Religious Belief-systems 101
- Thread starter Mars Man
- Start date
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #27
I have not read that book, Void, but it does sound as though it would be a good read. Maybe one fine day, I'll be able to do so.
Then, going back to look at that verse in the writting entitled 'Genesis'--verse 7, of chapter two--we find one more word which is a bit specific and which has already kind been talked about in the previous post.
This word is, ruach-khiyim (khiyim is plural of khiya--as seen earlier) which is rendered in English as 'breath of life' or 'breath living.' This term is more precise than the simply ruach.
Therefore we see that the author is saying that with the additive of 'ruach-khiyim' the simple 'nephesh' becomes 'nephesh-khiya,' or living nephesh. (I will use the term nephesh here on out to save interference from preconceptions often attached to the term 'soul.')
As pointed to in the earlier post, we can find the exact thing for all animate life forms. 1 The concept is clearly applicable to all animate life forms.
Then, there is another very practicle feature of this nephesh, namely, as it is not a 'nephesh-khiya' until it has 'ruach-khiyim, without 'ruach-khiyim,' it is merely a 'nephesh,' without 'khiya'--or life-force.
In other words, a non-living 'nephesh is distinguishable from a living 'nephesh. 2
Further supporting this concept are those found in the descriptive functions of essentially all animate beings. I will touch on those in the next post.
1. Gen 1:21, 24, 30; 2:19; 9:10-16; Lev 11:10, 46; 24:18; Eze 47:9; Prov 12:10 (used for 'life' as a nephesh); etc. 2. Gen 19:19,20; Lev 19:28; 21:1; 22:4; Num 23:10; Josh 2:13, 14; 11:11; Judg 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1 Ki 20:31, 32; Pslm 22:29; Hag 2:13--also see and compare Gen 17:14; Ex 12:15; Lev 7:20; 32:29; Josh 10:28-39; Job 7:15; Pslm 78:50; Eze 13:19; 22:27; 33:6; etc.
Then, going back to look at that verse in the writting entitled 'Genesis'--verse 7, of chapter two--we find one more word which is a bit specific and which has already kind been talked about in the previous post.
This word is, ruach-khiyim (khiyim is plural of khiya--as seen earlier) which is rendered in English as 'breath of life' or 'breath living.' This term is more precise than the simply ruach.
Therefore we see that the author is saying that with the additive of 'ruach-khiyim' the simple 'nephesh' becomes 'nephesh-khiya,' or living nephesh. (I will use the term nephesh here on out to save interference from preconceptions often attached to the term 'soul.')
As pointed to in the earlier post, we can find the exact thing for all animate life forms. 1 The concept is clearly applicable to all animate life forms.
Then, there is another very practicle feature of this nephesh, namely, as it is not a 'nephesh-khiya' until it has 'ruach-khiyim, without 'ruach-khiyim,' it is merely a 'nephesh,' without 'khiya'--or life-force.
In other words, a non-living 'nephesh is distinguishable from a living 'nephesh. 2
Further supporting this concept are those found in the descriptive functions of essentially all animate beings. I will touch on those in the next post.
1. Gen 1:21, 24, 30; 2:19; 9:10-16; Lev 11:10, 46; 24:18; Eze 47:9; Prov 12:10 (used for 'life' as a nephesh); etc. 2. Gen 19:19,20; Lev 19:28; 21:1; 22:4; Num 23:10; Josh 2:13, 14; 11:11; Judg 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1 Ki 20:31, 32; Pslm 22:29; Hag 2:13--also see and compare Gen 17:14; Ex 12:15; Lev 7:20; 32:29; Josh 10:28-39; Job 7:15; Pslm 78:50; Eze 13:19; 22:27; 33:6; etc.
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #28
The nephesh-khiya eats and desires to eat,1 and of course, after all that eating, can become fat, 2 but luckily, it can fast--and thus loose weight.3 It can be punished for touching unclean things, 4 and of course it works.5 And, among a number of other things that a nephesh-khiya can do, it can be refreshed by cool water, when hot and tired.6
In Biblical Hebrew, the idiomatic style of the word nephesh with the possessive suffix, is invariably rendered as a personal pronoun in English. So, to say something like 'my nephesh' is to say 'I'--if used in a reflexive situation, 'myself.'7
Then, as brought out in the last posts, and built upon here, we find that since we do have the concept of nephesh-meth (Lev 21:11--and notice the proof texts given in the last post) along with that of all animate life forms being nephesh-khiya, it is clear that the concept of the term nephes is that of the very entity itself--the very life form in its totality.
We can verify that by looking at Genesis 7:22, where we will find:
Here, all animals with the 'breath of life in their nostrils, are the subject. It can be reasoned that ruach goes hand in hand together with ni'shimath (breath) to make nephesh-khiya, but that the word ruach--usually rendered 'spirit' in English--can be contrasted (in essence) with ni'shimath-ruachas at Job 27:3-5. (KJV shows this best in translation) 'Breath' and 'spirit', as a group within a nephesh-khiya are contrasted with the absence of such in the 'nephesh-meth.' (verse 3 against verse 5; also see Job 34:14, 15 (KJV); Psalms 104:29; Isaiah 42:5)
With just a little bit of the further detail being skipped over, we can quite conclusively say that the conception was that of 'ruach (usually rendered 'spirit') being the 'priciple force of life' which we find in every cell of the body of things, and, especially in the case of animated forms. (since that was all the Jewish religious writers of that day knew, obviously) And, as expected, this was evidenced in the act of breathing, so 'breath' was very closely related to having the 'life force' within the 'nephesh' and thus being a living being--both human and non-human.
A follow up, recap, and conclusion will come soon.
1. Lev 7:18,20,25,27; De 12:15; 23:24; Ps 19:15; 27:7; Isa 29:8; 56:11; 58:10; Jer 31:25; etc. 2. Prov 11:25. 3. Ps 35:13. 4. Lev 5:2; 7:21; 17:15; 22:6; Num 19:13. 5. Lev 23:30. 6. Prov 25:25. 7. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. by Brown, Driver, and Briggs; Oxford Press 1951; p 660. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros ed. by Koehler and Baumgartner; Leiden, 1958; p627.
In Biblical Hebrew, the idiomatic style of the word nephesh with the possessive suffix, is invariably rendered as a personal pronoun in English. So, to say something like 'my nephesh' is to say 'I'--if used in a reflexive situation, 'myself.'7
Then, as brought out in the last posts, and built upon here, we find that since we do have the concept of nephesh-meth (Lev 21:11--and notice the proof texts given in the last post) along with that of all animate life forms being nephesh-khiya, it is clear that the concept of the term nephes is that of the very entity itself--the very life form in its totality.
We can verify that by looking at Genesis 7:22, where we will find:
Here, all animals with the 'breath of life in their nostrils, are the subject. It can be reasoned that ruach goes hand in hand together with ni'shimath (breath) to make nephesh-khiya, but that the word ruach--usually rendered 'spirit' in English--can be contrasted (in essence) with ni'shimath-ruachas at Job 27:3-5. (KJV shows this best in translation) 'Breath' and 'spirit', as a group within a nephesh-khiya are contrasted with the absence of such in the 'nephesh-meth.' (verse 3 against verse 5; also see Job 34:14, 15 (KJV); Psalms 104:29; Isaiah 42:5)
With just a little bit of the further detail being skipped over, we can quite conclusively say that the conception was that of 'ruach (usually rendered 'spirit') being the 'priciple force of life' which we find in every cell of the body of things, and, especially in the case of animated forms. (since that was all the Jewish religious writers of that day knew, obviously) And, as expected, this was evidenced in the act of breathing, so 'breath' was very closely related to having the 'life force' within the 'nephesh' and thus being a living being--both human and non-human.
A follow up, recap, and conclusion will come soon.
