|
| Torâh | Haphtârâh | Âmar Ribi Yᵊhoshua | Mᵊnorat ha-Maor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setting: ca. B.C.E. 1427. Location: Area of Shit•imꞋ & Har Nᵊvo, east of NᵊharꞋ ha-Yar•deinꞋ, opposite Yᵊrikh•oꞋ (see map below: 31° 46' N, 35° 43' E). |
| ||
| |||
(16.18; 17.8-10)
 |
| Beneath the red dot: Located on the balcony at the SE corner of the inner court of the Beit-ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ ha-Shein•iꞋ , the Beit-Din ha-Ja•dolꞋ, which supervised all of the lesser Bat•eiꞋ-Din throughout the land, convened in the Chamber of Hewn Stone.
Next to (behind) Green dot: 1.5m (4½') high stone ñÉøÅâ preventing any αλλογενης from approaching any closer. See also diagrams in the "Pharisee Judaism" section of our History Museum page. (Photographed © 1985 by Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu Bën-Dâ•widꞋ at the Holyland Model site, Yᵊrushâlayim.) |
úÌåÉøÈä in this dâ•vârꞋ is explicit. Only willful ignorance of úÌåÉøÈä can be responsible for neglect of this instruction.
"Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ and police shall you give yourselves in all of your gates, if a dâ•vârꞋ is too complex [lit. too wonderful] for you to adjudicate mi•shᵊpâtꞋ, between blood and blood, or law and law, or battery and battery, or [other] Dᵊvâr•imꞋ of quarreling in your gates, then get up and go to the Place, where é--ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ shall choose [namely Har ha-BaꞋyit, Yᵊrushâlayim and Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ]. You shall come to the Kohan•imꞋ, the Lewiy•imꞋ, and to [whomever] shall be the sho•pheitꞋ in those days. You shall inquire and they shall relate to you the dâ•vârꞋ of the mi•shᵊpâtꞋ. Then you shall do in accordance with the dâ•vârꞋ that they relate to you from that place that é--ä shall choose, and you shall be sho•meirꞋ to do in accordance with everything that they instruct you. According to the Tor•âhꞋ
that they instruct you, and according to the mi•shᵊpâtꞋ that they tell you, you shall do. Don't deviate from the dâ•vârꞋ that they relate to you, left or right."
 |
| After the destruction of the Beit-ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ ha-Shein•iꞋ , the Beit-Din ha-Ja•dolꞋ moved several times. One of the locations was probably this 2nd-century Beit-ha-KᵊnësꞋët at Beit Shᵊar•imꞋ.
Photographed © 1983 by Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu Bën-Dâ•widꞋ. |
 |
 |
This pâ•râsh•âhꞋ begins ùÑÉôÀèÄéí
 Khat-shepset obelisk Karnak Luxor 250x375.jpg "Khat-shepset obelisk (Karnak temple, Luxor, Egypt)") |
| îÇöÌÅáÈä of Queen Par•ohꞋ Khât-shepꞋset (B.C.E. 1504-1483), step-sister princess who adopted Mosh•ëhꞋ from the Nile (ca. B.C.E. 1547) – approx. 30 m high, 323 tons, red granite; tallest obelisk in Egypt (Karnak temple, Luxor) |
16:22 — åÀìÉà-úÈ÷Äéí ìÀêÈ îÇöÌÅáÈä
This proscribes the superstitious – and idolatrous a•vod•âhꞋ zâr•âhꞋ (foreign; e.g., inter alia, Egyptian) – custom of looking to, or praying toward, the gravestone memorials of patriarchs, matriarchs and sages (instead of toward Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim). Egyptians, for example, believed that their pharaohs transcended into the heavens at death, and looked to these dead pharaohs, via their îÇöÌÅáÈä, to likewise deliver them. Similarly, Christians believe that a dead man-god Christ transcended into the heavens at death and they look, via their cross, crucifix-idol or 2-dimensional image-idol, and pray to, their dead Christ to likewise deliver them.
While the graves of our Patriarchs and ancestors are to be protected as physical evidence of their historical reality, and out of kâ•vodꞋ for the patriarchs, matriarchs and sages, they remain a place of tum•âhꞋ, not a preferred site for tᵊphil•âhꞋ. Moreover, tᵊphil•âhꞋ recited at such îÇöÌÅáÈä often cross the line, becoming tᵊphil•otꞋ to Râkh•eilꞋ (Av•râ•hâmꞋ, SârꞋâh, Yo•seiphꞋ, Dâ•widꞋ, a sage, etc.)—going way beyond respect for the patriarchs into blatant ancestorolatry.
While MoshꞋëh prayed on behalf of Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ as an intermediary during his lifetime, he never interposed himself as a necessary intermediary and it is a central tenet of úÌåÉøÈä that Yᵊhud•imꞋ may have no dead intermediaries—nor even live rabbinic intermediaries! Yᵊhud•imꞋ may only pray, directly and exclusively, to é--ä
|
|
16.18ff — is one of the passages documenting the appointment by MoshꞋëh of Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ of the Beit-Din system.
Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ and sho•tᵊr•imꞋ shall you provide in all of your gates that é--ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ gives you for your tribes; åÀùÑÈôÀèåÌ the kindred îÄùÑÀôÌÈè-öÆãÆ÷
Biblical mi•shᵊpâtꞋ, combined with khoq, both products of the Beit-Din, comprised Oral Law. With the sectarian split between the Qum•rânꞋ Kha•sid•imꞋ Bën-Tzâ•doqᵊ Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ, the Pᵊrush•imꞋ (which included RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa) and the assimilated Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ of the Roman occupiers, Oral Law correspondingly segmented into Ma•as•ëhꞋ, Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ (including Talmud) and the codified Book of Decrees, respectively.
The Biblical term for the corpus of Case (Oral) Law, mi•shᵊpâtꞋ, and Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ are cognates, both deriving from the same root: ùÑÈôÇè. Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.8-12 reinforces this theme.
 BCE22-2100 kings eagles Ashur (BritishMus) 250x175.jpg "Tree of Life Babylonian cylinder-tablet (clay) BCE 22-2100 (British Museum)") |
 BCE22-2100 kings eagles Ashur (BritishMus) 553x387.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small} "Tree of Life" Garden Creation theme – Kings flanked by eagles that supposedly carried them into the heavens to the winged-disked A•shᵊr•âhꞋ (later, ) |
18.10-13 with 20.18— These passages cover religious items, trappings and symbols used in the worship of other ëloh•imꞋ – defined in Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ as a•vod•âhꞋ zâr•âhꞋ. The historical origins of today's wide-ranging religious practices are then pivotal in discerning genuine úÌåÉøÈä, as lᵊ-ha•vᵊdilꞋ from the religious items, trappings and symbols used in ancient a•vod•âhꞋ zâr•âhꞋ that were expelled and prohibited by úÌåÉøÈä.
The earliest religions of Sumeria (BCE 27th century) and its successor, Akkadia (BCE 23rd century), which evolved into the Babylonia (i.e., Iraq; BCE 1700) and subsequent Assyrian Empires, focused on a lover-mother "Queen of heaven" star (technically planet) goddess, known variously through these epochs as A•shᵊr•âhꞋ, Inanna and Ishtar. By the time of the Assyrian Empire, they morphed her into a male god, Ashur, and obtained the symbol of a winged disk, representing a star. More recently (Hellenist Romans), we know this goddess cum god as Venus. A reasonably historical chart can be found at lost-history.com/myth-as-history.php (per 2013.07.31).
 BCE22-2100 man woman snake (BritishMus) 0250x188.jpg "Tree of Life Babylonian cylinder-tablet (clay) BCE22-2100 man woman snake (BritishMus)") |
 BCE22-2100 man woman snake (BritishMus) 1024x768.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small} "Tree of Life" in Creation Garden, note the hanging fruit beneath the branches; flanked by a man, a woman and, behind the woman, a snake; Babylonian cylinder and resulting clay tablet; (British Museum), B.C.E. 22-2100 – the century in which Av•râ•hâmꞋ was born (see Chronology of the Tanakh, from the "Big ðÈèÈä" Live-LinkT ) |
It is this pre-dawn planet, A•shᵊr•âhꞋ, the "Goddess of the Heavens" (aka Inanna and Ishtar cum the winged-disk star Ashur) – the planet we know as Venus – described in Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 14.12: "How you have fallen from the heavens, äÅéìÅì áÌÆï-ùÑÈçÇø. This "famous shining son of the pre-dawn darkness" is inescapably the planet Venus, aka the ancient – A•shᵊr•âhꞋ / Ishtar. This connection is further confirmed in the Hellenists translation to their Greek LXX as εωσφορος, and thence to the Latin "Lucifer" – A•shᵊr•âhꞋ / Ishtar, the fallen (rejected and debunked) winged-disk star "Goddess of the Heavens" equating to Sâ•tânꞋ.
Censoring by the Christian Church eliminated all record of having syncretized earlier origins of these foreign religious cultural icons. As a result, these motifs seem, to the gullible, to be new and of Christian origin unconnected to their obvious true origins. Yet, it is hard to miss that the motif of this star (often with disk) atop a tree, which commemorates the theme of creation and eternal life, hanging decorations on it almost exactly like the ancient depictions, should ring alarm bells of horror among Christians.
 |
 "Tree of Life" Garden Creation theme – tree anointed using pine-cones by kings flanked by winged man-faced eagles beneath the winged-disk-star A•shᵊr•âhꞋ (later, ) |
Christians hang their belief in this "star" on the account of a miraculous "star" described in their Διαθηκη Καινη (NT). In the earliest extant mss. of this account, the "Magi" followed something in the eastern night sky. The "Magi," the Iranian astronomers of their day, who "followed the star," lived in Persia (modern Iran), where they began their journey. Look at a map! If they had followed a star in the east they would have wound up on the east coast of China trying to charter a boat across the Pacific to San Francisco! For the "Magi," Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim and Beit LëkhꞋëm laid to their west – the exact opposite direction from the miraculous guiding "star" in the east! Talk about stretching a tall tale for the illusion of a completely new and Christian origin, with no connections to earlier religious icons, for their star atop their Christmas trees! 
The enigma of the guiding "star" in the east was resolved in The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu (NHM, in English): The αστρον of the Christian Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) cannot be the guiding "star in the east" since the Greek term is αστρον, not αστηρ; i.e., it was an unusual celestial phenomenon in the east of the night sky – like a conjunction, and there were 3 monumental conjunctions of the critical planets that, NHM 2 recorded, coincided with the birth of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, beginning on B.C.E. 0007.05.29 (see in-depth explanation in NHM 2.1-2 notes 2.0.1–2.2.1).
The "star in the east" described in KJ/V translation of the Christian Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), in fact, is the natural tradition that traces back and originated with the ancient winged-disk "star" symbolizing the goddess A•shᵊr•âhꞋ / Ishtar of the Akkadians, Sumerians, Assyrians and Babylonians – atop their tree! This is also corroborated in the exquisitely precise coincidence with the transition to the first Christmas trees, also in Europe and by the 1800s.
Such a•vod•âhꞋ zâr•âhꞋ includes "Kha•nukh•âhꞋ (lᵊ-hav•dilꞋ) Bushes" and Xmas trees, Easter eggs, hunts and bunnies, Gospel music, Christian 'Bibles' or the Quran (neither are Bibles) and religious books outside of halakhic Judaism, crosses and crucifixes, depictions of Jesus or "saints," statues of Buddha, observance of St. Valentine's day, St. Patrick's day, St. Nicholas' Day (Xmas), Halloween and the like; all defined in these pᵊsuq•imꞋ as úÌåÉòÅáÈä to é--ä.
|
|
 200x180.jpg "Shyster lawyer") |
| Shyster lawyer Jackie Chiles (Seinfeld, actor Phil Morris) |
America's criminal predator-pampering system—which metes out loopholes for the rich (typically the predators) and fails to mete out justice to victims and, therefore, doesn't merit being called a" Justice System." What does úÌåÉøÈä say about such unjust legal systems? What does úÌåÉøÈä say about the Christian prescription for eternal life through faith alone? Consider how the the American legal system reflects Christian values of hedonism plus unconditional vicarious atonement.
Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 16.20 — "tzëdꞋëq-tzëdꞋëq you shall pursue, on account of which you shall live." tzëdꞋëq is defined by úÌåÉøÈä as interpreted by Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ of the Beit-Din—not by pseudo-messianic Christian Jews of Displacement Theology!
While on the subject of justice in the US, one of my Orthodox neighbors brought to my attention a point of Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ that, although it should be obvious, is often overlooked. It's well known that the Beit-Din ha-Ja•dolꞋ was regarded as "bloody" if they executed more than one criminal in a 70-year period. Yet, surely there were more murders than that in that same period? How is this apparent laxity, and seeming departure from Tor•âhꞋ shë-bi•khᵊtâvꞋ explained?
bᵊ-Mi•dᵊbarꞋ 35.30; Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.6-7and 19.15 require that the death penalty not be imposed unless there are at least two eyewitnesses who identify the murderer. Criminals convicted of murder without the required two eyewitnesses were sentenced to life without parole—which actually meant living out their life and dying in a prison city, not getting out a couple of years later on some pretense so that they could repeat their offense. (If they left the city, any relative of the victim was authorized by the court to kill him.) By the application of úÌåÉøÈä criteria,then, the American mother who drowned her two children (and O.J. Simpson, if he is convicted) should be sentenced to life without parole and live out their days in prison.
It could, and probably should, be argued by modern halakhists that the requirement of two eyewitnesses was likely to avoid executing an innocent person based on false testimony of a lone vindictive enemy of the accused.
Police today know, however, that eyewitnesses are notoriously inaccurate. In the panic of the moment, eyewitnesses often misperceive what actually transpired, later disagreeing with one another, even about the most basic descriptions. Modern standards of DNA pattern-matching, fingerprinting and the like arguably make murder convictions more certain than the testimony of two eyewitnesses. This reasoning suggests that where there is no reasonable doubt of guilt the death sentence should be mandatory. Legal technicalities should result in penalties against offending police, etc., not exculpation of the predator. Certainly, America's pampering of predators has resulted in dramatic increases in the number of incidences of predation. This is another issue in which no modern halakhist has been recognized to fill the vacuum.
Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.1 — This mi•tzᵊw•âhꞋ classifies the sacrificing of any animal in which there is a îåÌí as a úÌåÉòÅáÈä
Notice that it is the act of "offering up" a blemished animal, rather than the animal itself, that is the úÌåÉòÅáÈä. Like the other mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ of our physical earthly realm, this was a úÌÇáÀðÄéú, cf. Shᵊm•otꞋ 25.9, 40) for the genuine spiritual counterpart in the non-dimensional Realm. (Unlike Christian reasoning, however, this doesn't excuse disobedience to the "mere patterns" in the earthly realm. Nothing is more sanctimonious than insisting one is the spiritually antithesis of their earthly practice.)
What, then, is regarded as the actual úÌåÉòÅáÈä in the non-dimensional Realm? See the Ha•phᵊtâr•âhꞋ.
|
|
17.8-13 — is another passage glossed over by Christianity. This is one of the many instances in which Tor•âhꞋ shë-bi•khᵊtâvꞋ tziv•âhꞋ to obey the Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ (=mi•shᵊpât•imꞋ = Oral Law / Tor•âhꞋ shë-bᵊ•alꞋ pëh) handed down by the Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ of the Bat•eiꞋ-Din, "the sho•pheitꞋ who shall be in those days."
Tor•âhꞋ shë-bi•khᵊtâvꞋ here unequivocally instructs readers to "be sho•meirꞋ to do (not merely talk) all that he instructs you, according to úÌåÉøÈä as they instruct you, and according to the mi•shᵊpâtꞋ they tell you. Do it! Don't deviate from the dâ•vârꞋ that they relate to you; neither to the right nor to the left. And the man who will do presumptuously, to not Shᵊm•aꞋ to the sho•pheitꞋ, that man shall die in burning-out the wrong from Israel. Then all of the kindred will Shᵊm•aꞋ and revere and not be presumptuous anymore."
This subject is covered more fully in our Khav•rutꞋâ Distance Learning text: Who Are The Nᵊtzarim? Live-LinkT (WAN).
Is there anything wrong with singing Christian hymns? Having a "Kha•nukh•âhꞋ (lᵊ-hav•dilꞋ) bush"? Participating in an Easter egg hunt?
úÌåÉøÈä instructs (18.9), "When you have come to the land that é--ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ has given you, don't learn to do like the úåáòåú of the goy•imꞋ" because, we learn in 20.18, the worship-practices directed to false Ël•oh•imꞋ are a úÌåÉòÅáÈä to é--ä and certainly shouldn't be directed toward Him. Accordingly, tᵊphilot of one who is not sho•meirꞋ-úÌåÉøÈä are a úÌåÉòÅáÈä to é--ä—explicitly declared in Mi•shᵊl•eiꞋ Shᵊlom•oh′ 28.9! See also Shᵊm•otꞋ 23.24; Yᵊkhëz•qeilꞋ ha-Nâ•viꞋ 11.12; Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 12.30-31; wa-Yi•qᵊr•âꞋ 18.3-5 and 24-30.
An old joke provides an illustration. Believing himself to be very sophisticated and a progressive thinker, a certain Jew prominently displayed a "Chanukkah (lᵊ-hav•dilꞋ) bush " in the picture window of his home during the Christmas holidays. Christians and other non-Jews far and wide applauded his broadmindedness.
One day during the winter holidays, a sho•meirꞋ-úÌåÉøÈä relative visited. Shocked and dismayed at the Christmas tree prominently displayed in his living room, the observant Jew wondered aloud, "What's this?"
The liberal Jew replied jocularly, "It's my 'Chanukkah (lᵊ-hav•dilꞋ) bush'."
When the time came that the worldly Jew died, he found himself amidst flames all around him. Panicked, he wondered aloud, "What's this?"
Then he heard a voice answering him,"It's your Christmas (lᵊ-hav•dilꞋ) khanukiyâh" (Kha•nukh•âhꞋ Mᵊnor•âhꞋ).
|
|
This pâ•râsh•âhꞋ begins ùÑÉôÀèÄéí, continuing åÀùÑÉèÀøÄéí
Modern liberals ignorant of Jewish history, aware only of what Christians learned in their Church Sunday Schools, often criticize úÌåÉøÈä as being barbarically harsh. When úÌåÉøÈä requires an "eye for an eye," and the like, however, this implies only after a trial in, and sentencing by, the appropriate á"ã (abbreviation for Beit-Din). Moreover, because it was impossible to be exact in, for example, impairing one eye exactly the same as another that was injured resulting in only partial loss of sight, this was interpreted to imply the monetary value placed on an eye, not gouging out an eye. Even RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's usage of this analogy (NHM 5.29), to drive home a point, was figurative.
'Street justice' and vigilantism is prohibited by úÌåÉøÈä. Those who falsely libel úÌåÉøÈä, Judaism and Yᵊhud•imꞋ in this way, in a futile attempt to defend their grossly unjust, liberal, legal system, need only look around them to see the fruits of their views. Rival modern legal systems are never even remotely consistent in meting out justice for the victim, especially when the victim is poor. Compassion decidedly favors the affluent and the predator—epitomized in the O.J. Simpson verdict—rather than the helpless, the downtrodden and the poor. The results, which fill the nightly news, continually provide new self-indictments.
|
|
16.18 — ùÑÉôÀèÄéí åÀùÑÉèÀøÄéí shall you [Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ] provide in all of your gates that é--ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ provides you."
This passage, along with Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.9-13, is the primary Scriptural basis for the Beit-Din ha-Ja•dolꞋ and its subordinate Bat•eiꞋ-Din.
The unbroken tradition of these Bat•eiꞋ-Din still endures today, and only Bat•eiꞋ-Din that operate within the framework of this unbroken tradition are legitimate. All others are self-proclaimed—and, attempting to displace the authority of the Pᵊrush•imꞋ-heritage Bat•eiꞋ-Din, are practitioners of Displacement Theology.
17.9-13— This passage states clearly and unequivocally that mi•shᵊpâtꞋ / Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ carries all of the authority and force of úÌåÉøÈä, and that anyone who rejects any of the mi•shᵊpâtꞋ of the sho•pheitꞋ of the Beit-Din "that shall be in those days" is transgressing mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ Tor•âhꞋ.
|
|
| Setting: ca. B.C.E. 720 (Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu chapters 40-66). Location: Yᵊru•shâ•layꞋim (31° 47' N, 35° 13' E) |
|
We are speaking strictly and exclusively about the 1st-century C.E. historical úÌåÉøÈä RibꞋi, not, lᵊ-ha•vᵊdilꞋ, the polar opposite, 4th-century, mythical Christian Jesus image fabricated in the intervening centuries by the Church (for details, see WAN Live-LinkT Technology).
The rabbis defiantly contradict both Ta•na"khꞋ and Ta•lᵊmudꞋ, aggressively keeping Jews away from even being aware, not only even of the existence of Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53, but also the sole clarification that Ta•lᵊmudꞋ – Ma•sëkꞋët Bᵊrâkh•otꞋ 5a (see our History Museum, select "Mashiakh," click the first "Burning Issues" button and scroll down to the sources table to "Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53", including 1QIsa, Tar•gumꞋ Yo•nâ•tânꞋ and the Aleppo Codex as well as 𝕸 – then confirm them yourself) – elucidating Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53!
