Questions about Jews, Judaism and so on.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty sure Hitler wouldn't have the same personality when judging his own life. That would make the system impossible.

Well, I don't know how Judaism works, that's kinda why I'm asking. But in any case, if his personality were changed, what would be the point? Would it really be you judging yourself, or would it just be each man judged fairly? And if each man is simply judged fairly, why doesn't God just do the judging?
 
Ok, discussion goes on.:goodjob:

Domination
The thing is, personality is NOT exactly the soul.
It's a result of the interaction between the soul, the body and the environment.
But what is meant by "judging" is that your attitude towards the actions switches from "what I think as right" to "what God thinks as right" since it's the World of Truth we're talking about.
And therefore it's not so much about personality, but rather the preferences system.
So even Hitler knows that "you don't murder", not to mention that he knew it ever here, just CHOSE to ignore it.
It could be somewhat compared to checking your maths test, you know the right answers cause you got it on the sheet, but did you answer right - that's what you're checking for.
And the "not knowing who did it" part is mostly for better objectivity, though the soul is honest anyways.
(You would be more objective on a "random" test rather than on yours, even though you can't change obviously wrong answers.)

timtofly
Erm, God is not "punishing" for looking at Him.
It's just that the soul would leave the body from excitement.
Check this.
Spoiler :
There is a Chassidic explanation that Aaron's two sons did not "sin" literally. Their "sin" was to allow their desire to cleave to G-d to mount to such an intensity that they died. Their bodies could no longer contain their souls. Thus the Torah says "when they drew near to the L-rd (with such passion that) they died." And this was counted as a sin! For although a Jew must divest himself of material concerns, at the moment when he stands poised at the ultimate ecstasy of the soul, he must turn again to the work that the soul must do within a physical existence.

It is written in the Ethics of the Fathers (4:22): "Against your will you live." Set against the desire of the soul to rise beyond the world, is its task of creating a dwelling-place for G-d within the world. Nadav and Avihu achieved the ecstasy but not the return. This was their sin and the reason for their death. They "drew near to the L-rd and they died." They allowed their spiritual passion override their this-worldly task. They went beyond the world and beyond life itself.
That's what is caused by (unnecessary) "seeing God".

CELTIC
NOW!!!
See my sig!!!:goodjob:
 
Ok, discussion goes on.:goodjob:
timtofly
Erm, God is not "punishing" for looking at Him.
It's just that the soul would leave the body from excitement.
Check this.

That's what is caused by (unnecessary) "seeing God".

I never said G-d was punishing. Moses looked away just like Adam hid from G-d. Sin cannot exist in G-d's presence. It is the shame a human feels not necessarily sin itself. It is interesting your take, since I never heard it. Are you saying then that once a soul leaves the body it cannot return? Now I hold that the soul is God in us. It does not mean we are G-d, but it is our ability to make the right decisions, our conscience per se. Allegedly, Jesus did command that the soul of His friend Lazarus return to him, even after 4 days. Paul also claims to have visited the third heaven.

Do you hold that Adam had a choice, or was the nature to choose wrongly already there and he did not have the power to correctly choose? Or do you just see Adam as figurative?

Also, never received your take on if Moses actually existed.
 
I think I may have asked this before, but don't recall getting an answer.

What religion was Noah?

Who would win in a fight, Samson or Goliath? Do you think David could have taken out Samson with the same sling move?

Do you think things would change if the Temple was rebuilt? How would your life be better or worse?
 
timtofly
I hold that Torah (I mean starting with Creation and up to the last prophets/kings, the entire Tanach) never leaves the plain meaning (while definitely having MANY deeper meanings too).
Which means, all those people lived exactly that way.
Spoiler :
Some traditional sources and some Orthodox Jews believe the pronunciation and cantillation derive from the revelation at Sinai, since it is impossible to read the original text without pronunciations and cantillation pauses.[citation needed] The combination of a text (מקרא mikra), pronunciation (ניקוד niqqud) and cantillation (טעמים te`amim) enable the reader to understand both the simple meaning, as well as the nuances in sentence flow of the text.
On the other hand, another source I really enjoy, Midrash, is much less "to the text", though it's usually hard to decide.
Spoiler :
Some of these midrashim entail mystical teachings. The presentation is such that the Midrash is a simple lesson to the uninitiated, and a direct allusion, or analogy, to a Mystical teaching for those educated in this area.

An example of a Midrashic interpretation:
"And God saw all that He had made, and found it very good. And there was evening, and there was morning, the sixth day." (Genesis 1:31)—Midrash: Rabbi Nahman said in Rabbi Samuel's name: "Behold, it was good" refers to the Good Desire; "And behold, it was very good" refers to the Evil Desire. (It only says "very good" after man was created with both the good and bad inclinations, in all other cases it only says "and God saw that it was good") Can then the Evil Desire be very good? That would be extraordinary! But without the Evil Desire, however, no man would build a house, take a wife and beget children; and thus said Solomon: "Again, I considered all labour and all excelling in work, that it is a man's rivalry with his neighbour."

About soul leaving.
I meant they/he would simply die of ecstatic happiness of seeing Godliness.
Nothing to do with soul returning or not.
You do know that people die from "happiness heart attacks"???:sad:

Adam had a choice.
We have a choice.
God had a choice to give us the choice to choose - and He chose to do so.:crazyeye::goodjob:

Pete
(Though I'd rather double-post, but the RULES...:lol:)
Noah was Noahide. (No joke!!!:lol::lol::lol:)
He heard God's commands and commandments, they made a covenant and had a sign for it - rainbow.

I'd say Samson, though not necessarily.:lol:
The very idea of a stone defeating iron was that "weaker" can defeat "stronger".
Would NOT apply to your hypothetical MK.:lol:

WHEN (not IF, see my sig:lol:) the Temple will be rebuilt, Jews (and non-Jews too btw) again will have a fixed place of both worshiping God and feeling His presence openly.
Better: What can be more than openly experiencing Godliness.
Worse: Well, a LOT of cows, sheep, pigeons...:lol:
 
Adam had a choice.
We have a choice.
God had a choice to give us the choice to choose - and He chose to do so.:crazyeye::goodjob:

WHEN (not IF, see my sig:lol:) the Temple will be rebuilt, Jews (and non-Jews too btw) again will have a fixed place of both worshiping God and feeling His presence openly.
Better: What can be more than openly experiencing Godliness.
Worse: Well, a LOT of cows, sheep, pigeons...:lol:

Being a Jew, what do you think our choice is and how would you define it?

Is it true that everything is ready for the Temple to be built? Could it be done in a month, or your best guess? I assume all that is needed is a peace accord?

Is the outer wall still considered part of the temple destroyed in 70AD? Would the Jews allow both the Temple and the Dome sitting next to each other?

Thank you for taking the time and answering questions.
 
tim
Hi.:)
Choice - see May 12, 10.43 above.
Temple - HERE.
Dome - as in Civ, why pay maintenance for OBSOLETE structures?:lol::goodjob:
Nice talking to you.:D

Trading in the Dome for the gates then.:D

Your choice being "everything" you spoiled on the twelth? I take you also "believe" the link on the Temple in this post?

Thanks
 
tim
Nice that you got my joke (though I wasn't really joking).:goodjob:
I barely understood what you meant by "spoiled".:crazyeye:
Why "believe" in brackets(commas?:confused:)???
Any time.:mischief:

PS. Some smileys here are WAY off-meaning...:D:crazyeye:

Your post of May 12th has 6 spoilers.;)

Some posters agree with the links they provide, and some just use links to make a point.
 
