Announcement

**OldShepherd** · 10-21-2001, 10:10 PM

**Stranger** · 10-23-2001, 04:55 PM

Funny, I thought I posted this reply...

As you can probably tell, I am serious about getting to the bottom of the truth. So I am spending more time and effort studying the Hebrew Scriptures and the NT than in answering your questions which I think I did. You have not shed much light on the subject. By your evasive action to my posts are you telling me that a prospective Christian needs to accept without question the fact that the founder of one’s religion is a bloody man of the most reprehensible kind? Almighty Yahweh restrained King David from building the house where His very presence would dwell because he was a bloody man. David was a sovereign king. He shed the innocent blood of ONE Jew and his conscience never bothered him until he ran into the prophet Nathan.

Psalms 24:3-6 * Who may ascend the hill of Yahweh? Who may stand in his sacred place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to an idol or swear by what is false. He will receive blessing from Yahweh and vindication from Elohim his Savior. Such is the generation of those who seek him, who seek your face, O Elohim of Jacob. Selah

Are you telling me now that Almighty Yahweh changed his moral scrupulous just like that? No Jew is capable of believing that Almighty Yahweh would pick a bloody thirsty Roman citizen felon who killed MANY more innocent Jews including women, children and babies than King David ever did to institute a new religion based on human sacrifice. To add insult to injury the main objective of Paul's religion is to do away with the word that Almighty Yahweh spoke for 1000 generations and to blame the Jews for all the crimes committed even before there was a Jew in the world. In less than 30 generations Paul trashed the Torah. The myth that he instituted is instrumental in the persecution, suffering and extermination without mercy of millions upon millions of innocent Jewish men, women, children and babies in the last 2000 years. I am sure that you must think that it is OK because you are not at the receiving end. All that it took to Paul is to say that he met the spook of Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus, Syria. Even his testimony about it is contradictory, but who cares? I am trying to sort out all your reactions to the facts that I am presenting here. I am concerned because Christianity is a proven threat even to our National security.

**OldShepherd** · 10-24-2001, 04:57 AM

To whom it May Concern,

Anyone who reads the above post about Paul and Christianity. In December 1999, almost two years ago, Lou posted the same dog puke, at another forum. The moderator’s reply is 9 pages. Below are some of his replies.

http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Archive...-7-000119.html

Lou,This will be my final response to your conclusion that Paul is a false apostle and that you need to re-invent Yahushua according to how you think He should be rather than how the scriptures declare He was.

“For some reason, all the “Theologians” defending the Christian faith in this forum are dumbfounded and cannot reply my posts.”

(Note, Lou’s incessant bragging and boasting. “I’m so much smarter and so much more knowledgeable than any Christian. They are all just dumbfounded and cannot reply to my posts.” Although the links, above, show that Lou has been posting the same dog puke, repeatedly, for over two years, and all his lies have been refuted/rebutted many times, he continues to post the same doggy doo, over and over again. O.S.)

The problem is, your post isn't right according to the Torah either.

However, you are wrong in your assertion that Paul invented Christianity. It is true that Christians twisted his writings to support their view that the Messiah abolished the Torah, but it is also true that you twist his writings to say that he abolished the Torah and also to falsely accuse Shaul, a dedicated and wise brother in the Messiah.

“Yahushua HaMaschiach who didn’t come to found any religion and for that reason he didn’t write any book or gave instructions that any book be written about him.”

Neither the Kings and judges of Israel, the prophets of Israel (with the exception of Jeremiah), nor Joshua Son of Nun mention anything about writing a book about them either. Sounds like a double standard to me. . .biased against Yahushua and His disciples!

I presume that this man Yahushua HaMashiach, will be reinvented by Lou the scoffer? You make Him out to what you want Him to be, rather than how He really was. He never claimed that He would be given supernatural power to overthrow the Roman Empire in those days.

”Unless one knows HaTorah nobody can tell the difference between Paul’s Jesus and the historical Yahushua. Again, Paul directed his letters to HaTorah ignorant people who were in no position to question any of his statements about the Law. ”

You are wrong. There were Jewish populations in each of those places. He always went "to the Jew first" (he said this 3 times in Romans), visiting the synagogues. There were Jews who came to know Messiah through his work.