1. Lev 7:18,20,25,27; De 12:15; 23:24; Ps 19:15; 27:7; Isa 29:8; 56:11; 58:10; Jer 31:25; etc. 2. Prov 11:25. 3. Ps 35:13. 4. Lev 5:2; 7:21; 17:15; 22:6; Num 19:13. 5. Lev 23:30. 6. Prov 25:25. 7. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. by Brown, Driver, and Briggs; Oxford Press 1951; p 660. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros ed. by Koehler and Baumgartner; Leiden, 1958; p627.
Last edited:
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #29
And...that was a pretty slow soon.
What can be gotten through the sifting process of just the intial language and usge, is that the early writers gave the entirety of the human being as being that nephesh in total. To that degree, the being as is, is the total being; no dualism, no neo-platonism.
When the being dies, the being is no more--that's the end of the line.
What is interesting, is that although Zoroastrianism may have had some influence on very early Judaism, it obviously did not here--as far as can be determined. The later rabbinic interpretations surely did, it appears.
This concept, then, seems to match much better what we can see through our understanding of nature today. Since most other religious belief-systems do teach that consciousness never ends, or that personal essence never ends, this particular element of early Judasim is unique.
scorpion da black
a friend
- 17 May 2007
- 646
- 16
Islam is truly the beacon of light ..........
when all the material things seem so cheap...
and all the hate fades no matter how deep.
and all pain is endurable despite all weeps.
and all sadness fades, though darkness creeps.
when all the material things seem so cheap...
and all the hate fades no matter how deep.
and all pain is endurable despite all weeps.
and all sadness fades, though darkness creeps.
Mycernius
The Hairy Wookie
- 4 Feb 2005
- 4,644
- 203
Depends on your point of view. A Christian would say the same about Christianity, a Jew the same about Judaism. On a like for like basis all three Abrahamic religions have similar goals. The Qu'ran even mentions the similarities:
Sura 2:62 -
Taken from the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali
One could argue that all three are a beacon of light.
centrajapan
先輩
- 16 Sep 2007
- 715
- 11
Islam believes in Jihad. However so do many others such as the Tamil Tigers a secular organisation with Hindu roots and Kamikaze. Suicide bombings is the last desperate tactic. Instead of surrender that is what they choose. So did the Native Americans. This has nothing to do with Islam. However Americans think so because of the 9-11 trauma.
After 9-11 Americans supported Israel even more and justified the Iraq invasion all in the name of fighting Islamic terrorism.
Suicide bombing is a strong weapon for the weak. Israel fuels lots of anger.
I belive US is the most fundamentalistic imperialist nation on earth today. They go around bombing countries including a pharmacy plant in the name of freedom in Sudan. Americans love Israel despite it carrying out severe discrimination, ethnic cleansing, segregation, apartheid and oppression because they have a funky angle on their bible hence when some Americans start to talk about Islam I will ask them more questions than they can answer and CIA as I am typing this.
After 9-11 Americans supported Israel even more and justified the Iraq invasion all in the name of fighting Islamic terrorism.
Suicide bombing is a strong weapon for the weak. Israel fuels lots of anger.
I belive US is the most fundamentalistic imperialist nation on earth today. They go around bombing countries including a pharmacy plant in the name of freedom in Sudan. Americans love Israel despite it carrying out severe discrimination, ethnic cleansing, segregation, apartheid and oppression because they have a funky angle on their bible hence when some Americans start to talk about Islam I will ask them more questions than they can answer and CIA as I am typing this.
Mycernius
The Hairy Wookie
- 4 Feb 2005
- 4,644
- 203
Are you confusing Jihad with violent acts? If so, you are incorrect in your idea of what a Jihad is. A jihad is not a holy war against the infidel, but more a struggle to improve yourself aginst the devil or what you percieve as a imperfect way that could be bad for you. You could call a diet a jihad against a weight problem, or taking a class as a jihad against your ignorance in a subject. It can be used as a way of preserving Islam against evil ideas that could threaten the Islamic way of life, and it is this which gives a lot of people the idea that jihad means war in violent means. It appears now to be used as an excuse by Islamic fundamentals to commits acts of aggression against any non-muslim. This is not Jihad, it is cowards and petty warlords, such as Osama Bib laden, using it to gain power for themselves or revenge against what they perceive as a slight against them, and not for the good of Islam. In fact it damages it and leads the non-muslims to see Jihad as violence and nothing else. Those that call for it now are using it for their own selfish needs.
Muslims aren't the only ones using it as a form of aggression. The Christian fundies are just as bad by using the threat of violent jihad to fight wars that are really about money. Might as well use the good old Christian title "Crusade".
Muslims aren't the only ones using it as a form of aggression. The Christian fundies are just as bad by using the threat of violent jihad to fight wars that are really about money. Might as well use the good old Christian title "Crusade".
scorpion da black
a friend
- 17 May 2007
- 646
- 16
it is just a poem i say about Islam...
i agree to you, every one has his point of view and it should be respected.
as for me this is how i perceive my religion ...these are few lessons i learn from my faith...not that other faiths aren't great!
i hope you like the poem
- 20 Nov 2007
- 46
- 0
i will suprise you
i will suprise you.
the islam is not bad religion-and i worked with musleam-we were been ok for each other-and had a good realationship between each other.
i even met one time in the past kadi when i was at the i.d.f as a soldier and we were speaking each other-and he was speaking very wise advise.
the true the jewish and the musleam have no hate inside israel.
but for outside the boarden we have real hate-between each other.
and this is strange you can know one friend(zalame)you know from the gamaha-but maybe he has a relative in the other side of the boarden.
i even read a bit in the koran -and i can tell you -there are alote of think from the real life that we should taking for our self.
avshalom charly cohen
israel/haifa
icarus5
i will suprise you.
the islam is not bad religion-and i worked with musleam-we were been ok for each other-and had a good realationship between each other.
i even met one time in the past kadi when i was at the i.d.f as a soldier and we were speaking each other-and he was speaking very wise advise.
the true the jewish and the musleam have no hate inside israel.
but for outside the boarden we have real hate-between each other.
and this is strange you can know one friend(zalame)you know from the gamaha-but maybe he has a relative in the other side of the boarden.
i even read a bit in the koran -and i can tell you -there are alote of think from the real life that we should taking for our self.
avshalom charly cohen
israel/haifa
icarus5
scorpion da black
a friend
- 17 May 2007
- 646
- 16
yes i am surprised and greatly....
well, i hope more Israelis think like you...
maybe that can bridge our differences...
and now more than ever i truly wish for peace...
i have seen the worst of Israel last summer..
maybe i am yet to see their best ....
best regards...
sasori
- 20 Nov 2007
- 46
- 0
scorpion da black
scorpion da black
dont write this think-it will make you with great dangerous-you know hizballa.
if someone that know you see that you are speaking with israeli -it could put you with great dangerous.
i wish you all the best-and peace-but becarefull-you know just say the israeli are bed people that knowing only more-this is more safe for you.
cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
icarus5
i mean knowning war not more
scorpion da black
dont write this think-it will make you with great dangerous-you know hizballa.
if someone that know you see that you are speaking with israeli -it could put you with great dangerous.
i wish you all the best-and peace-but becarefull-you know just say the israeli are bed people that knowing only more-this is more safe for you.
cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
icarus5
i mean knowning war not more
scorpion da black
a friend
- 17 May 2007
- 646
- 16
don't worry, we live in a democratic country...
i can say what ever i wish...
and every person is eager for peace here..
that doesnt mean Israel isn't an enemy still....it will be in our perspective until the occupation ends
i can say what ever i wish...
and every person is eager for peace here..
that doesnt mean Israel isn't an enemy still....it will be in our perspective until the occupation ends
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #39
Now there is a statement well made, well considered, and well presented !
Let's compare these three here then. Let's look at the whole (as far as we can determine) systems of each one, from the oldest thoughts to the newer, from the variant readings to the common, and see where they agree, where they differ. Let's do it as academically as we can, please.
AND...let's control our more negative and rash behavior here, I intend to keep this balanced and fair, free of personal attacks or jabs, slurs, or obvious insults--and I'm sure Mycernius is right there with me. ALSO, there is no need to see just anything at all, which you do not like, as being insulting. . . that simply reflects badly on ones own position. Let's discuss this in good will !!
One thing that interests me is the god-models presented by the three systems. Let's take a look at these ! (and I will soon enough get started on that too)
pugtm
Jewish Samurai
- 21 Apr 2007
- 567
- 13
well here's a case were you get to do only 2/3rds the work for full credit.
islamic and jewish gods are identical as is a lot of their basic fundamental scriptures but they branch out in the interpretation and values considered by their scholars
christian theology though is considered very pagan by jewish standards(muslim too probably though i by no means speak for or have an extensive knowledge of islam) as is their view of god.
islamic and jewish gods are identical as is a lot of their basic fundamental scriptures but they branch out in the interpretation and values considered by their scholars
christian theology though is considered very pagan by jewish standards(muslim too probably though i by no means speak for or have an extensive knowledge of islam) as is their view of god.
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #41
Thanks for joining in pugtm san. I'd like to examine this then. It is exactly one thing to sum up in so many words that the Judaic god-model and the Islamic god-model are the same, and another thing to put it out on the table in details and presentation.
I will take the position that the three god-models presented by the three branches of the Abrahamic belief-systems are all three different models. . . with only a little overlap.
I hope you would be interested in taking part in this fully and in an academic mode of presentation and debate, and hope that the others who had joined in will be too. Thanks !!
I will take the position that the three god-models presented by the three branches of the Abrahamic belief-systems are all three different models. . . with only a little overlap.
I hope you would be interested in taking part in this fully and in an academic mode of presentation and debate, and hope that the others who had joined in will be too. Thanks !!
- 20 Nov 2007
- 46
- 0
Mars Man
Mars Man:
you dont understand peoples from israel and lebanon not speaking with each other -not so ofen-only last year we had a war with missile between the 2 country-with dead people and much hate.this small talk that we had done-is not very -ofen happened.
this is not which, god is right or not.
icarus5
Mars Man:
you dont understand peoples from israel and lebanon not speaking with each other -not so ofen-only last year we had a war with missile between the 2 country-with dead people and much hate.this small talk that we had done-is not very -ofen happened.
this is not which, god is right or not.
icarus5
Mycernius
The Hairy Wookie
- 4 Feb 2005
- 4,644
- 203
Muhammad moved to a Jewish city during his exile from Mecca and had a lot of contact with Jewish scholars. This is most likely why Islam has a lot in common with Judaism when dealing with the fundamentals. The differences between the two are the influences from Christianity, they do recognise Jesus as a prophet and also the virgin birth, and also from the pre-islamic mythology that Muhammad grew up with.
Is the the doctrine of the Trinity that is the main reason for this? I would like to know more on this, thanks.
pugtm
Jewish Samurai
- 21 Apr 2007
- 567
- 13
no actually the trinity just makes it worse the reason is jesus himself. to jews worshiping anything other than god is pagan, even if he was a representative of god(which he wasn't) cannot be worshiped.
it can be best explained like this. in the talmud a question is posed, can we channel prayer through an idol to god or in other words to help us focus know we are praying to god but pray to an idol to represent it. the answer is still no because that is still not god and it demeans both us and god for a person to pray to it.
even so emperor Constantine paganized Christianity during his reign and a lot of changes have happened since then too. in our point of view Christianity has more in common with paganism than it does with Judaism.
scorpion da black
a friend
- 17 May 2007
- 646
- 16
pugtm is right...
Islam and Judaism believe only in God without having any other being sharing this supreme position with.
where we differ is in one point that has many branches. Judaism believe them selves to be the people of God, chosen people , sons of God..
Judaism is a religion built on race (sons of Issac, Jacob ) . you can only be born Jewish.
as for Islam it is not a religion of race, it is built on embracing belief system. any one can be Muslim, not only the sons of Ismael (Arabs).
as Islam also doesn't define any race as chosen by God. any person who embraces Islam is a servant of God.
as for Christianity...Christians assume that Jesus is the son of God..
that is the main difference between Christianity and Islam.
Muslims consider Jesus as a prophet , while Christians give him a Godly position.
the trinity in Islamic perspective is a sign paganism.
as for Judaism, they don't believe that the Messiah was even sent.
neither was he is a prophet nor he is a God in Jewish perspective.
that is as academic as it can get.
oh and mars man.
as mr. Cohen said here.
it is not very often that a Lebanese and an Israeli can talk and can do so in a positive constructive way. as a matter of fact it is almost never seen.
it is a sign of good will. i think you should encourage that more often rather than deleting our conversation.
Islam and Judaism believe only in God without having any other being sharing this supreme position with.
where we differ is in one point that has many branches. Judaism believe them selves to be the people of God, chosen people , sons of God..
Judaism is a religion built on race (sons of Issac, Jacob ) . you can only be born Jewish.
as for Islam it is not a religion of race, it is built on embracing belief system. any one can be Muslim, not only the sons of Ismael (Arabs).
as Islam also doesn't define any race as chosen by God. any person who embraces Islam is a servant of God.
as for Christianity...Christians assume that Jesus is the son of God..
that is the main difference between Christianity and Islam.
Muslims consider Jesus as a prophet , while Christians give him a Godly position.
the trinity in Islamic perspective is a sign paganism.
as for Judaism, they don't believe that the Messiah was even sent.
neither was he is a prophet nor he is a God in Jewish perspective.
that is as academic as it can get.
oh and mars man.
as mr. Cohen said here.
it is not very often that a Lebanese and an Israeli can talk and can do so in a positive constructive way. as a matter of fact it is almost never seen.
it is a sign of good will. i think you should encourage that more often rather than deleting our conversation.
Haruspex
先輩
- 30 Aug 2007
- 2,324
- 96
Lets just say most of christendom, but not all. Arianism for example was not trinitarian. So they simply considered Jesus as someone who was created, and has no unity with God and the Holy Spirit, although they consider Jesus a divine being. And this isn't a fresh view either, Arianism was around at the Nicaean synod. Basically it was the faith of goths. Theodosius comes to mind.
Mycernius
The Hairy Wookie
- 4 Feb 2005
- 4,644
- 203
Thank you Pugtm and Scorpion. I knew it was something to do with Jesus.
As Derfel pointed out there where different sects of Christianity that did not see Jesus as the personification of God. It has to do with the phrase "Son of God". It seems that it was taken at face value, especially by Paul of Tarsus, instead of the view others took that all humans are sons or daughter of God. After all doesn't the term Our Father seems to be used a lot.
As for Pagan roots, both Islam and Judaism have their own pagan roots that can be found in scripture. The best example of that within Islam is the name Muslims give to God, Allah. It is a name that pre-dates Islam and is the name given to a pre-Islamic deity that Muhammad used to identify with the God of Christians and Jews. The original Allah had three daughters; Allat, Manat and al-Uzza, whose worship gave rise to the mythical Satanic verses.
The roots of pagan belief in Judasim can be found in one of the most known stories that is in all three faiths and that is Noah and the flood. The myth pre-dates Judasim and is Akkadian/Sumerian in origin and found in the Epic of Gilgamesh (Recommended reading for people interested in myth).
As Derfel pointed out there where different sects of Christianity that did not see Jesus as the personification of God. It has to do with the phrase "Son of God". It seems that it was taken at face value, especially by Paul of Tarsus, instead of the view others took that all humans are sons or daughter of God. After all doesn't the term Our Father seems to be used a lot.
As for Pagan roots, both Islam and Judaism have their own pagan roots that can be found in scripture. The best example of that within Islam is the name Muslims give to God, Allah. It is a name that pre-dates Islam and is the name given to a pre-Islamic deity that Muhammad used to identify with the God of Christians and Jews. The original Allah had three daughters; Allat, Manat and al-Uzza, whose worship gave rise to the mythical Satanic verses.
The roots of pagan belief in Judasim can be found in one of the most known stories that is in all three faiths and that is Noah and the flood. The myth pre-dates Judasim and is Akkadian/Sumerian in origin and found in the Epic of Gilgamesh (Recommended reading for people interested in myth).
pugtm
Jewish Samurai
- 21 Apr 2007
- 567
- 13
yeah but thats not part of our commandments nor do we read any customs or laws from it in fact quite the opposite we see noah as a man who refused to partake of the pagan and debauched actions taking place around him.
you are both right and wrong
people can convert but we dont encourage it since it is very difficult and you are right you are born jewish.
were you are wrong is that judaism extends beyond jews as well and holds all the nations to account.
and all are subject to certain laws. see the B'nei Noah
jews simply accepted a more responsibility and agreed to act as an example for mankind "a light unto the nations" it doesn't mean that no one else can, it just means we decided to.
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #49
Yes, I do appreciate that, yet we must not lose sight of the rule of thumb on the forum here, that discussions within a thread are to stay as closely on topic and theme as much of the time as can humanly be, and that chit chat be done through other means. . . such a PMs. While I do understand some of the troubles, the war, and all the long, long history of trouble in, around, and via the Middle East, I moderate here according to the Forum Rules and certain rule-of-thumbs.
Now, I hope to get involved here soon too, please give me some more time. I will go to original sources as much as possible. I will have to ask those who have a copy of the Quran and Sirah (spelling?) to help out in that area. The original documents supporting all interpretation, to the largest degree possible, should be our guidlines.
- 20 Nov 2007
- 46
- 0
jewish making diffeclt for join them
jewish making diffeclt for join them-the answer is yes.
Judaism is not missionary religion.and she is claiming that there are place for other religion.(not everyone should be jewish).
they even making hard for people who like to join this religion(it could happen-but the jewish people think that to change other people from the born religion is bad for the people).
in the bible there are 2 blassne for the sun of ismael(musleam today)-it is saying that god will make them be a lote of people and they will have alote of area.
and one for the sun of izik(izchac)-to israel people-that they will be not having more area or a lote of people -but they will be more sparkling-that mean more knowlege..
the 2 blass were being given togther-that main that one without the other will cancel they both.
i think there are alote of think that people dont know a bout jewish tradition.
and some of the information is base on stereotype.
about jesus-i found somethink that is very amazing-and i hope soon it will be publish with order-that will show the connection that jesus has for the old bible(appearance at the book of Deuteronomy (fifth book of Pentateuch) )in hide way-but very clear for understanding.
now someone is working on that for me.-and soon may be some other more-this is connecting to the bible code.
cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
icarus5
jewish making diffeclt for join them-the answer is yes.
Judaism is not missionary religion.and she is claiming that there are place for other religion.(not everyone should be jewish).
they even making hard for people who like to join this religion(it could happen-but the jewish people think that to change other people from the born religion is bad for the people).
in the bible there are 2 blass
ne for the sun of ismael(musleam today)-it is saying that god will make them be a lote of people and they will have alote of area.and one for the sun of izik(izchac)-to israel people-that they will be not having more area or a lote of people -but they will be more sparkling-that mean more knowlege..
the 2 blass were being given togther-that main that one without the other will cancel they both.
i think there are alote of think that people dont know a bout jewish tradition.
and some of the information is base on stereotype.
about jesus-i found somethink that is very amazing-and i hope soon it will be publish with order-that will show the connection that jesus has for the old bible(appearance at the book of Deuteronomy (fifth book of Pentateuch) )in hide way-but very clear for understanding.
now someone is working on that for me.-and soon may be some other more-this is connecting to the bible code.
cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
icarus5
Similar threads