To see how self-contradicting this is, just substitute "the Messianic Age" consistently and meticulously for every instance of "he" in the chapter. And Ta•lᵊmudꞋ, and all rabbis up through the 16th century, state that Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53 refers to the Mâ•shiꞋakh! Q.E.D.
To see how self-contradicting this is, just substitute "the Jewish people" consistently and meticulously for every instance of "he" in the chapter. Moreover,
53.6 – It is a violation of úÌåÉøÈä, which permits no innovation (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1), to proclaim the Jewish people make atonement for the world.
53.7 – The Jewish people are as not silent about our suffering, complaining more loudly, longer and single-purposedly than any other people. We've suffered persecution more than any other people, but we also howl about it to the top of our lungs, endlessly – not suffering silently!
538 – If "he" is "the Jewish people," then who else is the real "My people" in this pâ•suqꞋ?!?
53.9 – The Jewish people is without sin?!? Does "Golden Calf" ring a bell?
In the 16th century, exactly the opposite of today's rabbis, R. Mosh•ëhꞋ al-Sheikh corroborated Ta•lᵊmudꞋ (cited above), stating categorically that "all rabbis" were in agreement that Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53 refers to the Mâ•shiꞋakh as the "Suffering Servant"!
And Ta•lᵊmudꞋ, and all rabbis up through the 16th century, state that Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53 refers to the Mâ•shiꞋakh! Q.E.D.
Briefly: beginning with the mandatory introductory context, pâ•suqꞋ 52.11
Speaking to Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ in the galut, é--ä orders: "Turn aside! Turn aside! Go forth from there! It is tâm•eiꞋ; don't [even] touch it! Go forth from in there! Bearers of the articles of é--ä keep yourself clear!"
This message to Yisrâ•eil•imꞋ in the Gâl•utꞋ is explicit, unambiguous, and clear: get out from in the Gâl•utꞋ and pursue the alternative: make âliyâh to Yᵊhud•âhꞋ.
Interestingly, Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu ha-Nâ•viꞋ continues: "For you aren't to go forth in panic, nor shall you be fleeing when you go, for é--ä goes before you, and the Ël•oh•imꞋ of Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ is your collector [of stragglers, i.e., the One bringing up the rear].
Here we find, yet again, the persistent, incessant, reference to a dual mission of é--ä to Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ (not to Christian pretenders, poseurs and apostates self-proclaiming themselves to be a pretend 'Israel') as a train: first as locomotive and then as caboose. This parallels, yet again, the dual mission of é--ä's representative and agent: the Mâ•shiꞋakh—first Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ and last Bën-Dâvid.
And what follows immediately? "Here, My Servant will be judicious; he will be exalted and borne aloft, very high'" followed immediately by Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53. Contrary to many modern re-interpreters, Tal•mudꞋ confirms the irrefutable logic that "My Servant" speaks not of "the Jewish people" (who are the "Bearers of the articles of é--ä" whose attention is being called to "My Servant" in this passage), but of the Mâ•shiꞋakh (documentation is found in the second text of our Khav•rutꞋâ Distance Learning: WAN Live-LinkT Technology).
In addition to the inescapable evidence of Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53, Dân•iy•eilꞋ (9.25-27) prophesied the year in which a Mâ•shiꞋakh (a priori, Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ) would be killed: 49 years (7 "weeks" of 7 years each) then 434 years (62 "weeks" of 7 years each), totaling 483 years after Artaxerxes edict. Artaxerxes reigned from B.C.E. 465-453, projecting a window for the death of the Mâ•shiꞋakh Bën-Yo•seiphꞋ to 18-30 C.E.! This was only expected to approximate a window or time frame; but if we calculate from the final year of Artaxerxes' reign, B.C.E. (i.e., minus) 453 plus 483 years = 30 C.E.!!!
For more in-depth explanation and details, see our Historical Museum, select "Mashiakh," click on the first "Burning Issues" button, scroll down to the sources table and select the desired passage.
|
|
 |
 Tei•mân•iꞋ cantillation |
Not coincidentally, the Ha•phᵊtâr•âhꞋ begins
àÈðÉëÄé àÈðÉëÄé, äåÌà îÀðÇçÆîÀëÆí;
Note the úÌÀáÄéø delineates only the second instance of àÈðÉëÄé, dictating the subsequent pause, arbitrarily denoted in English with a comma. There is no pause between the two instances of àÈðÉëÄé. It would be chanted: "I-Myself am I-Myself, Who is comforting (or comforts) you.m.p." In Hebrew, the doublet indicates emphasis. Thus, "[It is] Absolutely I-Myself, Who comforts you.m.p."
The clause ends with àÇúÌÀðÈçÈä, the primary disjunctive, and pause, in any pâ•suqꞋ.
|
|
The Ha•phᵊtâr•âhꞋ reads (Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu ha-Nâ•viꞋ 52.1): "Awake (!) awake (!), dress in your Strength, Tziy•onꞋ; dress in your formal clothes,
éÀøåÌùÑÈìÇí òÄéø äÇ÷ÌÉãÆùÑ, ëÌÄé ìÉà éåÉñÄéó, éÈáÉà-áÈêÀ òåÉã òÈøÅì åÀèÈîÅà: "
To smooth out the English: "Awake (!) awake (!), dress in your Strength, Tziy•onꞋ; dress in your formal clothes, Yᵊrushâlayim the QoꞋdësh City, because the âreil and tâm•eiꞋ won't increase or immigrate in you anymore."
With all of the Arab and Christian religious sites in Yᵊrushâlayim enjoying guarantees of religious freedom and access, how can this prophecy be fulfilled? Arab tradition has, since Yi•shᵊm•â•eilꞋ, required circumcision (but at the age of 13 years instead of the 8th day following birth). Therefore, Arabs aren't included among the (physical) âreil•imꞋ (uncircumcised). However, both Muslim and Christian Arabs transgress úÌåÉøÈä and are, consequently, included with other goy•imꞋ as tâm•eiꞋ.
Only Jews, Arabs and Christians have entrenched positions in Yᵊrushâlayim. So Hindus, Buddhists and the rest of the world doesn't present a real obstacle to this prophecy. The biggest obstacle to the fulfillment of this prophecy is winning the Christian & Muslim-Arab world to become truly úÌåÉøÈä-observant, i.e. subordinate to a Pᵊrush•imꞋ-heritage Bat•eiꞋ-Din instead of practicing Displacement Theology—and the Way to persuade them is with WAN Live-LinkT Technology.
The central question, then, is who will be more receptive to úÌåÉøÈä: Muslim Arabs, who aren't idolaters like Christian Arabs and most other goy•imꞋ, or idolatrous Christians who discover that, contrary to the post-135 C.E. Hellenist counterfeit that has deceived them, the genuine RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa requires them to abandon their idolatry and obey úÌåÉøÈä?
If Arabs and Christians were able to surmount their respective hurdle of rejecting úÌåÉøÈä, this prophecy would thereafter likely occur relatively quickly.
|
|
Ho•sheiꞋa ha-Nâ•viꞋ 14.3 teaches that the spiritual counterpart of qor•bânꞋ is tᵊphil•âhꞋ. Mi•shᵊl•eiꞋ Shᵊlom•oh′ 28.9 then corroborates the parallel úÌåÉòÅáÈä by defining this act of sacrificing of the lips (i.e. tᵊphil•âhꞋ) of the person who deviates from Shᵊm•aꞋ to úÌåÉøÈä—in whom, consequently, there is a îåÌí—as úÌåÉòÅáÈä.
Just as it is úÌåÉòÅáÈä for the transmitter of an ascendance-offering / tᵊphil•âhꞋ to have a îåÌí, so, too, it is úÌåÉòÅáÈä for the ascendance-offering / tᵊphil•âhꞋ to be transmitted on the wrong frequency (i.e., to the wrong recipient, Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.2-3). This also causes the message to be úÌåÉòÅáÈä (17.4) for which the sender is held responsible (17.5-7).
Can a Yᵊhudi sage in the Tᵊphutz•âhꞋ po•seiqꞋ? Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.10 stipulates that Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ, which includes unconverted & non-Jewish geir•imꞋ, are to comply with the Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ that was pâsaq by the contemporary sho•pheitꞋ of the Beit-Din "from the place that é--ä has chosen."
This necessarily means Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ, and more particularly Har Tziy•onꞋ in Yᵊrushâlayim (Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 2.3 & Mikh•âhꞋ 4.2), whenever it is possible to po•seiqꞋ from this place.
Whenever a need may arise to decide a point of Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ, the sho•pheitꞋ (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.9) of the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit-Din will go up to Har Tzi•yonꞋ in Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim to consider and po•seiqꞋ the question. With the exceptions handed down by the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit-Din on Har Tziy•onꞋ (photo of archeological remains) and documented in NHM, however, the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ sho•pheitꞋ — medieval ⇒ modern: ôÌåÉñÅ÷ — have found the ôÌÀñÈ÷Äéí handed down by the Teimân•imꞋ to be correct.
This pâ•suqꞋ advocates the supremacy of Yi•sᵊr•â•eilꞋ over the Tᵊphutz•âhꞋ for religious authority and ôÌåÉñÀ÷Äéí. Tor•âhꞋ shë-bi•khᵊtâvꞋ – and NHM – has ordained that every letter of these ôÌÀñÈ÷Äéí is binding (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.10b-13).
|
|
| Ta•na"khꞋ | Translation | Mid•râshꞋ RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa: NHM |
NHM |
||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.12 | 12 and the man who shall do maliciousness without hearkening to the Ko•heinꞋ (who stands there ministering to 'ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ) or to the sho•pheitꞋ; that man shall die, so you shall burn-out the râ from Yis•râ•eilꞋ. 13 | I tell you that everyone who provokes 5.22.1 his brother is liable to the adjudication of Oral Law.7.1.1 Whoever calls his brother useless' 5.22.2 shall be liable to the Beit Din.5.22.3 Whoever calls his brother Insane fool' 5.22.4 shall be liable to the fire of Gei-Hi•nomꞋ.10.28.2 | 5.22 | ||||||||||||||
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 18.13 | Tâm•imꞋ shall you be with 'ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ. | If you love those who love you, where is any payment for you in that? Don't even the goy•imꞋ 5.47.1 do the same? 5.47.2 Therefore be tâm•imꞋ 5.48.0 as your Father who is of the heavens 5.48.1 is Tâm•imꞋ.' 5.48.0 | 5.47-48 | ||||||||||||||
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 18.15 | A nâ•viꞋ from your midst, from your brothers, like me, shall 'ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ raise-up for you; to him shall you hearken! | While he was still speaking, look… a cloud covered them.17.5.1 While they were under the cloud they heard from the cloud 17.5.2 a voice 3.17.1 saying, "This 17.5.3 is My lone 17.5.4 son.3.17.2 My pleasure is in him.3.17.3 Hear him." 17.5.5 | 17.5 | ||||||||||||||
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19.15 | A single witness shall not rise-up against a man, for any â•wonꞋ nor any khatâ•atꞋ, in any kheit that he may commit; according to two witnesses, or according to three witnesses shall the matter be raised. | If your brother missteps,18.15.1 go innocuously;1.21.4 reprove 18.15.2 him between you and him alone. If he will hear you then you have gained your brother.18.15.3 16 If he won't hear you, take one or two more 18.16.2 brothers with you 18.16.1 so that (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19:15) according to two witnesses, or according to three witnesses, the matter shall stand.18.16.2 Because by two or three witnesses 18.16.2 a thing will be established. 17 If he does not listen to these two or three, then tell it to the qᵊhil•âhꞋ.16.18.3 If he does not even listen to the qᵊhil•âhꞋ,16.18.3 then let him be to you as the goy•imꞋ 6.32.1 and the turncoat-tax-gouger.5.46.1 Ä•meinꞋ! 18 I tell you, whatever you shall make â•surꞋ 16.19.3 in [the Beit ha-Din shël ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ] 16.19.3 on hâ-•ârꞋëtz 2.20.0 shall be made â•surꞋ 16.19.3 in the Beit ha-Din shël Mal•âhꞋ.16.19.5 Whatever you shall make mᵊphu•tâkhꞋ 16.19.4 in [the Beit ha-Din shël ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ] 16.19.3 on hâ-•ârꞋëtz 2.20.0 shall be mᵊphu•tâkhꞋ 16.19.4 in the Beit ha-Din shël Mal•âhꞋ.16.19.5 19 I tell you again—that if two from among 18.19.1 you shall concur 18.19.2 in [the Beit ha-Din shël ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ] 16.19.3 on hâ-•ârꞋëtz 2.20.0 regarding any practice, whatever they shall ask 21.22.1 shall become for them by my Father Who is in the [Beit ha-Din shël Mal•âhꞋ.16.19.5 20 For where two or three convene 1.18.5 [the Beit ha-Din shël ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ] 16.19.3 in my name, I am there in the midst of them." 18.20.1 | 18.15-20 | ||||||||||||||
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19.21 | Your eye shall not pity; nëphꞋësh by nëphꞋësh, eye by eye, tooth by tooth, hand by hand, leg by leg. | You've heard the Oral Law 5.38.1 (Shᵊm•otꞋ 21:24; wa-Yiq•râꞋ 24:20; Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19:21) concerning: Eye for eye' and tooth for tooth'; and I say to you (Tᵊhil•imꞋ 37:1), Don't compete with wrong-doers.' If a man shall strike you on your cheek, extend the other to him.5.39.1 Whoever will take pleasure in quarreling with you, to litigate Oral Law 5.40.1 and to sue the dress-shirt off of you, strip off your ta•litꞋ 9.20.2 and give 5.40.2 it to him. Whoever shall request you to do impressment 5.41.1 of a mile for him, go two miles. Give 5.42.1 to him who asks 5.42.2 it, and don't turn aside anyone who wishes to pawn.5.42.3 | 5.38-42 | ||||||||||||||
| Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 21.1, 6-7 | If a corpse shall be found in the adâm•âhꞋ that 'ä your Ël•oh•imꞋ gives you to inherit it, fallen in the field; not knowing who struck him… 6 All of the zᵊqan•imꞋ of that city (closest to the corpse) shall rinse their hands over the calf whose neck was broken in the naꞋkhal. 7 They shall respond and say, "Our hands have not spilled this blood…" | So the predominantly aristocratic, Hellenist-Roman Pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ 3.7.2 Chief Ko•heinꞋ 2.4.1 of the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ 4.5.2 and the Zᵊqan•imꞋ of [their Beit]-Din [ha-Qâ•tânꞋ] 27.20.1 incited the crowds [of their Hellenist, Roman-collaborating Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ Kohan•imꞋ of the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ supporters] 27.20.2 to ask 21.22.1 for Bar-Ab•âꞋ 27.16.1 and bring about the death of [the Pᵊrush•iꞋ] RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa. Replying, the Roman ruler said to them, "Which of the two do you wish that I release to you?" They said, "Bar-Ab•âꞋ." 27.16.1 Pilate said to them, "Then what shall I do with RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa who is called the Mâ•shiꞋakh?" They all [the Hellenist, Roman-collaborating Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ Kohan•imꞋ of the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ] said,27.22.1 "He should be hung." 10.38.1 Pilate reported, "What evil 21.41.1 has he done?" Then they cried out more exceedingly saying, "Hang him!" 10.38.1 Pilate, seeing that it was benefiting nothing, but rather was becoming a commotion, having taken 21.22.3 water, washed 27.24.1 his hands opposite the qᵊhil•âhꞋ 4.25.1 saying, "I am innocent of the blood of this Tza•diqꞋ. 27.24.2 Watch what you do." 27.24.3 Replying, all of the [the Hellenist, Roman-collaborating Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ Kohan•imꞋ of the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ] kinsmen said, "His blood 27.25.1 will be upon us and upon our seed." 27.25.2 Then he released Bar-Ab•âꞋ 27.16.1 to them and delivered RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa over to the Royal Italian Palace Guards 27.26.1 to beat, afflict and hang.10.38.1 Clearly, this account of Pilate's actions—who was the principle Roman collaborator with the Hellenist Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ Kohan•imꞋ running the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ—were "cleaned up" by the 4th century Roman Christian NT redactions of the Roman Church, shifting blame to "the Jews." |
27.20-26 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 51.7 | Hearken to Me, you who know tzëdꞋëq, with My úÌåÉøÈä in their heart; do not revere the sharp-scorn of humans, or crack from their abuse. | Happy 5.3.1 are you to be when they shall reproach 11.20.2 you and pursue 5.9.1 you and falsely say every evil 5.11.1 thing about you on account of me. Rejoice 5.12.1 and be jubilant, for your payments in the heavens 3.2.2 are great—for they pursued the Nᵊviy•imꞋ 11.9.1 who were before you 5.12.2 thusly. | 5.11 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 51.8 | Because like a garment, an âsh will eat them; and like wool, a sâs will eat them; but My tzëdꞋëq shall be lᵊ-o•lâmꞋ, and My yᵊshu•âhꞋ for the generation of generations. | Don't multiply heaps of treasures on earth where moth and rust 6.19.1 eat it or burglars break in 6.19.2 and steal it. Make for yourselves treasures in the heavens 3.2.1 in a place that moths and rust 6.20.1 won't eat it and in a place that burglars won't break in 6.19.2 and steal it. In the same place that your treasure will be, your heart will be too.6.21.1 | 6.19-21 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 51.17,22 | Wake yourself, wake yourself! Get up Yᵊrushâ•laꞋyim, who has drunk from the Hand of 'ä the cup of His fury! The goblet cup of staggering you have drunk—drained. 22 Thus has said your A•don•aiꞋ 'ä, and your Ël•oh•imꞋ, Who will quarrel [for] His am? Behold, I have taken from your hand the cup of staggering; the goblet cup of My fury, you shall not drink [of it] anymore. | Then he walked slowly for a little, and fell on his face and hit•pa•leilꞋ, 5.44.2 saying, "My Father, if it could be, pass this cup of death from me,26.39.1 although, [let it be] according to your will, not my will." | 26.39 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 52.1 | Wakey, wakey, dress in your strength, Tzi•yonꞋ; dress in your opulent garments, Yᵊrushâ•laꞋyim, Ir ha-QoꞋdësh, for no longer shall the uncircumcised or tâ•meiꞋ come into you anymore. | Then the Sâ•tânꞋ 4.1.1 took him and brought him up into the high place 4.5.1 of the Hei•khâlꞋ 4.5.2 in the Ir ha-QoꞋdësh 4.5.3 & 1.18.7 | 4.5 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53.4-5 | See verse in our History Museum, "Mashiakh" page, Click on first "Burning Issues" button, then scroll down and click on links "Yeshayahu 53.4 & 5". | Around dusk, they offered many who were demon-possessed 4.24.1 to him, and he threw out the rukh•otꞋ 8.16.1 by a saying 12.37.0 alone,8.16.2 and cared for 10.8.1 all that were afflicted in evil 21.41.1 17 so that it would be fulfilled, 5.17.3 which was spoken through Yᵊsha•yahꞋu 8.17.1 ha-Nâ•viꞋ 11.9.1 saying [53.4]: Note that post-135 C.E. Hellenists (viz., goy•imꞋ Roman Christians) clearly relied on the Hellenized Greek LXX rather than the much different Hebrew sources that fail to support the interpretation: "But he was wounded on account of our sins, and was bruised because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and by his bruises we were healed." While there is no basis for doubting the reading of the source manuscripts, reliance on the Hellenist Greek LXX itself demonstrates that the interpretation (of Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53.5) found in NHM certainly reflects post-135 C.E. Hellenist goy•imꞋ Roman Christians rather than original Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ.In this regard, it must also be noted that, while the LXX was originally translated in the second century B.C.E., the earliest extant source mss. are the same Hellenized goy•imꞋ Roman Christian documents that contain the earliest extant texts of the NT!!! Preferring Hellenist goy•imꞋ Roman Christian LXX over Hebrew úÌåÉøÈä Judaism is self-evidently false. |
8.16-17 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53.7 | See verse in our History Museum, "Mashiakh" page, Click on first "Burning Issues" button, then scroll down and click on link "Yeshayahu 53.7". | Then Pilate said to him, "Do you not hear how much testimony there is against you?" He didn't reply to him a thing,27.14.1 so that the Roman ruler was very much amazed. | 27.13-14 | ||||||||||||||
| Yᵊsha•yâhꞋu 53.10 | See verse in our History Museum, "Mashiakh" page, Click on first "Burning Issues" button, then scroll down and click on link "Yeshayahu 53.10". | Then, having called them near, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa said, "You see that the leaders of the goy•imꞋ 20.19.0 make themselves •don•imꞋ 22.43.2 over them.20.25.1 Their great exercise authority over them.20.25.2 It won't be thus among you. Rather, whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your boy-servant.20.26.1 Whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave.20.27.1 The person 8.20.2 didn't come that he should be served by others. Rather, he came to serve others, and for his allowing his nëphꞋësh 2.20.1 to be redemption 20.28.1 for many." Recall that, unlike the devastation in 70 C.E. or the Bar-•KokhꞋvâ Rebellion of 135 C.E., in 30 C.E., the Hellenist Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ "Wicked Priests" (of the Qum•rânꞋ scrolls) Kohan•imꞋ running the Beit ha-Miq•dâshꞋ solved their fears of an anti-Hellenist (and anti-Roman) insurrection among the Jews by sacrificing the key firebrand—RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, thereby assuaging the fears of (i.e., redeeming the Jews from) the Hellenist Kohan•imꞋ collaborators and their partner Hellenist Roman occupiers. |
20.25-28 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
| Setting: ca. 29 C.E. Location: Northwest shore of Yâm Ki•nërꞋët |
|
Today the west is locked in a deadly religious war with global reach, having two prongs of jihad: Sunni and Shiite, each vying with the other to establish their version of Islam as the world-ruling Caliphate. Islamic legend predicts that their Mahdi, an Islamic messiah knock-off, will fly back to Medina (more recently changed to Yᵊrushâlayim for political reasons)—on his magic horse—on 2006.08.22. Failure of this fable to occur won't spare Christianity or Judaism from Muslim jihadists who will, nevertheless, continue to strive toward their goal of destroying Christianity and Judaism—i.e., the western way of life. In pursuit of their goal, both are willing, in the short-term, to ally with the west in order to dominate their Islamic rival. The west has terminal blindness if it continues to delude itself that such short-term alliances will produce either friendship, an enduring alliance, loyalty or even sincere gratitude.
Helping Muslim countries is repaid with the killing of western soldiers, demonstrations of thousands in the streets burning western flags and chanting death to Israel and western "infidels." We've seen this proven many times over, for decades. Yet, the western public—the Left most naively and vociferously—stands fast in denial. Instead of arguing the inane Democratic-Republican mantra, "Are Americans safer today?," Americans should have the intelligence to ask the pivotal question: "Safer than what???" The question isn't whether it's a more dangerous world. Of course it is. That would have been more dangerous if Gore or Kerry had won too. The relevant version of this is: "Are Americans safer than they would be if Kerry had won?" and, alternately, "Are Americans safer than if Saddam was still in power attacking its neighbors and raining rockets on Israel while continuing to build up—and perhaps again use—its chemical weapons while perhaps having obtained nuclear weapons from N. Korea by now—all IN ADDITION to our present problems that we would still have if Kerry had won—and far more!!! THESE are the questions Americans should be contemplating instead of being spun out of the real world into an illusory Leftist utopia that contrasts the 21st century with the gone-forever 1980s.
Consequently, like it or not, Christianity and Judaism, whether they choose to be allied or conflicted, are both confronted by a suicidally determined jihadist Islam.
In the midst of all of this, a Christian (Hellenist Roman) distortion of a teaching of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa lies at the heart of America's lack of resolve to defend itself: turn the other cheek. It is particularly self-defeating, in light of the religious core nature of this conflict, that Christian-predominated western apathy, resulting from a fixed focus on hedonism (i.e., materialism or capitalism), is compounded by the cognitive dissonance within Christian philosophy deriving from a misinterpretation of a commentary on úÌåÉøÈä that was delivered by a first-century Pᵊrush•imꞋ RibꞋi. Even cursory thinking demonstrates that a Perfect and Immutable Ël•oh•imꞋ (Ma·lâkh·iꞋ
ha-Nâ•viꞋ 3.6 and Tᵊhil•imꞋ 148.6), Biblically-specified as "of Israel," cannot contradict His Own Perfect and Unchanging Instructions (Hebrew "úÌåÉøÈä") with a superseding NT or Quran, or abandon His promises to Israel by changing, instead, into a Displacement Theology god of Christian or Muslim gentiles.
The inescapable implication of this is that anyone who teaches Displacement Theology or supersession is (by Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1-6) a false prophet or false messiah—i.e. antichrist—whether Jesus or Muhammad. All of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's commentaries on úÌåÉøÈä (documented only in Hebrew Ma•tit•yâhꞋu according to the earliest church historian, Eusebius, E.H., III, xxvii, 2-6), either corroborated and explained úÌåÉøÈä or tightened and reinforced úÌåÉøÈä. Furthermore, they HAD to since if he contradicted úÌåÉøÈä he would (by Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1-6) have been a false prophet!!!
Therefore, one's understanding of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's remarks in NHM 5.39 can be correct only when the interpretation is compatible with úÌåÉøÈä:
You've heard the Oral Law (elaborating Shᵊm•otꞋ 21.24; wa-Yi•qᵊr•âꞋ 24.20 and Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19.21) concerning: 'Eye for eye' and 'tooth for tooth'; and I say to you (Tᵊhil•imꞋ 37.1) , 'Don't compete with wrong-doers.' If a man shall strike you on your cheek, extend the other to him. [The meaning is:] Whoever will take pleasure in quarreling with you, to litigate Oral Law…" NHM
In this passage, we see a Pᵊrush•imꞋ RibꞋi in the middle of teaching how Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ is to be applied and implemented in daily life. His quotation of Tᵊhil•imꞋ 37.1 demonstrates not only that he was teaching from úÌåÉøÈä but also that what he was illustrating with his remark about turning the other cheek was: "Don't compete with wrong-doers."
It doesn't require a lawyer to recognize that life's intricacies typically make the application of law very complex and nuanced. The application of úÌåÉøÈä, via Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ, was no less challenging and (4Q MMT confirmed) occupied the central priority in first-century Jewish life. Just as courts of today are overwhelmed with frivolous lawsuits, the batei din in his day were overwhelmed with wrongful—false and malicious—actions often motivated by spite, hatred, and vindictiveness having no connection to justice. RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa teaches that when confronted with a false and malicious action in the Beit-Din the solution is not to enter an equally false and malicious counteraction before the Beit-Din in response but, rather, to reply to the effect: "You threaten to claim I did such-and-such before the Beit-Din. Fine. Go ahead. While you're at it, claim that I did something else (the other cheek) as well!" In other words, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa is talking of someone who is innocent and being unjustly threatened, telling the victim to call the legal bully's bluff rather than replying in kind by making up false accusations against his impugner. However, it must also be kept in mind that this was a hugely popular and top intellectual (probably a graduate of the Great Library of Alexandria University) Pᵊrush•imꞋ RibꞋi who was referring to redress in a Pᵊrush•imꞋ Beit-Din; NOT the illegal Hellenist pseudo-Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ "Bat•eiꞋ-Din," documented by Josephus, in the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ, which was a corrupt and bribe-driven mockery of the Oral Law obeying the Roman occupiers.
Thus, proving yet again to be the polar antithesis of Jesus and Christianity, the Christian claim that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa taught pacifism is unequivocally wrong. Moreover, though Jews have forgotten it (like they've forgotten much of úÌåÉøÈä) and Christians have become estranged from the Bible teachings of the first-century Pᵊrush•imꞋ RibꞋi, the Bible teaches that Y--H is the Ël•oh•imꞋ of Israel (not gentiles, whether Chrisitians or Muslims) and a "Man of war" (Shᵊm•otꞋ 15.3).
The concept of Allah, millennia later, is an Arab apostatized knock-off from úÌåÉøÈä (Displacement Theology) like the rest of Islam, their false prophet, Muhammad and their confabulated childish distortions of an afterlife.
Yet, while it is clear from all of this that jihad represents a religious global threat, Jews and even Christians remain in denial rather than wage the only possible remedy to a religious threat: religious polemics. As we noted in a previous article (The Winning Strategy for an Unwinnable War: Perceptional Reality Check, 2006.08.20), the only reformed jihadists are those who converted out of Islam while the converse also seems invariably true: the only non-Muslims who become suicidal terrorists are those who convert and become Muslims. Despite Islam's blatant contradictions of indisputably documented history, its blatant plagiarism from Judaism and the absurdity of many of its confabulated and childish tenets, Jewish timidity (which is the obsolete relic of past pogroms) and Christian timidity (which is the relic of Roman-Hellenist redactions and distortion) combine to give jihadists a mass license to commit war crimes and atrocities with impunity in their pursuit of a world Islamic Caliphate.
|
|
Updated 5765 (2005)
 |
| The Biblical Archaeology Review has documented (90.05-06, XVI.3, p. 16ff) that, by the end of the 1st century C.E., the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ had established a congregation and Beit-ha-KᵊnësꞋët on Har Tziy•onꞋ. The foundation and part of its wall can still be seen today. Some archeologists believe that some of the stones used in this wall were salvaged from the Wall of the Beit-ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ after the Romans had knocked them down into the street; and these archeologists may be correct. Photographed © 1983 by Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu Bën-Dâ•widꞋ. |
In Twelfthmonth on the Judaic calendar, late winter, of 29 C.E. (see NHM 18.15 header notes), RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa set the guidelines establishing the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit-Din, based—not surprisingly—on úÌåÉøÈä (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 17.6): "By the testimony of two or three witnesses' not by the testimony of a single witness." Expounding on this passage, RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa detailed (NHM 18.15), "If your brother missteps, go innocuously; reprove him between you and him alone. If he will hear you then you have gained your brother. If he won't hear you, take one or two more brothers with you so that [Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 19.15] according to two witnesses a thing will be established"—in a Beit-Din.
Only a Jew learned in úÌåÉøÈä and accepted in the mainstream religious Jewish community can serve as a sho•pheitꞋ on a Beit-Din. Crucially, it must be remembered that a Beit-Din may only interpret úÌåÉøÈä, handing down decisions (mi•shᵊpâtꞋ and khuq•imꞋ = Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ); not contradict úÌåÉøÈä. Even beyond that, úÌåÉøÈä prohibits adding or deleting anything whatsoever to úÌåÉøÈä (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1).
The rabbis' removal of the Asërët ha-Dibrot from the head tᵊphil•inꞋ, their authorizing Jews to go beardless, their rescinding the úÌåÉøÈä requirement for a pᵊtilꞋ tᵊkheilꞋët in one's tzitz•itꞋ, requiring the wearing of a kip•âhꞋ and the woefully ignorant equating of electricity with fire are all rabbinic additions and deletions—explicitly prohibited by úÌåÉøÈä that have indisputably demonstrated to 90% of Israel, as proven by their abandoning úÌåÉøÈä, why they shouldn't follow such false shepherds. The recent removal of Jews from settlements in Gaza is a wake-up call to religious Jews that something is dire wrong with their practice. These are examples that must be restored. However, the religious Jews' self-alienation from the flock of (secular) Israel, sanctimoniously ghettoizing themselves to pray apart from the body of Israel, is another example demonstrating the rabbis who led their followers into a false hope praying for, and prophesying, they would remain in Gaza. Their false prophecy demonstrates that they are defined by Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 18.21-22 as false shepherds, co-responsible with their peers for having alienated 90% of the flock of Israel and perpetuating disrespect for úÌåÉøÈä among the goyim.
There is only one remedy, and it is the same remedy for restoring the flock of Israel, for bringing respect for úÌåÉøÈä to the goyim and respect of the Arabs for Israel's place in our ancestral land. The remedy is to recognize that those racist Jews who proclaim that é--ä promised this land to DNA-blooded Jews pervert Scripture and corrupt the bᵊrit. The bᵊrit is a contract that stipulates IF Israel keeps His mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ—while Israel keeps His mi•tzᵊw•otꞋ—Israel will inherit this land. That applies to the flock of Israel as keepers of this bᵊrit, not merely to some small isolated group of Ultra-Orthodox Jews; and it applies to the restoration of the pristine úÌåÉøÈä—before the rabbinic additions and deletions. This awakening of the rabbis from their medievolatry and Europolatry, to reconcile úÌåÉøÈä with archeological and historical facts, modern logic and science is an unavoidable element of the remedy. Until this is done there will be no remedy.
Except in extenuating circumstances, a minimum of three Jews learned in úÌåÉøÈä and accepted in the Pᵊrush•imꞋ-heritage community serve as Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ. Basic arithmetic demonstrates that RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa instructed his followers to prevent resorting to the Beit-Din by, first, seeking, rather, to first attempt to straighten out the problem one-on-one, face-to-face, Jew-to-Jew. See also, in this context, NHM 7.1-6 with notes.
Notice the subtlety, however, in the second step, ordained from the beginning of the Bat•eiꞋ-Din system by MoshꞋëh. The party who feels wronged is required to make a second effort to avoid resorting to the Beit-Din. This time, however, he or she brings along a witness—who will be called to testify before the Beit-Din if the matter isn't resolved, resulting in litigation before the Beit-Din. If the accused defies the Beit-Din then the Beit-Din imposes the appropriate punishment, up to and including excision, on the rebellious wrong-doer who defies the Beit-Din.
RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa then defines the authority of the Beit Din ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ (18.19-20): "I tell you, whatever you shall make â•surꞋ in hâ-ÂꞋrëtz shall be â•surꞋ in the heavens. Whatever you shall cause to be mᵊphutakh (opened, see NHM note 16.19.4) in hâ-ÂꞋrëtz shall be mᵊphutakh in the heavens. Notice that pᵊsuq•imꞋ 21-22 continue RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's instructions to the Beit Din ha-Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ.
|
|
Great is the Dᵊvar ha-mi•shᵊpâtꞋ, that ha-Qâ•doshꞋ, Bâ•rukhꞋ Hu, chose over all of the qor•bân•otꞋ that are in the Ol•âmꞋ.
As memorized in 'These are the Great Things,' Sho•phᵊt•imꞋ and shotrim (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 16.18), This is what is written, "Doing tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ and mi•shᵊpâtꞋ is more preferable ìé--ä îæáç (la-Y--H mi-zâvakh; to é--ä than a sacrifice)" (Mi•shᵊl•eiꞋ Shᵊlom•oh′ 21.3), because the qor•bân•otꞋ weren't conducted in the environs of the BaꞋyit. However, the tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ and the din•imꞋ were conducted in either—the environs of the BaꞋyit or not in the environs of the BaꞋyit.
Another thing, with the exception for unintentional a•veir•otꞋ of úÌåÉøÈä, the qor•bân•otꞋ didn't make ki•purꞋ. However, the tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ and the din•imꞋ made ki•purꞋ, whether for unintentional a•veir•otꞋ of úÌåÉøÈä or intentional a•veir•otꞋ of úÌåÉøÈä.
Another thing, the qor•bân•otꞋ aren't conducted except in this Ol•âmꞋ, while the tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ and the din•imꞋ are conducted both in this Ol•âmꞋ and in hâ-ol•âmꞋ ha-baꞋ.
How is there a good reward for the tzadiq•imꞋ and punishment for the wicked? Behold the din—tzᵊdâq•âhꞋ—which facilitates one's health and he doesn't have punishment like the wicked.
|
|
|
 250x167.jpg "Shitim, across the Yardein fm Yerikho (Jericho)")
 801x536.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small}
 0250x250.jpg "Map Shitim Baal Peor (images.google.co.il)")
 1000x1000.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small}