Wrong again. First of all, there will be no future posts from you because I don't want you to drag anyone down to the lake of fire you are on the road toward. Secondly, the plan of salvation through Yahushua the Messiah is very clearly laid out in the Torah. See http://www.eliyah.com/themessiah.html for details. Will you call the visions of Ezekiel and Daniel "Spook" also?

Nowhere does Paul say he is a proud Roman citizen. This is a false accusation based on words that you put into his mouth. Woe to Lou!

It doesn't say that Paul "Whispered" anything. That is another false accusation. He was sparing the centurion a lot of grief and judgment (perhaps even his life) by informing him of where he was born. Do you think that Gamaliel . . . wouldn't have known where he was from? . . . In fact, Paul declared to the whole crowd in Acts 22:2 that he was born in Tarsus! Of course, you carefully fail to mention this in your post. Lou, you have invented an accusation based on false information. False information, by the way, that you yourself invented based on your paranoia of Paul (and now Yahushua) which came about when you started reading the "church fathers". . . .

Your interpretation of his attitude is based on your own bias against Paul, not based on the facts.

”It also disqualifies Paul from his own doctrines about being counted among those who claim no earthly city, but a Heavenly one? Paul seems to be a traitor to his own cause. . In simple terms, Paul is not admitting that he is “an alien and stranger on earth,” but a proud Roman citizen of the “no ordinary city of Tarsus.” I see here an outright typical case of “Preachertitis” (e.g. preachers who are under pressure to preach against sexual sins among other things, but can’t help to run to a whorehouse after work.) Obviously, Paul is not operating empowered by the Almighty, but by virtue of his Roman citizenship. Acts 21:39”

This was in response to a question, Lou. Quote the whole thing please and quit deceiving the people of Yahweh!

Acts 21:38 Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers? 39 But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people.

He was asked where he was from. If someone asked me "Aren't you that man from Brazil who lead 4000 murderers into the wilderness?" I wouldn't say "No, I'm from heaven". I would tell them where I from.

No wonder Roman authorities in Philippi quaked when they realized that Paul and Silas were not just a pair of rabble-rousing Jews! (Acts 16:12-40) These men insisted they were Roman citizens, a matter which could be confirmed by a simple check of the census rolls. Emperor Claudius executed men who falsely claimed Roman citizenship; so it was not an assertion to be made lightly." --Will Durant, "The Story of Civilization; Caesar and Christ" (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1944), page 25.

”Paul's mighty working power was very much invested in his Roman citizenship. It allowed him to operate quite disconnected from any Heavenly power. Paul's objective was to create a common bond religion to be accepted by everyone in the Roman Empire regardless of his/her previous religious affiliation.”

Your whole story and assumption is a lie and a false accusation from the very premise. If the premise is flawed, then so is everything else based on that premise.

I find it interesting that you shun Christian conclusions except when it's convenient to support your own ideas. . .We must base them on the unchanging word of Yahweh...something you reject.

It doesn't say that was the reason for the meeting with the leaders. You are making this all up. Lou, how would you like it if everyone looked at your personal life and find out what things you did before you became a believer in the Messiah...and then wrote posts to the forum to use those things against you? Perhaps those things could be used to prove you are a false teacher.

These are all false accusations based on false premises and false ideas which took form when you got paranoid about the Scriptures. If you are referring to his visions as from satan, beware lest you blaspheme the Spirit of Yahweh. His vision and doctrines were confirmed by the apostles.

Your conclusion that it [the great commission] came later is based on such weak evidence that it again reveals that you are just looking for an excuse to condemn Paul because you don't understand his writings, nor do you want to do the work and laboring in the torah and prophets it takes to understand the wisdom that he speaks. Kepha declares that this wisdom was given to him by Yahweh in 2 Pet 3:15.

Your are making more conclusions based on the previous false premise. First: Kepha had a vision in Acts 10 that had the purpose of showing them that they needed to go to the Gentiles too. Second: This commission to the Gentiles was approved and endorsed by the apostles in Jerusalem.

”Are there any scriptures that indicate that we would get the righteousness of Yahweh through this Messiah?”

Yes:

Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS (Heb. Tsedkenu from 6664 Tsedek).

