RSS

Job’s Grace Was Extended to All

17 Mar
from Google Images

Job continues in his defense against the accusations of the friends. They had accused him of trusting in his own wealth and power instead of the Lord (Job 4:5-6; 15:13). They claimed he had secretly accumulated his wealth at the expense of the poor and those too weak to oppose him (Job 4:8, 11; 20:5-10, 18-19; 22:6-9). The mere mention of such charges implies such behavior was, indeed, the course many wealthy men of Job’s day had taken to enrich themselves. Certainly, this is a common characteristic of those who amass wealth in own time, and it seems to have been a common method to accumulate wealth throughout history.

Accusations of poor wages and unbearable working conditions had undoubtedly contributed to the rise of labor unions and the initiation of child labor laws. Thus, if known history is any indication of what life was like in Job’s age, the friends’ accusations against Job reveal a common understanding of how wealth was gained by men with no scruples. Therefore, they assumed Job’s calamity was an indication of the Lord’s sentence upon him for his presumed wicked behavior. Nevertheless, Job objected to their charges, saying he had not made gold his hope nor rejoiced in his wealth for its own sake (Job 31:24-25).

Concerning the wealthy, if their gold isn’t their servant, it is their master, and this is behind the friends’ accusation of Job’s heart. It was an assault against his character. They believed the desire for wealth had so characterized Job’s heart and attitude toward life, that he embraced his gold as his best and only hope (cp. Luke 12:16-21). Trusting in riches is opposed to trusting God. In fact, one cannot walk with God and be guided by one’s wealth at the same time, vis-à-vis what’s good for the bottom line (cp. Matthew 19:3; Mark 10:24; Deuteronomy 4:19; 8:12-17). Therefore, Job denied their charge that prosperity had corrupted him (Job 31:26), or making the work of his hands his god and master (Job 31:27; cp. 1Kings 19:18; Hosea 13:2). The fact is, Job considered such behavior moral depravity, and he judged such conduct as denying the Lord above (Job 31:28).

Not only had Job not abused others who were weaker than himself, but he didn’t rejoice in the calamities of those, his enemies, who were his equal in power and wealth (cp. Proverbs 24:17-18). In other words, he didn’t consider powerful, unscrupulous men a threat to his wealth, whether they were his competitors or folks who simply sought to destroy him (cp. Job 1:13-20). The attitude toward the wicked, who saw him as a threat, simply didn’t affect Job’s behavior as a magistrate (Job 31:29-30). The righteousness of the righteous simply is not governed by the wickedness of the wicked. The one is opposed to the other, in that neither is inspired or driven by the other.

The fact is, even when Job’s own servants saw opportunity to destroy Job’s enemies, Job neither encouraged their attitude nor permitted them to take advantage of such an opportunity, when it presented itself (Job 31:31; cp. 1Samuel 24:4; 26:8; 2Samuel 16:9).

So, Job not only treated those weaker than himself with kindness and mercy, but he also extended that same kindness and mercy even to his enemies who were powerful and wealthy enough to hurt him. If this wasn’t enough, Job was also kind and merciful to strangers or traveling merchants, offering them the hospitality of food and shelter, as they journeyed from their cities and countries to where he lived (Job 31:32). Truly, neither Job’s righteousness nor the accumulation of his wealth was dependent upon what others did or did not do. Rather, his righteousness determined how he managed his wealth, in that his righteousness was totally dependent upon his understanding of and his submission to the ways of God

 
15 Comments

Posted by on March 17, 2024 in Book of Job

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

15 responses to “Job’s Grace Was Extended to All

  1. mosckerr

    March 17, 2024 at 13:13

    Xtian & Islamic revisionist history = a sack of shit.

     
  2. Eddie

    March 17, 2024 at 20:30

    mosckerrm I’ll give you a few days to show, first, how this comment refers to my study “Job’s Grace Was Extended to All” and, secondly, how Christian revisionist history (as you label our history) is a sack of shit.

