Replies

To reply to you both in one post:

1) MestaMachine: IF you and/or Zionist Conspirator continue to post on FR, AND respond to well meaning Christians with responses that denigrate the New Testament against Torah principles, AND then offer the excuse that only Torah is valid against the teachings of Torah, AND neither of you finish the discussion started by ZC in the thread I linked to, THEN I will continue to challenge you with Torah, Talmud, and Tanach to the effect that Messiah came in the 1st century.

2) MestaMachine: “If we stay factual”. Sure. I appreciate that the Torah is the word of God, and so long as we obey Torah principles in the discussion, I am OK. I trust that both of you will understand the difference between “staying factual” and a difference of opinion regarding the conclusion drawn from systematic reasoning given a body of evidence with Torah principles as a guide. “The Law of the Lord is perfect”.

3) MestaMachine: Regarding the Soncino Tanach (Old Testament) which I used being corrupt, and not the Tanach of choice today by the Orthodox Jewish community: Sure man. You point me to the definitive, sanctioned, recognized, approved English translation used by Orthodox Jews the world over, and I will acquire a copy, and use that going forward. No problem. I don’t mind saying that I am not Hebrew fluent, but I do have access to Christians (Gentile and Jewish) who are, so it might take some time for me to get back to you from time to time, but get back to you I will.

4) MestaMachine: You want to attack the authority of the Septuagint? Let’s hear it.

5) MestaMachine and Zionist Conspirator: One of you are willing to finish the discussion started by ZC and myself? I welcome it. Every time my faith is challenged, it is stronger at the end of the challenge. I can only profit from a discussion with both or one of you, and I am happy to invest my time in this way.

6) ZC: You did not address my Hebraic, Torah reasoning in the claims I made. The brief justification you make in post #95 do not begin to address the points I made. You are handwaving, and hoping nobody notices. I notice, and so does HaShem. You are definitely better than this. You can meet me point by point. I welcome this, and encourage you man!

7) Have a great day gentlemen.

I have answered your challenge many times by pointing out that the Torah does not authorize, call for, or predict any such religion as chr*stianity. Your main argument on this point was to invoke the "prophet like unto" Moses in Deuteronomy. I'm afraid that taking that one verse (which is the mitzvah to hearken to a prophet) and pretending that it overturns the entire Torah simply cannot satisfy anyone other than one who is already convinced.

You then invoked the criteria for a true prophet as enumerated in the Torah. Yet you continue to ignore the case described in Deuteronomy 13 of the false prophet who makes predictions which come true but which are to be ignored because they are merely a test from G-d to see if the hearers of such prophecies (and witnesses of such fulfillments) really will stay with the Torah rather than going to something new.

Then you invoked RaMBa"M as a wintess for chr*stianity even though he rejected it.

I begin to wonder why you are do absolutely fixated on justifying your conversion to chr*stianity. The only reason I can figure is guilt.

At any rate I am satisfied with my own position and stand by it. So long as the Torah does not authorize chr*stianity, chr*stianity's claims fail the test.

I don't think MestaMachine is coming from the same place I am so I cannot answer for him/her.

Chr*stianity is based on the "new testament" just as mormonism is based on the "book of mormon." IF those revelations are true, then naturally their religions are as well. But to claim that either is alluded to in the Torah or Hebrew Bible is simply ludicrous.

Pinging kosta to this old debate for his interest.

“1) MestaMachine: IF you and/or Zionist Conspirator continue to post on FR, AND respond to well meaning Christians with responses that denigrate the New Testament against Torah principles, AND then offer the excuse that only Torah is valid against the teachings of Torah, AND neither of you finish the discussion started by ZC in the thread I linked to, THEN I will continue to challenge you with Torah, Talmud, and Tanach to the effect that Messiah came in the 1st century.”

First of all, I was not on the other thread you are referring to. I read what you pointed to until my eyes glazed over. a ONE post response would be almost impossible.
I do not know Zionist Conspirator and was not pinged to this thread by her and do not agree with her either.
You misunderstand my response. I asked you if you seriously wanted to pursue this discussion, but received no reply.
I posited that the translation of the Old Testament in common use is mistranslated in many ways.
I ALSO dispute common interpretations of Torah Principals by overeducated psychologists.

I also posit that every effort to concord the Old Testament with the New often requires the skills of a verbal contortionist and a misapplication of recorded history, and sometimes statements made up of whole cloth which are totally and completely irrelevant. There are others which seek to dismiss Old Testament history by replacing it with speculation. Still others which denigrate Old testament history when it doesn’t factually agree with profferred concordances.
I can give you many instances of this.

The reason I haven’t responded is because you did not alert me to your seriousness. It isn’t worth the time or the effort if you were not serious because I seek no conversions and am expressly forbidden to do so.

I disagree with ZC on a lot of things, but she is right about there being NO pointers to Christianity in Torah or in any translation of the Old Testament including the modern ones.

That said, I do not want to denigrate anyone’s faith except maybe islam which is abomination beyond abomination.
So by disputing you on facts, I want to make it perfectly clear that I am NOT questioning your FAITH. Only your facts.
I would ask you to be very specific and take it a point at a time, ask me the question, and I will answer.
What you have asked for a response to requires a volume or two and many hours of time.
So I ask you, how important is this to you if the point is you trying to convince me I am wrong, and I respond with how you are wrong? Is it going to change your life? Because these are lifechanging beliefs and not to be taken lightly.

I am very secure in my skin and with my faith. Why do you challenge it? Would you accept proof as proof? Would you admit being wrong if I show you where and why you are wrong? Is there any REAL value to challenging my faith except for you to try and convert me, which is simply not going to happen?

I don’t know you. Please tell me what the point of this is. If it is educational debate, fine.
State your case on THIS thread ONE point at a time. I live my faith. I don’t write about it 24/7. There are things going on in this world that require my presence much more than arguing religious issues which are not relevant to anyone but you and me.
ONE point. Fire away.