The Talmud This, The Talmud That...

[inyourarmsalways]

The Talmud this, the Talmud that, and we are left with all that being just one interpretation out of many.

Keep quoting the Talmud, use your pretty red writing, but it doesn't serve any purpose here. Homosexuals cannot change, and the only ones that can live hetersexual lives are bisexual people.

My husband and I support the GBLT community, and hope that more will join in with us, as we walk TOGETHER hand and hand before Christ.

 

[Der Alte]

The Talmud this, the Talmud that, and we are left with all that being just one interpretation out of many.

Keep quoting the Talmud, use your pretty red writing, but it doesn't serve any purpose here. Homosexuals cannot change, and the only ones that can live hetersexual lives are bisexual people.

My husband and I support the GBLT community, and hope that more will join in with us, as we walk TOGETHER hand and hand before Christ.

What you do or do not support is irrelevant to anything. If the Bible is the Word of God, and I believe that it is, then the interpretation and practice of God's people for the last 4000 years +/- is relevant and does serve a purpose.

What does NOT serve any purpose is the ever changing secular humanist, if it feels good do it, philosophy. To understand or interpret any language you must consult those who speak and understand that language, and who better to consult for the Hebrew scriptures than the Jewish scholars of the past 4000 years?

I don't believe I saw any evidence for the statement, "Homosexuals cannot change, and the only ones that can live hetersexual lives are bisexual people."

Jewish Encyclopedia – Talmudic law
Three Historical Periods of Jewish Law.

The development of thousands of years is represented by the Jewish law asit is found in the Shulḥan 'Aruk, Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, of Joseph Caro (16th cent.), as well as in numerous other works which elaborate or elucidate individual passages in various ways. The history of the Hebrew code falls into three chief epochs: (1) the Pentateuch, (2) the Talmud, and (3) post-Talmudic literature. The Pentateuch forms the basis of the Talmud, while the latter serves in its turn as a foundation for post-Talmudic law, which has tenaciously maintained its validity in less cultured countries to the present day.

Assyro-Babylonian Influence.

The Talmud has been completed for 1,400 years; and the greater part of the legal material which it contains is more than 2,000 years old. The history of the Hebrew code falls into three chief epochs: (1) the Pentateuch, (2) the Talmud, and (3) post-Talmudic literature.

Influence of Persian Law.

The Jews lived for a time both under the ancient Persian régime of the Achæmenidæ (550-330 B.C.) and under the neo-Persian dynasty of the Sassanids (250-500 C.E.). Persian law has, therefore, also been a factor, although the present knowledge both of the Achæmenian and the Sassanid codes is insufficient for an estimate of the extent of their influence on the Jews. The Talmud, on the other hand, characterizes the legal system of the Sassanids as a superficial one, and quotes some extracts in support of its assertions, e.g., the creditor may seize the security (B. B. 173, borrowed from Turkish law). See further Frankel, l.c. p. 56, where the theory is advanced that Sassanid law influenced the code of the Babylonian Talmud.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=35&letter=T​

 

[inyourarmsalways]

What you do or do not support is irrelevant to anything. If the Bible is the Word of God, and I believe that it is, then the interpretation and practice of God's people for the last 4000 years +/- is relevant and does serve a purpose.

What does NOT serve any purpose is the ever changing secular humanist, if it feels good do it, philosophy. To understand or interpret any language you must consult those who speak and understand that language, and who better to consult for the Hebrew scriptures than the Jewish scholars of the past 4000 years?

I don't believe I saw any evidence for the statement, "Homosexuals cannot change, and the only ones that can live hetersexual lives are bisexual people."

Jewish Encyclopedia – Talmudic law
Three Historical Periods of Jewish Law.

The development of thousands of years is represented by the Jewish law asit is found in the Shulḥan 'Aruk, Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, of Joseph Caro (16th cent.), as well as in numerous other works which elaborate or elucidate individual passages in various ways. The history of the Hebrew code falls into three chief epochs: (1) the Pentateuch, (2) the Talmud, and (3) post-Talmudic literature. The Pentateuch forms the basis of the Talmud, while the latter serves in its turn as a foundation for post-Talmudic law, which has tenaciously maintained its validity in less cultured countries to the present day.

Assyro-Babylonian Influence.

The Talmud has been completed for 1,400 years; and the greater part of the legal material which it contains is more than 2,000 years old. The history of the Hebrew code falls into three chief epochs: (1) the Pentateuch, (2) the Talmud, and (3) post-Talmudic literature.

Influence of Persian Law.

The Jews lived for a time both under the ancient Persian régime of the Achæmenidæ (550-330 B.C.) and under the neo-Persian dynasty of the Sassanids (250-500 C.E.). Persian law has, therefore, also been a factor, although the present knowledge both of the Achæmenian and the Sassanid codes is insufficient for an estimate of the extent of their influence on the Jews. The Talmud, on the other hand, characterizes the legal system of the Sassanids as a superficial one, and quotes some extracts in support of its assertions, e.g., the creditor may seize the security (B. B. 173, borrowed from Turkish law). See further Frankel, l.c. p. 56, where the theory is advanced that Sassanid law influenced the code of the Babylonian Talmud.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=35&letter=T​

Not really, there have been problems with interpretations in the past, and there currently are today.

What the Talmud says doesn't reflect what God thinks for sure.

 

[Der Alte]

Not really, there have been problems with interpretations in the past, and there currently are today.

As I said ever changing, new age, secular humanist, if it feels good do it, philosophy. There is virtually no "problems with interpretation" among peer recognized scholars who have studied the languages.

The only "problems with interpretation" I have seen here are the unsupported, undocumented opinions, posted on various websites, by people who have absolutely no qualifications in either Biblical language, who think they can pick up a lexicon, choose any definition that suits them, and claim it is the only correct definition. They evidently never heard of voice, mood, tense, state, etc. Who needs all that grammar stuff anyway?

Then these unsupported, undocumented opinions are cut/pasted here, and other places, as fact. "All the historical evidence, such as the Talmud and the early church, is wrong because Gary Gay posted the 'correct' information on his website."

I have pointed out the fallacy of that several times, and it was virtually ignored.

The words; car, bear, bar, house, arm, what do they mean, are they verbs or nouns? You cannot assume that the first definition listed for these words is always the correct or only definition. The same with Hebrew and Greek, the primary definition is not always the correct or only definition.

What the Talmud says doesn't reflect what God thinks for sure.

And God himself told you this, for sure, personally?

Well, evidently Paul didn't get that message, when he used "arsenokites" to describe a behavior condemned by God, the same word the Jewish scholars used to translate, "if a man lie with a woman as with a man," ca. 250 BC.

 

[UberLutheran]

What you do or do not support is irrelevant to anything. If the Bible is the Word of God, and I believe that it is, then the interpretation and practice of God's people for the last 4000 years +/- is relevant and does serve a purpose.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Do you support the extermination of homosexuals based on the literal reading of Leviticus 20:13? YES or NO.

 

[Brieuse]

Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Do you support the extermination of homosexuals based on the literal reading of Leviticus 20:13? YES or NO.

Don't give them ideas...

It's bad enough that we're being accused of doing Satan's work.

This reminds me of my ex-church where they tried to deliver my sister from the demon of epilepsy.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Do you support the extermination of homosexuals based on the literal reading of Leviticus 20:13? YES or NO.

If we were stil under the old covenant what choice would we have? It's God's WILL.

 

[Der Alte]

Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Do you support the extermination of homosexuals based on the literal reading of Leviticus 20:13? YES or NO.

Irrelevant and irrelevant.

If you had actually been reading my posts you would know that I believe that Christians are only responsible for observing those O.T. Laws reiterated in the N.T. For example, only 9 of the 10 commandments are reiterated in the N.T. The only one omitted is the 4th, the Sabbath, which was given only to the children of Israel as a memorial between them and God.

The dietary laws were abrogated by Jesus, Mk 7:18-19, Mt 15:16-17, and God himself Acts 10:11-16.

The O.T. Injunction against homosexual copulation was reiterated by Paul , 1 Tim 1:10, 1 Cor 6:9 and he used the same language the Jewish translators of the LXX used 250 BC.

Lev 20:13 [size=+1]ואישׁ אשׁר ישׁכב את־זכר משׁכבי אשׁה[/size] [size=+1]תועבה עשׂו שׁניהם מות יומתו דמיהם בם׃[/size]

Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

LXX [ca. 250 BC] Lev 20:13 [size=+1]και ος αν κοιμηθη μετα αρσενος κοιτην γυναικος, βδελυγμα εποιησαν αμφοτεροι θανατουσθωσαν, ενοχοι εισιν.[/size]

TR 1 Cor 6:9 [ca. 90 AD] [size=+1]η ουκ οιδατε οτι αδικοι βασιλειαν θεου ου κληρονομησουσιν μη πλανασθε ουτε πορνοι ουτε ειδωλολατραι ουτε μοιχοι ουτε μαλακοι ουτε αρσενοκοιται.[/size]

1 Cor 6:9 [ca. 90 AD] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor [[size=+1]αρσενοκοιται[/size]] abusers of themselves with mankind​

 

[inyourarmsalways]

Irrelevant and irrelevant.

If you had actually been reading my posts you would know that I believe that Christians are only responsible for observing those O.T. Laws reiterated in the N.T. For example, only 9 of the 10 commandments are reiterated in the N.T. The only one omitted is the 4th, the Sabbath, which was given only to the children of Israel as a memorial between them and God.

The dietary laws were abrogated by Jesus, Mk 7:18-19, Mt 15:16-17, and God himself Acts 10:11-16.

The O.T. Injunction against homosexual copulation was reiterated by Paul , 1 Tim 1:10, 1 Cor 6:9 and he used the same language the Jewish translators of the LXX used 250 BC.

Lev 20:13 [size=+1]ואישׁ אשׁר ישׁכב את־זכר משׁכבי אשׁה[/size] [size=+1]תועבה עשׂו שׁניהם מות יומתו דמיהם בם׃[/size]

Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

LXX [ca. 250 BC] Lev 20:13 [size=+1]και ος αν κοιμηθη μετα αρσενος κοιτην γυναικος, βδελυγμα εποιησαν αμφοτεροι θανατουσθωσαν, ενοχοι εισιν.[/size]

TR 1 Cor 6:9 [ca. 90 AD] [size=+1]η ουκ οιδατε οτι αδικοι βασιλειαν θεου ου κληρονομησουσιν μη πλανασθε ουτε πορνοι ουτε ειδωλολατραι ουτε μοιχοι ουτε μαλακοι ουτε αρσενοκοιται.[/size]

1 Cor 6:9 [ca. 90 AD] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor [[size=+1]αρσενοκοιται[/size]] abusers of themselves with mankind​

If that was a moral violation, it would've included one for lesbians.

Tow'ebah means "ritual/ceremonial impurity" in that sense. Read the verse following, it includes both men AND women in the mix for it.

 

[Der Alte]

If that was a moral violation, it would've included one for lesbians.

Tow'ebah means "ritual/ceremonial impurity" in that sense. Read the verse following, it includes both men AND women in the mix for it.

Unless the context demands it, or it is specifically stated, in the text, the masculine often can and does include the feminine.

"Tow'ebah means "ritual/ceremonial impurity" in that sense." This is a late 20th century concoction by homosexuals trying to legitimize behavior that has been considered an abomination for over 4-000 years. The Jews have never made that distinction, and, when it comes to the Jewish scriptures and their ceremonial requirements, they, the Jews, are the authority, NOT homosexual websites with ZERO evidence or qualifications. Here is some more historical evidence for you and all the others to ignore, again.

ABOMINATION (Jewish Encyclopedia)
From BibleWiki

Rendering in the English versions of different Biblical terms denoting that which is loathed or detested on religious grounds and which, therefore, is utterly offensive to the Deity. These terms differ greatly in the degree of the abhorrence implied and should be distinguished in translation, as follows:
(1)
(image) (to'ebah):Abomination of the highest degree; originally that which offends the religious sense of a people. Thus (Gen. xliii. 32): "The Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians." The reason is that the Hebrews, as foreigners, were considered an inferior caste. According to Herodotus, ii. 41, no Egyptian would kiss a Greek on the mouth, or use his dish, or even taste meat cut with a carving-knife belonging to a Greek. But especially as shepherds the Hebrews were "an abomination unto the Egyptians" (Gen. xlvi. 34). The eating of unclean animals is a religious offense called to'ebah: "Thou shalt not eat any abominable thing" (Deut. xiv. 3). This is the introduction to the laws prohibiting the use of unclean animals (see Clean and Unclean Animals). Still more offensive to the God of Israel is the practise of idolatry. The idol itself is called an Abomination: "for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God. Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house and thus become a thing set apart [tabooed=cherem] like unto it; thou shalt utterly detest it and utterly abhor it; for it is a thing set apart [tabooed]" (Deut. vii. 25, 26, Heb.): "Cursed be the man that maketh a graven or molten image, an abomination unto the Lord" (Deut. xxvii. 15). Often the word to'ebah is used for idol or heathen deity; for instance, in Isa. xliv. 19; Deut. xxxii. 16; II Kings, xxiii. 13, and especially Ex. viii. 22 (26, A. V.), it is to be taken in this sense. When Pharaoh had told the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in Egypt, Moses replied: "How may we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians [that is, the kind of animals worshiped by them] before their eyes, and they not stone us?" (see Ibn Ezra, ad loc.).

All idolatrous practise is an Abomination because of its defiling character: "Every abomination to the Lord which he hateth have they done unto their gods" (Deut. xii. 31; compare Deut. xiii. 15, xvii. 4, xx. 18). Also magic and divination are an Abomination (Deut. xviii. 12). Sexual transgression is particularly denounced as an Abomination (to'ebah) (Deut. xxii. 5, xxiii. 19 [18, A. V.], xxiv. 4); especially incest and unnatural offenses (Lev. xviii. and xx.): "For all these abominations have the men of the land done who were before you, and the land became defiled; lest the land vomit you out also when ye defile it" (Lev. xviii. 27, 28, Heb.; compare also Ezek. viii. 15 and elsewhere).

But the word to'ebah also assumes a higher spiritual meaning and is applied also to moral iniquities: "Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. . . For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God" (Deut. xxv. 14-16). In the same strain we are taught that "lying lips" (Prov. xii. 22), "the perverse" (ib. iii. 32, R.V.) the "proud in heart" (ib. xvi. 5), "the way of the wicked" (ib. xv. 9), "thoughts of evil" (ib. xv. 26, Heb.), and "he that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the righteous" (ib. xvii. 15) are an Abomination. "These six things doth the Lord hate, yea, seven things are an abomination to him: haughty eyes; a lying tongue; hands that shed innocent blood; a heart that deviseth wicked imaginations; feet that be swift in running to mischief; a false witness that uttereth lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren" (ib. vi. 16-19, Heb.). In another direction the prohibition of an abominable thing is given an ethical meaning: "Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy God an ox or a sheep wherein is a blemish, for that is an abomination unto the Lord thy God" (Deut. xvii. 1, Heb.). Here the physical character of the sacrifice is offensive. But prophet and sage declare that any sacrifice without purity of motive is an Abomination: "Bring no more an oblation of falsehood—an incense of abomination it is to me" (Isa. i. 13, Heb.; compare Jer. vii. 10). "The sacrifice of the wicked" (Prov. xv. 8, xxi. 27) and the prayer of "him that turneth his ear from hearing the law" (Prov. xxviii. 9, Heb.) are an Abomination.

http://bible.tmtm.com/wiki/index.ph...rom=ABBAS+(ABAS),+AARON+(Jewish+Encyclopedia)

​

 

[Merciel]

Is this the same Talmud in which Jesus was declared to be the bastard child of Joseph Pandera, gained his powers by smuggling the ineffable name of God from the Temple, etc.?

 

[Der Alte]

Is this the same Talmud in which Jesus was declared to be the bastard child of Joseph Pandera, gained his powers by smuggling the ineffable name of God from the Temple, etc.?

And what makes you think the Talmud says all these things, do you have any direct evidence? I don’t mean second or third hand “quotes” from anti-Semitic websites. If you would like to back this up, the Talmud, is available, online, on at least two sites, one is sacredtexts and the other is come-and-hear. Good luck.

In the meantime, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that you are correct. The O.T. clearly prophesies that the Messiah would be rejected, tortured, and killed, by his own people, see e.g. Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and others.

If, as you claim, the Talmud does say all those things, how does the fact that the Jews fulfilled prophesy, exactly as God said, even using the exact words that God prophesied, change anything about how the Jewish scholars interpreted the Hebrew scriptures, delivered to them by God, BEFORE the advent of the Messiah, and which God has never abrogated?

The Talmud is a credible, historical source for the interpretation of Jewish scriptures, and the faith, and practice of the Jewish faith, by the Jews, but it is not a credible source for anything relating to the Christian faith.

[size=+1]שלום[/size]

Der Über Älter