Why else would the Messiah be called "Yahweh OUR Righteousness" unless this were the One through whom Yahweh brought us His righteousness? These things Paul discusses in depth in the book of Romans and other books. Our only hope for salvation is to be declared righteous and the only way the righteousness of Yahweh is going to be applied to us is through His Messiah. We cannot claim the law as our hope of proving us righteous, it only declares us guilty because it proclaims righteousness, but we are not. Lou, I am afraid for you. The reason nobody responds to you is because it takes time to sit down and painstakingly defend a brother in Messiah. You are way out of line and need to repent of Lashon Hara, false accusations and making up gossip. It is Satan who is the accuser of the brethren: Revelation 12:10 This is what I have seen you do on this forum, day and night. I'm available in email to answer honest questions from you or from anyone about Paul but until I receive an email from you indicating your repentance, you may no longer teach at EliYah.com.

**Stranger** · 10-24-2001, 08:11 PM

Wowww, Old Shep, that's a mouthfull!

"For some reason, all the "Theologians" defending the Christian faith in this forum are dumbfounded and cannot reply my posts."

(Note, Lou’s incessant bragging and boasting. "I’m so much smarter and so much more knowledgeable than any Christian. They are all just dumbfounded and cannot reply to my posts." Although the links, above, show that Lou has been posting the same dog puke, repeatedly, for over two years, and all his lies have been refuted/rebutted many times, he continues to post the same doggy doo, over and over again. O.S.)

Ever since I started posting on this subject I am finding more documentation in the NT that Christianity is not what it pretends to be. It piggybacks on the Hebrew Scriptures for support and that's about it. You are trying to reconvert me to Christianity and it is not working. You are not addressing the points that I am making. To say that I am "dog puke" doesn't work. Facts are stubborn things. I am much different from 2 years ago. I gained a tremendous amount of inside in the NT. Now I am reviewing my statement of introduction and in the meantime I share with everybody my findings about the Heathen roots of Christianity. Am I doing wrong?

By the way, I never said that, "I’m so much smarter and so much more knowledgeable than any Christian. They are all just dumbfounded and cannot reply to my posts." That is false witness. That is probably what you are dealing inside you mind, but please don’t say that I said that.

I will reply more later. I am short of time now.

**Spying** · 10-26-2001, 08:12 AM

Making Widows!

Hi Stranger,

Good morning to you. We are all short of time, but I want to take a moment this morning to say "Hi".

You know, it has been awhile since I spent any time attempting to convert you. I will let you know that I am not about spending any time reconverting you to the system of belief which you have discarded, but you know how I feel about you: You are a brother of mine. Someday you are going to believe what I believe if you hang around me long enough. That is the way it works.

You have refined your arguments. From your point of view, the post that started this thread is quite good. You no longer are rambling as much as you have in the past. Now that you focused on widows and widowhood, why don't we spend some time together? Where did Paul get his authority to make widows?

Sincerely, Spying

**OldShepherd** · 10-26-2001, 08:47 PM

Below is a quote copied verbatim from another forum. Actually the same forum as the 9 page post I quoted from before. As noted above and here there is nothing, absolutely nothing new about Paul posted on this entire forum. Everything, anti-Paul/N.T., posted on this forum has been posted on other forums, much of it more than once and has been thoroughly rebutted and refuted more that once, by many different persons.

The most accomplished anti-Christian Jewish scholars have been poring over the N.T., for almost 2000 years and the Muslims 1500 years, trying to prove it is contradictory, is not authentic and/or authoritative, etc.. Every so often along comes someone whose ego is puffed up with their own imagined importance and knowledge and thinks they are going to find something that hundreds and hundreds of anti-Christian, anti-N.T. religionists, for 2000 years, has never discovered.

Speaking of ego observe how a two paragraph response, above, was considered an adequate answer to one specific 9 page post, quoted in part, and more than 20 long threads, from two forums, previously ignored for the most part.

Shalom all,

I hesitated to post this article on this forum because I know that even in presenting some of the tactics used by Anti-Mashiach believers, (Like Lou! O.S.) it may cause one to stumble. However, I also know that their information is getting more widely publicized and spread around, so my hope is that this will help to nip any doubts in the bud.

In recent years, there have been more and more attacks on what is called the "new testament" portion of scripture. What is sad is that many of these attacks originate from those among us that are considered believers in Yahushua. Some time ago, I wrote a study on proving Yahushua is the Messiah from the Tanakh or "Old Testament" Scriptures to help deal with this problem. However, I am discovering that there is a common thread among those who reject the Messiah, it is 'fear' and 'paranoia'. Fear of syncretism (combining of pagan and true beliefs) has been chief among the fears of those who reject the Messiah.

The problem with articles from Anti-Mashiach sources that nit pick the so-called "new testament" is that Tanakh also has its share of textual difficulties and syncretisms. Do they hold the Tanakh to the same standard they require of the "new testament"? (This question was asked on this forum but essentially ignored. O.S.) Here are some examples from the books of Kings and Chronicles alone:

Jehoram, the son of Ahab began his reign as king of Israel in the second year of Jehoram, son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah (2Kings 1:17)... or was it the 18th year? (2Kings 3:1)

Ahaziah became king in the 12th year of Jehoram (2Kings 8:25)..or was it the eleventh? (2Kings 9:29)?

Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign in Judah (2Kings 8:26).. or was he 42? (2Chron. 22:2)

Ahaziah's brothers were slain (2Kings 10:13)..or was it his brother's sons? (2Chron 22:8)

Josiah died in the city of Meggido (2Kings 23:30)..or was it Jerusalem? (2Chron 35:24)

I have 10 other examples I could list, just from Kings and Chronicles. If some of these Anti-Mashiach believers would put the Tanakh under the same microscope as they do the so called "New Testament", they would become Atheists.

Fact is, secular history treats "Yahweh" as just another one of those 'tribal war gods'. Most all the nations had them, and they say that "Yahweh" was just Israel's war god. Many of the tribal war gods had a temple, sacrifices, and a priesthood, with a monarchal government system. They say that most all religions had their 'flood story' and had their saviors (like Moses, or Samson). Call it "syncretism" or call it what you want. The truth is, people will believe what they want to believe and anyone can nit-pick their way into unbelief if they really try hard enough. Many of these supposed contradictions have one or more of the following in common:

* They fail to understand the true context of each passage, or even what the passage is saying.

* They assume the scriptures are guilty until proven innocent.

* They fail to consider that a missing piece of information would harmonize two accounts.

* They assume that an incomplete report is a false one.

* They assume Yahweh approves of every event the scriptures record.

One can find things to complain about throughout the entire scriptures. From Adam not dying on the day he ate the fruit, to a claim that heaven is not being a place to rest..but a place of incessant praise and singing. They would do well to hear:

Isaiah 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

The problem isn't that Yahweh doesn't know what He is talking about, the real problem is that THEY do not know what Yahweh is talking about.

Rather than assuming the "New Testament" or "Old Testament" is wrong, one should seek the wisdom of Yahweh in understanding the more difficult to understand passages. This is a real problem, "spiritual laziness". If one is too lazy to labor in the word of Yahweh and prayer to find the truth, they can be tossed about by many false doctrines...or even true ones. One must seek Yahweh's wisdom to know the difference, not pagan religions.

James 4:8 Draw near to Yahweh and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded.

Titus 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

This last verse says a lot to me.

With love in His service,

**Spying** · 10-27-2001, 07:09 AM

Gaining Ground?

Hi Sir,

I know that your comments and questions have been for the most part ignored. I know that it has be a source of frustration for you as well as it has been for me, but what are we to do?

I want to thank you for consenting to be softer in your approach. We are gentlemen, and we are gentle.

It appears to me that we have no choice but to go over and over and over again the same battleground whenever our opponents send out their skirmishers to attack us. They fire; we fire back. If we remain silent or refuse to fight, then we must retreat like I did a little while back when I went over to Qumran Bet to visit.

I really don't know. We can't make others see our point of view. How many times does the truth need to be stated before it is understood? So, if Stranger sticks to his guns and keeps attacking over the same ground, then I must fight all over again.

In my heart, I am fighting to win Stranger over to my point of view, but maybe the same battles are being fought over and over again for those who just happen to drop by to watch and listen. So, unless you can think of some other approach, then we must continue. As EliYAH quoted:

Titus 1:15
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. (KJV)

So, even our repetitive debates are pure!

Please, Old Shepherd, you simply must relate to all of us how you are able to make the showthreads highlight certain words like "widow" in a link. I just noticed that you could do that, and I find that amazing!

Sincerely, Spying

**OldShepherd** · 10-28-2001, 04:14 AM

Shalom Spying,

Everything that you ever wanted to know about html is at this URL. The answer to the specific question you asked is (a href=http://yoururl.xxx)Your wording here(/a) Replace the parentheses, "(" and ")" with angle brackets, "<" and ">" If I type the angle brackets the whole thing becomes invisible.

http://werbach.com/barebones/barebone.txt

**Stranger** · 10-28-2001, 05:10 PM

Hi, Old Shep...

Hey, you never replied on whether "the lamb of God" was marinated in Roman SPIT... What's your opinion?

**Stranger** · 10-28-2001, 05:33 PM

Hi Spying...

I'll get back to you shortly about the widows... I am short of time at this moment... I honestly thank you for your support. I am glad that you noticed that I am evolving into a more civilized poster. Most of my posts at Eliyah were very much immature. I am finding new evidences that the NT is not to be taken seriously. I thank you for the opportunity to post in here. I also thank Old Shep very much for his efforts to present his views about my views. I am not looking for disciples. I am in the process of learning the truth. The deeper I dig into the NT the more crap I find. If I were to defend the NT, I would have a very hard time doing it. I really depend on Almighty Yahweh for my salvation, not on Paul's "I say." Old Shep is not telling me anything new that I haven't heard before. What I heard before doesn't shed any light on the subject of my posts. BTW, I am not following anyone's teachings. Every now and then I run into some input that sheds more light on some of my points, but I am not a blind follower of anyone else's viewpoint.

**Stranger** · 10-28-2001, 07:05 PM

Now, wait a minute, Old Shep...

I have 10 other examples I could list, just from Kings and Chronicles. If some of these Anti-Mashiach believers would put the Tanakh under the same microscope as they do the so called "New Testament", they would become Atheists.

Not really, Old Shep, none of the "difficulties" in the Tanakh have anything to do with "believe matter."

The "difficulties" in the NT are directly related to "believe matter."

The NT basically says, "you must believe this way or else." and sadly to say, "this way" or "Paul's way" is anti-Torah and anti-Jew...

**OldShepherd** · 10-28-2001, 07:13 PM

"Hey, you never replied on whether "the lamb of God" was marinated in Roman SPIT... What's your opinion?"

Absolutely false, Lou. I answered you twice, both quoted below. If you want to act stupid and ignore everything I post then say I didn't respond be my guest. But just like I told that other guy several times you are my best witness against everything you represent. All your lies and twisted scriptures and references tell the world that you have nothing to offer but dog puke. If you are finding anything new in the N.T., you are keeping it to yourself because everything you have posted here is the same old lies you posted at those other forums. The links are there, above, anyone can follow them and find the same old, same old.

First response posted 10-07-2001 08:03 PM "O S Answer #7-10 - - Jesus Christ is not a scapegoat."

"So John referred to Jesus as "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). ~~Lippard~~ (Lou) supposes that Jesus failed to meet the requirements for a sacrifice because He was scourged and mutilated.
* * *
But Jesus was physically and spiritually spotless when the sacrifice began. The scourging and mutilation were part of the whole execution process by which he became the sacrifice. The Levitical sacrifices were no longer without blemish once the priest's knife cut its throat, flayed its skin, and dismembered its body. So Jesus was no longer spotless once the sacrificial process began. ~~Lippard~~ (Lou) is grasping at straws to bring up such pointless objections.

A Message to ~~Mr. Lippard~~ (Lou) and other critics of Messianic prophecy.

You think that your are free and capable of independent thinking, but you have enslaved your mind by a presupposition of unbelief--denying the possibility of an inspired Scripture and of a holy God who holds you responsible for your sin and unbelief. You think you are reasoning soundly, but the above article is evidence that you are merely rationalizing your unbelief. Sound reason follows the laws of logic, does not twist or misrepresent evidence, tells the whole truth, and is honest about the results."

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...-response.html

http://www.webcom.com/~ctt/fabprof0.html

Lou, here is a very brief quote from The Life and Times Of Jesus Christ the Messiah, a two volume work, written in 1874 by Alfred Edersheim, a former orthodox, i.e. real Jew, who converted to Messianic Judaism.