Er...
What's the difference???
I use links for saving my time of rewriting most of them in my words.:)
Which means I not only agree with them, I actually try to find an on-line version of what I've actually read to make such conclusions.:goodjob:
Some people think that it's not my opinion - but it's quite the opposite: I'm looking for sources to prove my points.:D
 
Er...
What's the difference???
I use links for saving my time of rewriting most of them in my words.:)
Which means I not only agree with them, I actually try to find an on-line version of what I've actually read to make such conclusions.:goodjob:
Some people think that it's not my opinion - but it's quite the opposite: I'm looking for sources to prove my points.:D

Weelll then, I suppose the Mashiach has come and will come again?

Also how close do you come to my hypothesis that: Alone God Is All? I have read some of the teachings of Kabbalah and was suprised how much of it was "my thoughts" without having even heard of it before the last three months.
 
I have heard from, Catholic friends that baptism and praying for the dead were both based in Jewish practices around the time of Christianity's founding. Can you verify or dispute this?
 
Weelll then, I suppose the Mashiach has come and will come again?

Also how close do you come to my hypothesis that: Alone God Is All? I have read some of the teachings of Kabbalah and was suprised how much of it was "my thoughts" without having even heard of it before the last three months.
Not according to the Jewish point of view - there's only one FINAL coming of him.
About your hypothesis - care to elaborate?
I read it but still am way too confused...
Yeah, when something makes sense, it can be thought of even beforehand.:goodjob:

Smellincoffee
(Nice nick. I'd do that right now, you know.:D)
Er... many things are somehow based on previous ones, and Judaism being the origin of all monotheism...:)
I'm not sure what these things are (for an obvious reason), could you elaborate a bit on what's the procedure AND the reasons of those?
 
Well according to your link, He came once on a donkey, and the second time in all His Glory.

I am not sure if I can elaborate, I can try to answer questions to the best of my ability though.
 
Judaism being the origin of all monotheism...:)

I think you might want to rethink that claim... you're right in the case of the Abrahamic traditions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). But monotheism did not begin from Judaism nor is it unique to it. Judaism arguably began as a henotheistic faith. And Hinduism, Zoroastrianism and Atenism are other religions you need to consider.
 
pete
Nope.:D
If we take in mind that Adam knew God, as is written in Torah (for me it's a fact, you may have your opinion), then even though he wasn't strictly speaking Jewish (no one was until Abraham), but the way he related to God was the "Jewish" (meaning Abrahamic as general) way.
Also, I really hold the "view" of an "evolving" Judaism plainly STUPID.:D
And I have my reasonable reasons for that.:D
 
Alone: Humans cannot compute "alone". We have always been in time and space. We can feel all alone, but we will never be able to describe emptyness nor eternity. A glass of water in the ocean may be close.

G-d: to paraphrase in the big bang God, at the start of time and space G-d created two things the earth (church got that one mixed up) and the heavens (not the earth). Now you can put a gap there, or your favorite theory.

Is: This is the point that seperates the earliest of "religions". If the earth was and the heavens were, then they cannot be G-d. What is G-d? No one knows, and our time and space is a limit to that knowledge. In the beginning the creation did know, but now we have forgotten. At times humans may have had the knowledge, but as a whole we do not know. There are too many historical evidences or lack thereof to go farther than that, and science has made great strides, but if G-d is, we cannot prove Him, but He would have to give us that knowledge.

All: IMO G-d is the "seed" that produces the all. Without Him nothing would exist. He is that force that holds everything together at the smallest particle that science has yet to discover. He is randomness and irrationality. He "designed" the laws that we have knowledge of. He is deterministic and perplexing, because He allowed the all and without Him the all would stop existing.

Elaboration?

Alone: A human can never be alone. There will always be someone or something around us. G-d alone is alone.

G-d: ceased to be alone and created the earth and the heavens.

Is: G-d is everything in that even the smallest particle would not exist without Him (the force that holds it all together). G-d is also outside of everything and that is why we cannot know Him unless He reveals Himself to us.

All: Everything that G-d created was good. After Adam made the wrong choice, everything was just copies of what was good.




It is alleged that on Palm Sunday Jesus road a donkey and was proclaimed "King" by the Jews. However, He came to pay the penalty for Adam's wrong choice and be the sacrificial lamb for all mankind (G-d Himself A Lamb). The Law had to be fulfilled, and it was not time for His Glorious earthly kingdom. The next time He will set up that kingdom.


You are right in that any religion would have to have happened after Noah. Abram was "called out" from those earliest ones and set upon the righteous path. Thank G-d.
 
civ2, I appreciate what you're trying to do with this thread, but your method is crap. You are ignoring some questions, answering some with answers that don't address the question, not quoting what you are answering, answering with bizarre statements, filling your posts with spoilers & smileys & contradicting yourself. You are confusing the goyim. Please take this seriously if you are going to do it & remember that the questioners don't know what you know about Judaism. They don't even know what Chabad is or why you continually link to it's website instead of answering yourself. Please keep the above in mind if you're going to maintain this thread. Shalom, brother.

Questioners, civ2 lives in a very insulated & religious community. His knowledge of Judaism runs deep, but he probably doesn't know much about Christianity, so don't assume he knows what you're talking about when you mention New Testament happenings that seem to be common knowledge to you.

The amount of miscommunication so far in this thread makes my head hurt. I don't really want to participate because these threads always end in train wreck & the mods are historically very tolerant of antisemitism That being said, I think the root of bigotry is ignorance & I have a child who I don't want to be affected by any more bigotry than I or generations before me were.

Is it true that everything is ready for the Temple to be built?

I don't think so. There's no cache of stone & timber standing by for that purpose, if that's what you mean. On the other hand, there have been architectual plans drawn up based on ancient accounts & the lineages of the priesthood have been maintained.

Could it be done in a month, or your best guess?

I seriously doubt it. Not in Israel. I don't want to guess.

I assume all that is needed is a peace accord?

That's not nearly enough. There are two huge mosques on the site. Jews are forbidden to damage a house of G-d, even a Muslim one. Even if the Muslim world willingly handed over control of the site, which it would never do, the Temple still couldn't be rebuilt. Nobody is holding their breath waiting for the Temple to be rebuilt.

Is the outer wall still considered part of the temple destroyed in 70AD?

Sort of. The Temple was the building that housed the Holy of Holies & the Ark. The wall you're talking about is just the foundation of the plateau that the Temple stood on. It's all we have left so it's special to us.

Would the Jews allow both the Temple and the Dome sitting next to each other?

I don't think that would work for Muslims or Jews. The site is very specific. The Dome of the Rock is built right where Muslims believe Mohammed ascended to heaven. That's also the spot that Jewish tradition says Abraham almost sacrificed his son on & the spot where both Temples stood. Neither structure would serve it's purpose if built somewhere else.

I have heard from, Catholic friends that baptism and praying for the dead were both based in Jewish practices around the time of Christianity's founding. Can you verify or dispute this?

Yes, this is true.

Ritual bathing is a very old Jewish practice. It was an old practice during the time of the Gospels. It's purposes are very complicated to explain & I really don't want to try as it would take awhile & be easily misunderstood. It occurs in a bath structure called a mikveh that is built to capture rainwater as groundwater is considered to not be spiritually pure enough. The Gospel account of "John" conducting ritual bathing in a river is downright bizarre & one of several apparent examples of the Gospel authors not knowing very much about Judaism.

"Praying" for the dead is also an ancient Jewish practice, but not in the way you might think. The concept of praying doesn't exist in Judaism the way it does in Christianity. Praying means asking for something. Jewish "prayer" tends to be thanksgiving & praise of G-d, not asking for stuff. In that way, we don't pray for our dead. When a parent, spouse or child dies, we say a "prayer" called the Kaddish at least once a day for the deceased for a year. The Kaddish is essentially a proclamation of G-d's positive attributes. I could probably find a translation to post if you're curious. "Prayers" in Hebrew are called brachas. The closest English translations are "blessings" or "prayers," but there isn't really a word in English that properly conveys the idea. We don't pray or bless. We say brachas.

It's allot more complicated than that, but that's enough for now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom