How Do You Know The Torah is True?

TorahCafe.com ^ | Dec 2012 | Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen

[Phinneous]

If you've never heard of mass-revelation (it's not a realization of having gained weight nor an encounter with a creep in the old Combat Zone in Boston...)

Rabbi Kelemen's concise class on why Jews not only believe in G-d's revelation at Sinai, but why we KNOW this to be fact.

[Olog-hai]

If you’re going to accuse one of “deliberately misreading”, then by all means let’s hear the correct reading.

The message supersedes what language it’s written in originally, besides. But you don’t seem to care about that. If God wanted an all-Hebrew Bible, He’d give that to us and it’d be commonplace.

[editor-surveyor]

Isaiah 28 is about the coming captivity of Ephraim in Assyria, and has nothing to do with the misunderstanding that grips churchianity wrt Israel’s total rejection of all that was Hellenistic.

Ignore the Maccabean revolt and look foolish.
.

[editor-surveyor]

Just break down and read the massive compendium of evidence against any Greek originals in post #91, then you will understand what a mountain you have to climb.
.

[TexasGator]

“It’s Torah, not The Torah.”

From Torah.org ...

“”Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it Joshua. “

http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter1-1b.html

[roamer_1]

The original chrstians who invented that charge then made up their own "oral law," didn't they?

YEP. And that is the problem... But it does not mean that either one is right.

[Olog-hai]

The Assyrian captivity of Ephraim? Then why is it referred to in 1 Corinthians 14:21 in the context of preaching the Gospel to people of many other tongues, and even using the languages of angels (in the previous chapter)? This was written by Paul, a Roman citizen and former Pharisee who knew quite a few languages, never mind knowing the Tanakh far better than either of us.

Zephaniah 3:9 speaks of a coming pure language anyhow. Then any confusion will indeed be relegated to the past.

[SkyDancer]

It was the way I was taught. Torah, not “The Torah” meaning there could be more than one version.

[editor-surveyor]

Isaiah is definitely speaking of the captivity.

Just read the beginning of the chapter.

And yes, Zephaniah definitely prophecies the return to Hebrew for the entire world in the kingdom.

.

[editor-surveyor]

It’s Torah.

No article is needed or appropriate, except when it is a title.

[Errant]

Then why is it referred to in 1 Corinthians 14:21 in the context of preaching the Gospel to people of many other tongues, and even using the languages of angels (in the previous chapter)?

1 Corinthians 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

E-S is correct about Isaiah 28, the context completely changed to that of the captivity.

[Errant]

Isaiah 11:10-11 In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his resting place will be glorious. 11 In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to reclaim the surviving remnant of his people from Assyria, from Lower Egypt, from Upper Egypt, from Cush, from Elam, from Babylonia, from Hamath and from the islands of the Mediterranean.

That "day" will be when the "rock" smashes the statue made of gold, silver, bronze, and iron mixed with clay feet, to be swept away by the wind without a trace. That "rock" will then grow to cover the entire world.

[Desparado]

It is true that modern Judaism is against Jesus as The Messiah. But Judaism down through history has had a number of so-called Messiahs. And in the times of Jesus (Yahshua), his followers were known as “Natzari” followers of the Nazerene. It was just another sect of Judaism in those times. After all, Jesus was a Jew. He studied Torah and taught Torah and kept the Feasts of the Lord as described in the Old Testament. He even said “ I did not come to change one jot or tittle of the Law(Torah) but to fulfill it”. And his followers did the same. He was the Living Torah. And that message has been lost except to a remnant of followers who exist in these times.

[Olog-hai]

You saying Paul took the verse out of context?

Paul would be the authority here.

[Errant]

You saying Paul took the verse out of context?

Not at all. Paul used the verse very appropriately.

Paul would be the authority here.

Of course, and Paul faced the same problem we face today, the ease of incorrectly interpreting the meaning of scripture. Hey, we're even now dealing with it now, right? That's what Paul was trying to get across when he said, "40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way."

[editor-surveyor]

>> “And in the times of Jesus (Yahshua), his followers were known as “Natzari” followers of the Nazerene.” <<

.
I think you are conflating the Nazerite vow with the fact that Joseph and Mary and their family were “Notzerim,” IOW descendants from a distant root of Jessie.

Neither Yeshua, nor any of his disciples were Nazerite. Nazareth was named for the fact that it was the place where the Notzerim went to hide during the persecution by Antiochus.

.

[Phinneous]

I can one-up you. There are even Jewish sources (these would be Pharisees to you, Perushim (’those who separate themselves’ [from those who don’t adhere to the written and oral Torah]) who thought that Bar Kochba, a 2nd Temple period leader/rebel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_bar_Kokhba), was Moshiach, the Messiah. Even the great Rabbi Akiva, head of all the Torah academies, believed he was (potentially) Moshiach. But when Bar Kochba’s rebellion against the Romans failed, Rabbi Akiva was proven wrong.

In Judaism Moshiach will bring the complete redemption to the world—the first time.

Tell me, as a J for J or Christian, whatever-— do you believe Jews need to follow the oral law (Mishna/Talmud) or not? Would you say that Jesus (or followers) relieved the Jews of our obligation to do so? (changing/’perfecting’/nullifying our Torah, G-d forbid?)

[Hieronymus]

None of the New Testament was ever originally written in any language other than Greek. There is no Aramaic-language original Besorah or other New Testament writings—none. All translations are based on Greek text, and anything in either Hebrew, Aramaic or any other Semitic tongue is a translation of that.

---

I would dispute with you on Matthew. In addition to a good number of early Christian writers who say that they saw Matthew in the original (Erasmus is actually the first one to contend that Matthew was first written in Greek), George Howard has done a fair bit of work on what Shem Tov preserved for apologetic purposes—google George Howard and Shem Tov. The Hebrew is much theologically richer than the Greek (I was looking at what stood behind the Greek amartia—sin—on Wednesday—three different Hebrew words, each of which fit extremely nicely into the theological context of the original)—this and many other things argue strongly against translation from a Greek original. No doubt the text has suffered various vicissitudes both before and after Shem Tov worked with it, but if I had to choose between working with it or working with the Greek, I’d opt for Shem Tov.

[Hieronymus]

Thanks for the ping. I don’t roll during Lent :) , so I will need to pick up the thread after Pasch, but there is a good deal of good stuff here.

[Hieronymus]

Very good post in that your logic is admirable, provokes thought, and deserves a serious response—particularly as your major premise is rock solid and you know how to reason.

I hope to respond to you after Passover—part of taking Lent seriously for me involves not being on FR most days, and the days that I am on being on in a minimal way.

[patlin]

In all of the Hebrew Scriptures one will rarely find the Hebrew singular ‘El’. The majority of time the plural Elohim is used. In the Greek there is no distinction between singular and plural, they simply use the word ‘theos’. However, there is a very prophetic reason for the distinguishing between the singular and the plural in the Hebrew as Elohim represents the unity of the Father, the Son and the Set Apart Spirit of Truth. Therefore, the majority of time the Voice of God used the plural to emphasize the process of redemption which includes all 3 who are the same as they were in the beginning, the same yesterday, today and forever. There is no distinction between Jew or Gentile in His process of Redemption.

As it is for the Jew, so it is for the Gentile, not the other way around as is falsely taught by Roman Christendom. They refuse to hear Paul when he wrote, what advantage then does the Jew have? Much, because to Judah was entrusted the Torah of YHWH. Y’shua taught obedience to the Torah and when He returns, Judah who has clung to Torah will have the veil lifted. Sadly for the followers of Roman Christendom, there is going to be a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth when they realize that they should have taken the teachings of Y’shua literally and not listened to and followed the whitewashed and twisted teachings of the Torahless preachers and prophets. There is also going to be a lot of hearts fainting when they find themselves in the midst of the wrath of Elohim because they did not have it in their heart to obey Him, to love Him as He desires to be loved.

Shalom