"2. This organic unity of Israel and the Messiah explains how events, institutions, and predictions, which initially were purely Israelitish, could with truth be regarded as finding their full accomplishment in the Messiah. From this point of view the whole Old Testament becomes the perspective in which the figure of the Messiah stands out. And perhaps the most valuable element in Rabbinic excommentation on Messianic times is that in which, as so frequently, it is explained, that all the miracles and deliverances of Israel's past would be re-enacted, only in a much wider manner, in the days of the Messiah. Thus the whole past was symbolic, and typical of the future - the Old Testament the glass, through which the universal blessings of the latter days were seen. It is in this sense that we would understand the two sayings of the Talmud: 'All the prophets prophesied only of the days of the Messiah,'7 and 'The world was created only for the Messiah.'8

In accordance with all this, the ancient Synagogue found references to the Messiah in many more passages of the Old Testament than those verbal predictions, to which we generally appeal; and the latter formed (as in the New Testament) a proportionately small, and secondary, element in the conception of the Messianic era. This is fully borne out by a detailed analysis of those passages in the Old Testament to which the ancient Synagogue referred as Messianic.9 Their number amounts to upwards of 456 (75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa), and their Messianic application is supported by more than 558 references to the most ancient Rabbinic writings.10. . .

3. But still, as the Rabbinic ideas were at least based on the Old Testament, we need not wonder that they also embodied the chief features of the Messianic history. Accordingly, a careful perusal of their Scripture quotations11 shows, that the main postulates of the New Testament concerning the Messiah are fully supported by Rabbinic statements. Thus, such doctrines as the pre-mundane existence of the Messiah; His elevation above Moses, and even above the Angels; His representative character; His cruel sufferings and derision; His violent death, and that for His people; His work on behalf of the living and of the dead; His redemption, and restoration of Israel; the opposition of the Gentiles; their partial judgment and conversion; the prevalence of His Law; the universal blessings of the latter days; and His Kingdom - can be clearly deduced from unquestioned passages in ancient Rabbinic writings.. . .There is, indeed, in Rabbinic writings frequent reference to the sufferings, and even the death of the Messiah, and these are brought into connection with our sins - as how could it be otherwise in view of Isaiah liii. and other passages - and in one most remarkable comment12 the Messiah is represented as willingly taking upon Himself all these sufferings, on condition that all Israel - the living, the dead, and those yet unborn - should be saved, and that, in consequence of His work, God and Israel should be reconciled, and Satan cast into hell."
Footnotes.
9 See Appendix IX., where a detailed list is given of all the Old Testament passages which the ancient Synagogue applied Messianically, together with the references to the Rabbinic works where they are quoted.
10 Large as this number is, I do not present the list as complete. Thus, out of the thirty-seven Parashahs constituting the Midrash on Leviticus, no fewer than twenty-five close with an outlook on Messianic times. The same may be said of the close of many of the Parashahs in the Midrashim known as Pesiqta and Tanchuma (Zunz, u.s. pp. 181, 234). Besides, the oldest portions of the Jewish liturgy are full of Messianic aspirations.
11 For these, see Appendix IX. (Link Below) 12 Yalkut on Is. ix. 1.

http://www.ccel.org/e/edersheim/lifetimes/htm/v.htm

http://www.ccel.org/e/edersheim/life.../II.v.htm#II.v

The second reply posted 10-14-2001 07:41 PM, on the same thread. This reply is in Hebrew since you evidently cannot read and comprehend English. You claim to be a Torah observant Jew so reading Hebrew should be no problem. But since you have proven you can't read Hebrew, and since you claim to have an Mdiv, you should be able to quickly translate it with the Hebrew language resources you were required to have for your MDiv studies.

"W'khi yarikh hazab batahor w'khibes bugdhaiw wurahatz baayim wutamea' ad-ha'arev.

Yarikh badad lo-tamea'!"

You have falsely accused me of not responding to you several times. You have not responded to almost 90% of what I have posted. And since you are always babbling about the N.T. being anti-Torah, I have asked you several times to address your own blatant violation of Torah, the fact that you are and remain married to a non-Jew. You have never responded, and unlike you I am not lying.

**Stranger** · 10-30-2001, 07:42 PM

Hi Old Shep...

You are not answering me about the Roman spit! Are you implying in your message that the Roman spit was part of the "acceptable sacrifice"?

I refuse to believe that the Roman soldiers were a substitute for an anointed priest to do any valid sacrifice on the anointed altar in the Temple. BTW no priest will ever do a human sacrifice no matter how lambish the person looks like. Any sacrifice anywhere else by anybody else is invalid.

If Jesus Christ were any "spotless" sacrificial lamb, when was he inspected and declared "spotless"? Was it before his blood sweat when he begged poor Judas to go out and betray him quickly? A "lamb" or humanoid that sweats blood is not normal. I never heard of a lamb that sweats blood. BTW, the blood that Jesus Christ shed in his sweat, was it part of the blood that cleanses sin? His blood sweat was mixed with Roman spit. I didn't read anywhere that Jesus Christ took a shower before he was marinated in Roman spit. Hey, wait a minute, where from Jesus Christ shed any blood? Was it from his hands and his feet? Did anyone slashed the throat of the “lamb of God” according to the Torah? Any sacrificial lamb shouldn’t bear any pain in the process. I read that he was pierced with a Roman spear on his right side (according to the pictures). Was the blood and water that he shed part of the “sin cleansing” solution? Is there any significance to the water? It wasn’t sweat, I guess. Funny, he sweated blood and shed water. I have many more questions, but I better stop here. I hardly ever get an answer from you. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Hey, Old Shep, I also asked you about the elements of the “eucharist.” The body and blood of Jesus Christ, was it from before his arrest, or while he was hanging from the cross, or when he was dead and touring Dante’s Inferno, or after he resurrected. I believe that the Christian needs to know what kind of flesh and blood of Jesus Christ are you talking about.

Please, Old Shep, be a man, speak for yourself!

**Stranger** · 10-30-2001, 10:08 PM

Spying, about Paul making widows...

Where did Paul get his authority to make widows?

It was the byproduct of his own free will to go to the High Priest and ask for letters of recommendation to arrest righteous Jews, men and women and to put them in jail and have them killed. Ms. Steven must have been one of the widows that Paul left behind. A Deacon is a married man. He must have been a family man, too. He must have left children at the care of his wife after he was stoned to death under Paul’s supervision. I must assure you that Paul did not get his authority to make widows as a final objective in his life. The question is very silly. You don’t seem to have a heart for all the widows that Paul left behind, and the orphans, too. Paul is a bloody man. The bloodiest man in the world. He confessed to be the Chief Sinner. And you cover up for him. King David wasn’t able to build a Temple to house the presence of Yahweh because of his past, and Paul is building the “church” or whatever as substitute for Israel. I sense that you are insulting Steven’s widow and all the other widows and orphans that he left behind asking me sarcastic questions about them.

If I were to accept that everything writing in the NT is factual, then I am a fool. There are obvious flaws in the NT. Some of them are as big as a house. A lot of the NT is composed of make believe stories sloppily put together to make the Jews look bad. Paul is bragging to a Heathen King Agrippa, or maybe he is confessing his murderous past to King Agrippa, or maybe the whole story is made up. Do you think that a Heathen ruler would just sit there holding hands with Paul and listening to Paul’s story about how he had a lot of Jewish taxpayers put to death without involving the Roman authorities? OK lets suppose that he had the approval of the Roman authorities to persecute any “messianic” Jew who believed in a messiah and who would kick the Romans out of Palestine. Paul was a proud Roman citizen who was working with the Temple authorities to quench any possible rebellion against Rome. Paul goes on his own initiative to ask letters of recommendation to the high priest in Jerusalem to go to Damascus, Syria which is another country way out of Judea’s jurisdiction and kidnap any Jew living there and bring him with her wife to Jerusalem to be put to death. He couldn’t have done anything like that unless he worked for the Romans. I am sure that a lot of men that he had killed left wives and children, some even babies, friends and neighbors deprived from the joy of seeing the men he had put to death alive. Paul said that he did this to MANY Jews. If you do not see my point I can understand your drift. Morally, you are not much different from Paul.

I am so happy that I am not a Christian! I couldn’t possibly put up with Paul’s immorality as cool as you can!

Announcement

Saint Paul is getting away with murder...!!!

Saint Paul is getting away with murder...!!!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment