Replies

Phinneous Its not so smooth, you just need to know how to read Hebrew. You know, the actual language of the Bible

Firstly, that's Biblical Hebrew - different from modern Hebrew, and while mostly mutually comprehensible, is not completely comprehensible to a modern Hebrew speaker (that's natural, languages evolve)

Secondly, it is definite that at least 268 verses of the Old Testament were written in Aramaic - such as a large chunk of Ezra, some of Daniel and Jeremiah.

Furthermore, there are competent translators from Hebrew and Aramaic, so many translations, like much of the KJV, are quite good in the translation, though I will agree they lose something

Yet to say "to understand the bible you need to only read it in Hebrew" is used as a red herring by people, just as Mohammedans who say "to understand the Quran you need to read it only in Arabic" - and that too Quranic Arabic. It's a cop-out.

Next, Phinneous, let’s burn down the little link you sent

Firstly, the question itself is riddled with errors

1. “He came not only for the gentiles, but for the Jews as well. “ — He came primarily for Jews and secondarily for gentiles. salvation came from the 2nd temple Jews and yet not from the Pharisees who added on the Oral Torah (hint, that’s what you use now, btw)

2. “ by so-called Christians”, “these were not real Christians,” — let’s be specific - the Nazis were Nordic occulists who hated Christianity secondarily to Judaism, so they don’t count — that murder, that genocide was based on the flawed premise of “race” (if a person was Christian but their grandparents were Jewish, they were murdered by the Nazis). BUT the Christians who persecuted Jews and were happy to convert them - they were not acting according to Christ’s teachings, but we need to acknowledge that they were Christian. They thought they were doing right — just as the Jewish persecutors of the Jesus-movement thought in the 1st century, just as the Jewish king Dhu Niwas of Yemen who slaughtered Christians thought it was right, just as the Jews who committed genocide against the gentiles in Cyprus and Cyrene during the Kitos war were “real Jews” who did sinful things. The “no true scotsman” argument doesn’t hold

Then the answer is also flawed

1. “no tongue that uttered more vulgar curses against the Children of Israel than this founder of the Reformation whom you apparently revere.”
—> Martin Luther called Calvinists and Catholics and Anabaptists and peasants as sons of devils etc. - the same epithets he hurled against Jews WHO DIDN’T CONVERT TO LUTHER’S WAY OF THINKING. And that’s the key - Luther hated anyone who didn’t agree with Luther, whether they be Jew or Catholic or Calvinist. If Mordechai or Francis became Lutheran, then Martin Luther would have been all smiles.

That’s not anti-semitism, that is not race-based hatred. That is hate against people who disagree with him. Not nice, but there is a serious difference between that and anti-semitism.

2. “Even the anti-Semitism of the New Testament “ — huh? The New Testament talks out against the PHARISEE Jews —> every single one of the authors of the New Testament books with the exception of Luke, were JEWS, born Jews, circumcised etc. But they were not PHARISEE-JEWS (the one form of Judaism that has been there since the destruction of the temple in 70 AD) — they were JESUS-MOVEMENT-JEWS i.e. Christians.

The texts are all against the Pharisee sect.

3. “almost none of them can read or understand the Hebrew Bible in its original language.” — really, “if you can’t read the Quran in Arabic, don’t discuss with me”

4. “ passionate resistance of the Jew to the teachings of Christianity “ — err.. nope - a large chunk of Jews followed Jesus. Only when the Pharisee invented their religion in 70 AD and edited out texts that supported the Jesus-sect, did the baptisms trickle.

5. Then next the Psalm itself - I have “[17] For many dogs have encompassed me: the council of the malignant hath besieged me. They have dug my hands and feet. “ — perhaps Rabbi needs to know there ARE other translations?