    Failure to comply with my request will result in me **trashing** this, your latest comment, together with my reply to it.

     
  3. mosckerr

    March 18, 2024 at 01:59

    Xtianity jabbers about ‘grace’. Religious rhetoric sucks. What distinguishes between mercy and long suffering from grace? Undefined terms compare to naked women dancing from a pole. “Eye Candy” but as useless as tits on a boar hog.

    Rava of the Talmud teaches that Job: an imaginary Man. The Book of Job addresses the subject of g’lut/exile. In the story of Job the concept of g’lut addresses the Torah mussar of blessings vs curses. G’lut – a cursed existence.

     
  4. mosckerr

    March 18, 2024 at 04:14

    Eddie I answered up your response directed to me. But I see you chose not to publish it.

     
  5. Eddie

    March 18, 2024 at 06:11

    mosckerr, you need to remember that I live across the ocean from you. You waited for a response, while I was in bed.

     
  6. Eddie

    March 18, 2024 at 06:30

    Xtianity jabbers about ‘grace’. Religious rhetoric sucks. What distinguishes between mercy and long suffering from grace? Undefined terms compare to naked women dancing from a pole. “Eye Candy” but as useless as tits on a boar hog.

    I see you are trying to be clever. The problem is that I often miss the point of a “clever” response. I’m not a clever person, so communicating with one who is, often ends in misunderstanding. Please rephrase your point here, and pretend I am a child. What’s your point?

    Rava of the Talmud teaches that Job: an imaginary Man. The Book of Job addresses the subject of g’lut/exile. In the story of Job the concept of g’lut addresses the Torah mussar of blessings vs curses. G’lut – a cursed existence.

    I believe Job actually existed, so I disagree with your Talmud. I can see the point of the meaning being in exile, however. Nevertheless, I disagree that this is the main point of the book. According to the first two chapters of Job, he was innocent and God destroyed him for no reason as far as Job’s sin is concerned. Therefore, the Jew’s exile couldn’t be the point of the book, because the Jews were exiled for a good reason. The Lord sent prophets to warn them of sin and judgment and they refused to listen. So, the exile!

    I believe the main point of the Book of Job goes to one’s worldview/understanding of God. Job and the friends begin with the same worldview, but Job **knows** he is innocent of wrongdoing. So, why does God punish him. His world/understanding is in chaos and would rather die, if this is how God treats his servants. Nothing makes sense. The point is that Job changed his worldview by going through the suffering and isolation that he was forced to walk through. He grew in understanding, but the friends didn’t. They had to be physically told by God. Whether or not they repented is another story. The Jews were told they were wicked, but they didn’t repent as a nation. Therefore, they are still in exile as a nation. The Jews have no king and no Covenant with the Lord. I’m not trying to be a bigot, and I could say the same thing about the whole world. the world has been in exile since Genesis 11. Abraham was brought out of exile, but when his descendants repeatedly turned away from God, they were exiled. The only way out of exile is to repent.

     
  7. Eddie

    March 18, 2024 at 06:41

    mosckerr, just so you know, your latest **comment** — 633 words and two pages in my word document has been trashed. It does not address my blog-post nor does it address anything we discussed in our comments. It is, therefore, not a true comment, and we did discuss this kind of thing earlier.

     
  8. mosckerr

    March 18, 2024 at 07:06

    [[[Xtianity jabbers about ‘grace’. Religious rhetoric sucks. What distinguishes between mercy and long suffering from grace? Undefined terms compare to naked women dancing from a pole. “Eye Candy” but as useless as tits on a boar hog.]]]

    Xtianity stands on its soap box and preaches “Saved by Grace” nonsense. Grace the 5th Attribute of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev which the church abomination denies.

    Undefined terms: love for example, disgusting religious rhetoric. Pie in the Sky fancy terms – with on clear definition. What you call “being clever”.

    The church hates the Talmud and attempted through book burnings to destroy it – but these war crimes only inspired Hitler and Nazi fanatism.

    T’NaCH commands mussar. The church revisionist history preaches “imaginary history”/the coming or return of JeZeus an imaginary Harry Potter fictional character.

    Job a work of fiction. 1/4th of the Talmud aggadic in nature. Aggadatah commands prophetic mussar NOT actual historical events. Job as “fiction” as simple story which distinguishes between Moshe’s Torah blessing or curse life or death – choose.

    Xtian replacement theology – this tumah avoda zarah replaces the 2nd Sinai commandment not to worship other Gods with ‘SIN’. A key example of its worthless revisionist history which promotes “Original Sin” and the need to believe in JeZeus.

    G’lut/exile a key theme of the Torah. Starting with the expulsion of Adam from the Garden, to the exile of Noach to his Ark, to the promise made to childless Avram that his future born seed would endure harsh slavery exile/g’lut in a foreign land. Hence the aggadic Book of Job fits nicely with the mussar of the Torah.

    The later Books of the NaCH, they serve as בנין אב\precedents for Torah common law. A precedent compares a different but similar case to a current case which a common law courtroom debates.

    The style of the whole of the (Talmud/Gemara) “Difficulty/Answer” methodology, models the Prosecutor/Defense arguments before a common law courtroom!

    The Framers of the Talmud (which means learning) sought this scholarship to serve as the model of Jewish common law courtrooms when Jews reconquered the Homeland as did Zionist Jews in 1948.

    Church replacement theology despises the pursuit of justice through common law courtrooms!!! It demands through theological decrees what a Man must believe rather than strives to define justice as the fair judicial restitution of damages imposed upon the guilty/wicked to compensate the victim/innocent.

    Just as the Court of Par’o utterly corrupt so too the Courts in Xtian European lands. No court ever forced the Catholic inquisitioners to stand before the Bar for war crimes!

    Torah common law NOT a belief system. Personal beliefs merit no respect. Torah common law stands upon Case/Rule precedents. The Book of Job serves like the Gemara does to the Mishna as a commentary to deeper understand the Books of Prophetic mussar.

    A gross fundamental error – to divorce the Holy Writings commentary made on the Books of the Prophets. The church abomination perverted the T’NaCH (Torah, Prophets, Holy Writings) into their vile corrupt Old Testament.

    Aggadic Mussar as told in the fictional story of the Book of Job requires making a drosh (a case comparison to a prophetic earlier work). Making a literal reading of a fictional story just as brain dead stupid as believing Sherlock Holmes or Nancy Drew or Harry Potter historical human beings!

    The language מלך/king as drosh metaphor. The church abomination translated the word מלך literally, Just as do those brain dead fools believe that some God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th.

     
  9. Eddie

    March 18, 2024 at 08:25

    Xtianity stands on its soap box and preaches “Saved by Grace” nonsense. Grace the 5th Attribute of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev which the church abomination denies.

    Sorry, but I still don’t see your point. I get the hypocrisy of the Church preaching “Saved by Grace” but not following through (which is an argument in itself), but what does that have to do with what the Oral Torah claims?

    What is your point about **love** not being clearly defined? Do you have a good definition? If so, let’s hear it. On the other hand, anyone, no matter what the language, religion or nation, is able to understand **love** when he sees it in action.

    Cleverness is often misunderstood for being wise. This is not necessarily so. A clever person is usually very intelligent and has a sharp, often biting, wit. He is a shrewd debater, often in an amusing fashion, making his opponent seem ill witted, even when that is not true. He’s a winner, even if his premise is wrong, because he can argue falsehood, as well as he can argue the truth. He is a gifted person, but this doesn’t necessarily mean he will use his gifts for the sake of truth.

    The church hates the Talmud and attempted through book burnings to destroy it – but these war crimes only inspired Hitler and Nazi fanatism.

    Hate is one of those **undefined** terms, is it not? Hate can be emotional and turn to bigotry. On the other hand, hate in biblical terms is choosing one thing/person over another. God loved Jacob but **hated** Esau. How do you define your use of this term? Should the Church accept the Talmud, which rejects Christ? The Talmud is for Jews; it expresses Jewish thought. The Talmud is as much for Christianity as Christianity is for the betrayal of Jesus to the Romans.

