Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Due to unfortunate events on other fora, I have a paranoia about clicking on links.

Could I get a summary or explanation of what I'll find?

 

Hi Nick'

I discussed a bit on "Shadow of the Third Century on my thread "The Concept of Jesus"

kay

Link to post
Share on other sites

In answer to your question about Ceasar, Sure, why not. I have also heard speculation that the gospel story is about Ceasar, but I don't put much credence in them.

 

I only skimmed the book and decided not to continue reading it. I was turned off by the tone of the author, he seemed rather self serving, this usually indicates a lack of scholarship and I didn't see anything to indicate that his methods were good. I didn't see much of a parallel with Spong either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

In answer to your question about Ceasar, Sure, why not. I have also heard speculation that the gospel story is about Ceasar, but I don't put much credence in them.

 

I only skimmed the book and decided not to continue reading it. I was turned off by the tone of the author, he seemed rather self serving, this usually indicates a lack of scholarship and I didn't see anything to indicate that his methods were good. I didn't see much of a parallel with Spong either.

 

MY Friend,

What the book's author was attempting to expose was the conflict between what Jesus was teaching and what the Pharisees and Paul was attempting to cram down the throats of the Believers of The Way. As the Book of Acts so clearly points out is that the Pharisees and Paul, were adherents an teachers of the TALMUD.

 

Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: "Hillel

(flourished 1st century BC – c. first quarter of the 1st century AD) Jewish sage and architect of rabbinic Judaism. Born in Babylonia, he went to Palestine to complete his studies under the Pharisees. He became the revered head of the school known by his name, the House of Hillel, and his carefully applied method of exegesis came to be called the Seven Rules of Hillel. He liberated texts from a slavish literal interpretation and sought to make obedience to the Law feasible for all Jews. His legal writings were very influential in the compilation of the Talmud, which also contains many stories and legends about his life. He is remembered as a model scholar and communal leader, whose brilliance, patience, and goodness are to be emulated by all rabbis.

 

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/hillel#ixzz1IUcaAbPk

Whereas Jesus' text book was TORAH, and never shall the twain come together, as Jesus iterrated via His Jot and Tittle proclamation.

In addition to this proclamation is the question tat also blows Paul [out of the water]; "Saul, Saul, Why Persecuteist Thou ME"Acts.9:4. When it is deciphered who the [Me] is in this question, it will be discovered that Jhn.1:1,1:14 further clarifies the Jot and Tittle proclamation,in addition to the curse;Deut.4:2. This lesson was ommited from the Pharisaic teachings Paul received in the house of Hillel via Gamaliel. And this my friend is what you missed by scanning only a part of the book.

Why is this so relevant today? Also omitted from Pharisaic Talmudic Instruction was knowledge of The Real Birth-Right scam. Not the one between Jacob and Esau, but the one between Issac and his older brother, ISHMAEL. Return this Birth Right to the descendants of Ishmael and Israel's problems will vanish in an Instant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are times when the Bible has to be taken literally. It's when what is stated biblically can also be substantiated by secular documented history. One case in point is the episode of Greek history which substantiates the Greek subjugation asone of the 127 provinces of the Medo-Persian empire which coinsides with the Israelte's continued captivity in Susa,Babylon. This saga is related in the books of Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah. Greco History along with the writings of Josephus in his Jewish wars highlights the differences between the captve Israelites and the mass conversion of other races to the Judean belief in tne Medo-Persian empire. See Esther 8:17. Here will be found the origin of how the Proselytes came to the belief of the Israelites. Hillel was a descendant of those proselytes, without a drop of Israelite blood in his veins or the required intimate knowledge of Moseic Law.

 

 

Edited 4-3-11 Removed duplicate post portion... JM

Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been often said,the government of the United States of America was established upon the political foundations given to Moses by his father-in-law.

 

By the replacement of Torah with the Talmud, that foundation has been sapped to the point that it currently resembles that of the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Christianity erected upon the plagurized form of the Talmud A/K/A the Septuagint, The morphing of that system has now developed into a reestablishment of Serfdom, to wit: http://www.linktv.org/programs/the-israel-lobby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overview: About The Talmud

 

Although the Torah is wonderfully rich in its narratives, poetry, and laws, it is inadequate as a law code. For example, Deuteronomy decrees that if a man divorces his wife and she remarries and the second marriage ends in divorce or death of the husband, the first husband is forbidden to remarry her (24:1-4), but nowhere does the Torah clearly define how the divorce is to be effected or what is to be written in a bill of divorcement.

 

Nevertheless, Jews sought to determine from the Torah all of the details of a complete legal system. As tradition describes it, from the time of the very giving of the written Torah, Moses already had received a companion Torah she'b'al peh (oral Torah), which he proceeded to teach to the people of Israel during their travels in the desert. It is clear that from the very beginning, Jews needed additional authoritative law, or halakhah ("going," or "path"), to govern regular life. These halakhot (plural) were passed on through the generations, and during the period of the Second Temple (fifth century BCE-first century C.E.), halakhot, both those developed through custom and those derived from interpretation of the Torah, were collected and transmitted. Following the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E., the earliest rabbis gathered and transmitted the laws learned from earlier sages.

 

During the first two centuries, the rabbis apparently worked out how, as an educated leadership, they were to transmit and develop new law through agreed upon rules of interpretation. Much of our understanding of this period comes from later texts which were not intended as histories and which probably should not be relied upon for history. Nevertheless, it is clear that by the close of the second century, the rabbis had agreed on enough of the basics that their various opinions could be compiled and compared to each other. At this point, around the year 200 C.E., Rabbi Judah the Patriarch, used his unique position as a leader of the Jewish people who actually got along with the Romans to publish the first major Jewish work following the Bible, a study book of rabbinic law called the Mishnah (literally, teaching or repeating).

 

The Mishnah defined the basic contours for later discussion of Jewish law. The name, which means "repeating," reflects that the book was designed for oral transmission and memorization, as a rabbi would repeat each tradition for his student. But the orality of the Mishnah is not just a matter of its form; the content is composed almost entirely of the statements of different rabbis, juxtaposed against and in conversation with the varying opinions of other rabbis. From the Mishnah onward, all of the literature of the Torah she'b'al peh is more than just "oral Torah"; in fact, a more descriptive translation of the term might be "conversational Torah," because it is the conversation and the interaction of different ideas that defines the essence of what eventually became known as the Talmud (study).

 

During the three or four centuries following the Mishnah's publication, the rabbinic sages whose work was eventually compiled in the documents which we call Talmud, analyzed each halakhah in the Mishnah. They compared the various statements of a rabbi to determine how his different positions could be seen as parts of a consistent legal theory. They harmonized the opinions in the Mishnah to other early opinions that were not included in the Mishnah. They tried to show the relationship between the various opinions in the Mishnah to their presumed derivations from Scripture.

 

Everywhere and throughout the Talmud, the rabbis worked with several basic assumptions. Given a controversy between two early sages, the goal was not to determine according to whom was the practical law; the goals was to make sense of each opinion. This underlying assumption that opinions are not simply fickle choices but the rational decisions of sages confronting differing ways of describing legal reality, is the hallmark of the Talmudic process. The rabbis expressed this concept succinctly: "both these and those are the words of the living God" or, as it may also be translated, "both these and those are the living words of God." (source: myjewishlearning.com)

Link to post
Share on other sites

From this overview of the Talmud,it can be determined that Hillel came to the concusion that The Torah was inadequate as a tool for teaching Jews, yet it wasn't disclosed how he came to this decision or the authority he used to reach this determination.

It is stated that he left Babylon and traveled to Palestine to complete his education in Judaism under the tutelege of the Pharisees where he excelled in this instruction. At this point it's imperative to explore the source of this Pharisaic knowledge that Jesus found so troubling during his ministry.(Matt.23:15) So lets return to the emancipation of the Israelite/Judeans and the rebuilding of the 2ndTemple. During the 70 years of Judah's captivity in Babylon, there was a contingent of proselyte Jews that had remained in Palestine claiming to have maintained the religious traditions and worship to the God of Israel, over the complete length time of Judah's captivity and wanted to join in the restoration of the Temple.(Ezra.4:2) To grasp why this request was denied and the claim viewed as bogus, one has to return to 2nd Kings.17:24-34 and read the story of the Ten tribes of Israel's deportation and the conversion to Judaism of the emigrant pagan groups who replaced the Israelite tribes. The proselytes Jews wanting to assist in the rebuilding of the 2nd Temple, were the descendants of those replacement emigrants descrbed in 2Kgs. The religious traditions practised by these people was derived from the inculcation of what the Israelites taught them upon their arrival in Palestine in addition to their own former pagan beliefs. It must also be remembered that after Solomon's death, The Torah fell into disuse and became lost. What these new pagan imigrants received fron the Israelite Priests was not Torah based instruction.

Prior to Judah's captrure by Nebuchadnezzar the Moseic books of the Law were rediscovered and went into cativity with the Tribe of Judah and remained with them until their emancipation back to Palestine. From this history, Hillel could not have had access to the Moseic Torah, but only the mish-mash taught his fore-fathers as described in 2Kgs.17:24-34. It is from this faulty foundation that we have received the Greek translation upon which christianity has been erected. Ptolemy commissioned 70 JEWISH Scholars to do this work. If he'd used 70 ISRAELITE Scholars, Jesus,IMO, would not of became so upset with the Greco rendition of His Father's Word.

 

Edited 4-4-2011 ... Removed duplicate reply post portion.... JM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillel was a descendant of those proselytes, without a drop of Israelite blood in his veins or the required intimate knowledge of Moseic Law.

 

I am not sure what you are trying to prove. First, you do not know that Hillel was not racially Jewish. At his time, there were actually more Jews living in the Diaspora than in Israel/Palestine. Second, so what? What if he were a convert to Judaism, does that automatically discredit him as scholar of Torah? Is racial purity required to be a scholar of Judaism?

 

George

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what you are trying to prove. First, you do not know that Hillel was not racially Jewish. At his time, there were actually more Jews living in the Diaspora than in Israel/Palestine. Second, so what? What if he were a convert to Judaism, does that automatically discredit him as scholar of Torah? Is racial purity required to be a scholar of Judaism?

 

George

 

George,

It's impossible to be a Racially Pure Jew, Jew is not the the designation of a Race of People because of their practise of the Religion. Ruth practised the Israelite Religion. Was she a Racially Pure Jew or a Moabitist?

Hillel was/is given the creidit for creating the Talmud. His reason for doing so is because he determined that Torah was Inadequate. His assumption of this authroity proves that he was not cognizant of the curse for this form of self aggrandisement. Was this a transgression of Torah Law? See Deut.4:2.

The Jot and Tittle pronouncment of Jesus, highlights his disagreement with the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud, again see Matt.23:15.

The Juanster

Edited by Juanster
Link to post
Share on other sites

George,

It's impossible to be a Racially Pure Jew, Jew is not the the designation of a Race of People because of their practise of the Religion. Ruth practised the Israelite Religion. Was she a Racially Pure Jew or a Moabitist?

Hillel was/is given the creidit for creating the Talmud. His reason for doing so is because he determined that Torah was Inadequate. His assumption of this authroity proves that he was not cognizant of the curse for this form of self aggrandisement. Was this a transgression of Torah Law? See Deut.4:2.

The Jot and Tittle pronouncment of Jesus, highlights his disagreement with the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud, again see Matt.23:15.

The Juanster

 

It is true that there is no racially pure anybody. Almost all of your posts mention something about the genetic impurity of various Jews like Paul and Hillel. Why do you think this is significant?

 

George

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service