    Already you are accusing Christianity to be in agreement with Nazi fanatism! Interesting!

    If the Tanach commands mussar, how does this answer the Church preaching false doctrine? Just as there are many factions in Judaism, which cannot come to an agreement with what the Tanach says, so there are many things concerning Jesus in the Bible that cannot be agreed upon by the many factions within the Christian movement.

    According to you: “Job is fiction” – I’ve already addressed this, and you’ve brought nothing to the table that would move me to change what has already been said.

    Idols come in many forms, some of stone, some of thought/tradition. Jews and gentiles are idolators. “Original sin” is a false idea. The term should be, in as much as I can tell, rebellion. Adam sinned by lying to the woman, but this didn’t get them exiled from the Garden. It was ‘rebellion’ eating of the forbidden fruit – casting God out of their thought process/decision-making. Jesus returns us to the Garden, out of exile.

    Your comparison between the Church and the Talmud seems to demand that I adopt your vocabulary or you adopt mine – In other words, because we have a different vocabulary we are at odds. This may be true is some cases, but not in all.

    Concerning injustice, I admit the Church history is very blurry as far as kindness, mercy, justice and brotherly love is concerned. Our problem (yours and mine) seems to be that you believe you (the Jews) are innocent of any of these crimes in your own history. Jews… Christians we are sinners, often wicked.

    Why would it be wrong for the Church to separate between the Tanach and the Talmud (its interpretation), when the Church doesn’t even accept its own commentary upon scripture – Old or New Covenants – on the same level as the scripture it interprets?

     
  10. mosckerr

    March 18, 2024 at 08:55

    Grace the 5th of the 13 attributes of Oral Torah logic. The Xtian abomination turns to the Greeks agapi to define a Hebrew term. LOL Proof that the gospel counterfeit comes from Greek sources rather than Jewish sources. The gospel metaphor “father” refers to Zeus. Its replacement theology replaces JeZeus with the chosen first born “cohen” seed of Avram cut through the sworn alliance/brit known as the brit cut between the pieces.

    The church repeated errors of reading the T’NaCH literally compares to the morality of a whore in church.

    Hate: defined through (By their fruits you shall know them – the definition of false prophets according to your imaginary man/God.)

    My family 7 generations of lawyers and judges in secular courtrooms. Dad told me: “You do not understand a subject UNLESS your can argue persuasively the opposing sides to that argument.

    You know nothing of Oral Torah logic and therefore you equally know nothing of Oral Torah claims. Truth the 8th attribute of the Oral Torah logic system which the church for 2000+ years has denied. Can’t have your cake and eat it too.

    Nazi hate of the Jews defined through the systematic murder of 75% of European Jewry in less than 3 years. This blood guilt of hate on the heads of the Xtian church like the blood that cried from the ground of Abel which denounced Church Cain.

    Paul said goyim not under the law. Can’t have your cake and eat it too. The Torah commandment of Moshiach part of the law which Goyim not under. Hence new testament revisionist history does not determine the Torah commandment of Moshiach.

    The Nazis based their genocide upon Xtian precedents. That’s as clear as the Sun in the Sky on a cloudless day.

    The church abomination knows nothing of prophetic mussar. It stands on its soapbox and condemns sinners!! Tits on a boar hog nonsense.

    I brought Rava, a late Amoraim scholar of the Talmud. Goyim despise the Oral Torah codification – the Talmud.

    Idols a false translation of avoda zarah. Limiting the reality of the Gods to 3 physical dimensions qualifies as idolatry. The church abomination must have a physical historical JeZeus.

    The church abomination of avoda zarah – that way from day one till today. Oh false prophet – by their fruits you shall know them. The 2nd Sinai commandment makes no mention of SIN. Church replacement theology an utter abomination. Small wonder that priest rape little boys, steal Jewish children and baptize them – like the Poop did early in the 20th Century. Blood libels pogrom illegal ghetto imprisonment, violent racism etc etc etc the Xtian religion a faith of tumah avoda zarah.

    The Talmud not an interpretation of the T’NaCH but rather a continuation of Oral Torah common law learned by means of precedents. The church abomination has produced nothing in terms of judicial righteous faith. Just tits on a boar hog useless.

     
  11. Eddie

    March 18, 2024 at 09:51

    Concerning grace, you haven’t proved your point. Use the Tanach to make your case against Christian use of ‘agape’ and grace. I do not accept the Talmud as an accurate interpretation of the Tanach. Your use of the Talmud v/s Christian scripture isn’t valid. If you chose to use the Talmud against a Christian commentary, then we could discuss the matter. Nevertheless, you point out that Christian scripture abuses grace. In what way? Paul certainly wasn’t speaking of the Talmud, when he used the term. He was interpreting scripture—the Tanach. Show me in the Tanach where Paul was wrong.

    moscckerr, you are trying to make me do **your** work for you. You make a statement and expect me to understand exactly what you mean. For example: “the definition of false prophet according to your imaginary man/God” – I’m expected to build an argument from a mere statement. Okay, I disagree with you. That’s my statement to match yours. Do you want to discuss this? If so, be clear and present your argument.

    Why would you expect me to know your Oral Torah? Do you know all the case law of the USA (since you interpret Oral Torah as case law)? If you wish to interpret it as commentary on the Tanach, does this mean I should expect you to know all the Christian logic in use in all our commentaries?

    Concerning Christ/Moshiach, you are being obtuse. Is it deliberate? I know lawyers can be deliberately obtuse in their desire to win an argument. Paul’s use of the term concerns whether or not a gentile Christian must obey the Jewish law in terms of what is clean and unclean, moral and immoral. It has nothing to do with not embracing God as Creator (Genesis is also part of the Torah), and it has nothing to do with Christ/Moshiach who claims in the New Testament that he fulfills the Law.

    Concerning the basis of the Nazi genocide, tell me, how is your argument true? What Christian precedents? If we believe Jesus was a Jew, why would a Christ follower hate the Jews?

    The rest of your commentary consists of statements which you don’t even try to prove. You present no evidence, hardly consistent with what is expected of a lawyer who wishes to win his case before a judge.

    Church knows nothing… stands on its soapbox… Idols a false translation… Church replacement theology an utter abomination… priests rape little boys… Talmud not an interpretation of the Tanach… a continuation of Oral Torah…

    I’m not going to do your work for you, mosckerr. If you wish to engage in a discussion with me, do the job of a good lawyer and present you case.

     
  12. mosckerr

    March 18, 2024 at 11:00

    In the Book of Sh’mote: And HaShem passed before him as said HaShem HaShem El Rachum v’Chanun Arech Ha’Panim etc. That’s a quote straight from the Book of Exodus.

    You none acceptance of the Talmud goes hand in glove with your none acceptance of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The church abomination has denied the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev from day one of that counterfeit revisionist history abomination. So it make perfect sense that you do not accept the Talmud. Would experience total absolute shock had you said otherwise.

    Talmud does not qualify as a commentary. It continues the judicial tradition/masoret as found between the Books of the Prophets to the Books of the Holy Writings which make up the NaCH.

    One of the first acts committed by the church abomination, it perverted the T’NaCH into its vile old testament. Hence the church abomination hates not just the Talmud but the NaCH as well.

    The church abomination perverts the word “Grace” – it denies the Oral Torah despite the fact that the attribute of “grace” functions as one of the 13 tohor attributes of the Oral Torah logic system.

    The Church abomination knows nothing of the Oral Torah logic system and this specifically includes the attribute of grace. Grace for the church abomination, just a pie in the sky pie in your eye undefined religious rhetoric propaganda nonsense.

    Paul never differentiated between Torah logic from ancient Greek logic. Torah common law stands upon the foundation of inductive precedent reasoning. Roman statute law stands upon the foundation of Aristotles deductive reasoning. The gap between the two as wide as the Grand Canyon. That Xtians like yourself unaware of this vast gulf, to what does this blindness compare? To an elephant locked in the china closet!

    Imaginary man God serves to refute the revisionist history of JeZeus the Man & God theological nonsense. That’s my presented argument, the new testament as false as a pregnant Man.

    The church abomination lies and proclaims itself as the “True faith”. Yet the church, specifically you, does not have the slightest clue of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev.

    The church abomination, its easier to deny the Oral Torah all together. Without Oral Torah logic church worshippers of avoda zarah cannot derive from the Torah the commandment of Moshiach.

    The T’NaCH a seal shut/closed to church barbarians. No Xtian commentary has the power to unseal/unlock the k’vanna of these sealed texts. Oral Torah by stark contrast easily unlocks and unseals these texts to reveal their eternal mussar. The church abomination does not even know that prophesy means mussar! LOL

    No such Torah concept as “clean and unclean”. Xtian bible mistranslations – as useful as tits on a boar hog. LOL Tohor vs Tumah equally does not translate as moral vs immoral. Acceptance of the oath brit alliance faith – the pursuit of judicial justice which fairly compensates damages suffered by others; this faith has nothing to do with any belief in God the Creator.

    Impossible to fulfil the Law of prophetic mussar. LOL Xtian followers guilty of thousands of war crimes against humanity, not just Jews. Its really not my place to educate you on church many and repeated war crime abominations because to list all Xtian unjust criminal actions would fill the Library of Congress.
    [[[The rest of your commentary consists of statements which you don’t even try to prove. ]]] You did not copy/paste even one example.

    Every shabbat the priest of church abomination would invade Synagogues across Europe and stand on their moral soap box, with swords drawn & preach conversion to “their” captive Jews.

    The Second Sinai commandment does not refer to Gods as idols. An utter perversion. The 30 years War that ended in 1648 witness almost the entire genocide of German peoples in the German states! As many Catholics and Protestants died in that war as in WWI, only the population of Europe in WWI, about 3 times the size of the population of Europe prior to the outbreak of the 30 year War of the Reformation period.

    The post 2nd Temple Talmudic scholarship follows the model of the NaCH scholarship upon the 1st Temple and before Torah which struggled with the idea of the Torah as the written Constitution of the bnai brit republic of the 12 Tribes.

     
  13. Eddie

    March 19, 2024 at 08:42

    יהוה passed before him and proclaimed: “!יהוה! יהוה a God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness,

    What has this to do with your argument? You don’t refer to in in anything you say.

    When have I ever claimed that I didn’t accept what the Lord said to Moses at Sinai? You are putting words in my mouth, mosckerr. You may disagree with what I claim about the words of God at Sinai, but you have no evidence that I don’t accept them as true, or the event itself as true. If I may present a personal observation: it is rather YOU who don’t accept those words. As an atheist how can you claim the words of Exodus 34:6? Who is the LORD God? (YHWH) HaShem to you?

    As for the Talmud/Oral Law, which was written down later, your argument makes no sense. If it is nothing but case law (as you claim), why would be make it my objective to know and understand the case law of your people? Do you know the case law of the USA? If, on the other hand, you believe (which is not your claim, but for the sake of argument I’ll put it here) that the Talmud is a commentary on the scriptures, then you might have a case that I should at least familiarize myself with at least some of the voluminous work of the Talmud. However, you want to claim the former, while making me responsible to perform what the latter demands.

    Of course, we deny the revelation of the Oral Torah! Even you cannot prove with scripture that it was revealed at Sinai. Common sense tells us that it wasn’t revealed at that time, because it had to be written down, and codified, centuries into the common era. The oral nature of the traditions was already shooting itself in the foot, because so much tradition could no longer be passed down from generation to generation. A written tradition was demanded.

    Talmud does not qualify as a commentary. It continues the judicial tradition/masoret as found between the Books of the Prophets to the Books of the Holy Writings which make up the NaCH.

    According to the Talmud:

    The days of the Messiah will last forty years, as it is written, Forty years long shall I take hold of the generation.

    (Babylonian Talmud: Sanhedrin 99a, referring to Psalm 95:10).

    “The church abomination perverts… knows nothing… Paul never differentiated…
    mosckerr, you continue to make simple statements against my faith, as though your statements carry some authority with me. They don’t. You must PROVE your case. Aren’t you a lawyer? You said you were. This should be an easy task for you, but your case, as presented in these comments, would be thrown out to court by an unbiased judge—no evidence, no case; period.

    The church abomination lies and proclaims itself as the “True faith”. Yet the church, specifically you, does not have the slightest clue of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev.

    This is another statement that you cannot prove. Abraham was promised to be a blessing to all nations. Yet, before you, as a nation, could become that blessing, you were twice removed from your land. Your Temple and your capital city was destroyed, each time showing you broke your covenant with God (who knows what that might be to an atheist), but the final time—AD 70—the Church was left to represent God. Show me how you, the nation, represents God today. The Church is all over the world informing others about the great God of Israel, our Creator who became man in order to bring us out of exile and back to himself. You don’t do this. We do!

    You demand everyone in the world to know the Talmud. Why? Judaism tells us why, doesn’t it?

    “The Written Torah cannot be understood without the oral tradition. Hence, if anything, the Oral Torah is the more important of the two”. [Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan]

    In other words, the Talmud interprets the scripture, and he admits openly that the Talmud is more important than the scripture. Surprise! It’s not just case law. Is it?

    No such Torah concept as “clean and unclean”. Xtian bible mistranslations – as useful as tits on a boar hog. LOL Tohor vs Tumah equally does not translate as moral vs immoral. Acceptance of the oath brit alliance faith – the pursuit of judicial justice which fairly compensates damages suffered by others; this faith has nothing to do with any belief in God the Creator.

    Interesting! “no such concept as ‘clean and unclean…’” Did you ever read what the Talmud says:

    Whoever eats bread without previously washing the hands is as though he had intercourse with a harlot… [Babylonian Talmud; Sotah 4b]

    Concerning my saying (and you continue to be guilty of the same here) that the remainder of your previous comment consisted of statements which you don’t even try to prove, you said:

    You did not copy/paste even one example.

    Sure I did. I posted excerpts from each paragraph, which you could have used to go back to the exact place in your own commentary, where you made your unproved statements.

     
  14. mosckerr

    March 19, 2024 at 09:34

    The 13 attributes of the Oral Torah, grace the 5th attribute, truth the 8th attribute. Why the necessity of repeating the שם השם? LOL The church abomination has denied the 13 middot logic system it favors their revisionist theology/history the JeZeus narrative. The Pauline narrative emphasized “saved by grace”.

    The Torah commands: do not take the שם השם in vain. Why the repetition of the Name in the 13 middot? Why the repetition of the Name in the kre’a shma
    שמע ישראל ה’ אלהינו ה’ אחד? Why not:
    שמע ישראל ה’ אלהינו אחד?
    No church abomination advocate has ever asked this most basic and fundamental of questions.

    Your bible abomination of avoda zarah copy-cats the sin of the golden calf wherein Israel declared אלו אלהים שיצאו וכו

    YHWH = the golden calf abomination of avoda zarah. Impossible to translate the Spirit Name revelation into a word.

    The Talmud was codified AFTER the expulsion of the Jews from Judea. Jews refer to this codification metaphorically as: The Oral Torah. Within its pages contained the Oral Torah logic system as taught by the secret kabbalah of rabbi Akiva. Goyim know nothing about this logic system. Hence the church abomination relies upon the ancient Greek philisophical schools of logic. Proof that the church abomination = to a Greek counterfeit of Oral Torah logic. The two opposing logic systems completely different the one from the other.

    Torah משנה תורה common law, as defined by the בנין אב-precedents of the Books of the Prophets and the Holy Writings/Gemara commentary to the Books of the Prophets functions by means of the Oral Torah logic system just as does the much later Talmud (the Gemara serving as the commentary to the Case/Rule common law Mishna) relies upon the exact same Oral Torah logic system to derives its Case/Rule halachic rulings. Oral Torah compares to water. Water assumes the shape of the vessel its poured into. T’NaCH the vessel of mussar common law. Whereas the Talmud the vessel of halachic common law.

    [[[why would be make it my objective to know and understand the case law of your people?]]] If you accepted the revelation of the Torah common law at Sinai … then you would have a direct interest in understanding how the sages applied this Oral Torah revelation in the much later Sanhedrin common law judicial rulings.

    [[[ Do you know the case law of the USA?]]] I come from 7 generations of American lawyers and judges.

    [[[ the Talmud is a commentary on the scriptures]]] Incorrect. The Talmud NOT a commentary to the T’NaCH Primary Sources. As the T’NaCH Primary source employ Oral Torah logic to command mussar. The Talmud employs Oral Torah logic to command halacha. Halacha does not even remotely resemble the language of the Torah.

    Oral Torah revealed in the 13 tohor middot. You do not understand the 13 middot. Hence your spacious claims of “grace” or “truth” utter and complete nonsense.

    The Torah makes the distinction between Sinai and Horev. The same mountain geographically. Sinai the revelation of the Written Torah which Horev the revelation of the Oral Torah as codified through the 13 tohor middot. Just that simple. A subtle nuance distinction separates Sinai from Horev. The church abomination does not concern itself by learning subtle nuance distinctions. Its broad brush avoda zarah replacement theology and revisionist history doesn’t care a less about subtle nuance distinctions. However the “devil” in the details.

    Babylonian Talmud: Sanhedrin 99 R. Eliezer said: The days of the Messiah will last forty years, as it is written, Forty years long shall I take hold of the generation. R. Eleazar b. Azariah said: Seventy years, as it is written, And it shall come to pass in that day, that Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years etc.

    This aggada does not correctly learn by a literal reading of its drosh story. Any more than the drosh story of the Creation of the Universe in 6 Days. Psalm 95:10 functions as a precedent to what Prophetic Book within the NaCH?

    These texts totally and completely sealed without knowledge of the Oral Torah logic system which unlocks and unseals these closed texts. Hence the Oral Torah more important that the Written Torah. Why because the Written Torah texts closed and sealed while the Oral Torah logic serves as the master key which unlocks and unseals the k’vanna of these seal texts.

    The Talmud refers to washing of hands before eating bread to the metaphor of sex with a whore … a reference to the tumah of having sex in violation of tohorat ha’biet. A woman must go to the mikveh after counting 11 days of no spotting on her white underwear. A whore has sex even during her period. That’s the metaphor comparison of washing hands before eating bread made to having sex with a whore.

     
  15. Eddie

    March 19, 2024 at 11:04

    mosckerr, this discussion has become very tedious. You offer nothing to the discussion, except simple statements, as though you are the authority that I must respect. I don’t. You are unconvincing and not an honest debater. Nothing you say has anything at all to do with my original study of Job, and, although I’ve permitted you to go down the rabbit hole of the Talmud being equal to the scriptures, as far as revelation from Sinai is concerned, you don’t prove your case. You don’t even attempt to prove it by offering evidence. You don’t even offer flawed evidence. All you do is offer your opinions, as though they were authoritative statements etched in stone. You may have a very high opinion of yourself, but you don’t appear to me as you appear to yourself. You’re just another guy on the internet. That’s all. You have opinions, but so does everyone else. What makes your opinion/worldview better or more truthful than mine? You don’t say. No evidence is offered. Therefore, our discussion is over, just as the friends’ discussion with Job was over, because they failed to prove Job was unrighteous. You have failed to prove that my faith is abominable, although you have repeatedly said it was. Have a good life, but our discussion is over, unless and until you begin to offer me an authority other than yourself,