quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
I was trying to ask a question about breaking the law of the land and then using your religious beliefs as an alibi or excuse.

If it is found that the very religion you are using as an excuse forbids what you did to break the law of the land ----

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:
Another humanist sign has been molested. This one In Moscow, Idaho. It's too big to paste here. Go here to see it:

[http://www.americanhumanist.org/system/storage/29/1225/Picture_002.jpg]

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
I was trying to ask a question about breaking the law of the land and then using your religious beliefs as an alibi or excuse.

If it is found that the very religion you are using as an excuse forbids what you did to break the law of the land ----

Ah. Yeah, that's different. In my opinion, of course, using a religious tenet to justify breaking the law should not be accepted as a defense in the first place. I would see that as a case of "civil disobedience" - disobeying the State in order to support a moral principle. I respect the concept of civil disobedience, but much of my respect is based in the person's willingness to accept his punishment under the law he is protesting, so I would not support any leniency based on religious or other ethical belief.

More to the point of your question, though - if someone WERE to accept such a religious belief as a reason for leniency (as many seem to), then I would think that being shown that the criminal was violating his own stated beliefs along with the civil law, that would remove ANY excuse for leniency. That would, if anything, make him a worse criminal.

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
1. Thou shalt not commit murder - How would a person of these beliefs say that God sent them to murder someone. The scriptures do not support murder. Killing is another items but it is clear that those who were killed were within God's people for violating God's law. There is no precedence for applying God's law to outsiders.

quote:

2. Thou shalt not bear false witness - I have heard many say they could stretch the truth because the end justifies the means. This is unauthorized according to direct commandment of their God.

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:
Which reminds me. Considering the popular concepts of adultery and fornication, and the idea that God (via Jesus) is to take the Church as his bride.... did God commit adultery with Mary or is there some other exemption in the Law.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:
Which reminds me. Considering the popular concepts of adultery and fornication, and the idea that God (via Jesus) is to take the Church as his bride.... did God commit adultery with Mary or is there some other exemption in the Law.

Even though I enjoy pointing out Biblical contradictions, I wouldn't use this one. The law is against fornication, not the result of it - a miraculous impregnation is not precisely the same act, and therefore sidesteps the law.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:
Just to enliven the argument and provide some meat for it. Note that I do not support such actions.

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
1. Thou shalt not commit murder - How would a person of these beliefs say that God sent them to murder someone. The scriptures do not support murder. Killing is another items but it is clear that those who were killed were within God's people for violating God's law. There is no precedence for applying God's law to outsiders.

LJ: What do you mean outsiders?

If read selectively, the scriptures do indeed support the murder of outsiders. The Old Testament in particular has many instances of massacres - see for instance Numbers 31, or Deuteronomy 2:30-34, or Deut 13:12-16. Or note the end of the Parable of the Talents, Luke 19:27, to bring in the NT. Yes, this requires selective reading - but so do many more liberal interpretations.

quote:

BobApril: In Jewish Law (which is what you are referring to), MURDER implies killing based on hatred. The Torah teaches that you are obligated to kill in self defense or to protect others. If you kill someone by accident this is not consider murder.

2. Thou shalt not bear false witness - I have heard many say they could stretch the truth because the end justifies the means. This is unauthorized according to direct commandment of their God.

LJ: False witness refers to individuals providing evidence in a court law. It does not include all types of lies.
Harder to justify, but note the story of Rahab, who lied to protect Joshua's spies, and was spared in Jericho's fall. Separately, while I don't have a source on tap, I've heard it claimed that the Commandment against false witness is specific to certain circumstances, and does not forbid ALL forms of lying. Note that it is phrased as "Thou shalt not bear false witness against (nothing about "for") thy neighbor (nothing about strangers who don't live nearby.)
BobApril: you are right. Lying is allowed in certain circumstances, just like Rahab.

In these issues as in so many others, the Bible is large and varied enough to support almost any interpretation simply by choosing which verses to apply. That act of choosing is done no less by liberal believers than by the most vicious fundamentalist.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:
Which reminds me. Considering the popular concepts of adultery and fornication, and the idea that God (via Jesus) is to take the Church as his bride.... did God commit adultery with Mary or is there some other exemption in the Law.

Even though I enjoy pointing out Biblical contradictions, I wouldn't use this one. The law is against fornication, not the result of it - a miraculous impregnation is not precisely the same act, and therefore sidesteps the law.

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:
Don't forget David, a man after God's own heart, and adultery. Plenty of reasons in the Bible to note a double standard and hypocrisy.
Actually, David's behavior was challenged by the prophet and David was punished with the death of the kid. Where is the double standard and hypocrisy? Being a man after G-d's heart, means you are still human with your mistakes and your shortcomings.
No wonder the Christian inventors set it aside and reference faith as something back to Abraham, a man who lived some 440 years before Moses invented Law breaking.
Moses did not invent 'law braking'. When Cain gets angry the Tanak introduces the idea of sin. Cain lived many years before Abraham or Moses.

Which reminds me. Considering the popular concepts of adultery and fornication, and the idea that God (via Jesus) is to take the Church as his bride.... did God commit adultery with Mary or is there some other exemption in the Law. If God ‘married’ her before he impregnated her, did Joseph commit adultery or maybe even Mary (she had other kids besides the first one.)

Maybe God can break Laws if the moment moves him to do so?
The idea of gods interacting in this fashion with humans is pagan. The 'Laws' you are referring to were not given by pagan gods

quote:

Originally posted by ixcatzin:
BobApril: In Jewish Law (which is what you are referring to), MURDER implies killing based on hatred. The Torah teaches that you are obligated to kill in self defense or to protect others. If you kill someone by accident this is not consider murder.

quote:

Originally posted by ixcatzin:

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:
Don't forget David, a man after God's own heart, and adultery. Plenty of reasons in the Bible to note a double standard and hypocrisy.
Actually, David's behavior was challenged by the prophet and David was punished with the death of the kid. Where is the double standard and hypocrisy? Being a man after G-d's heart, means you are still human with your mistakes and your shortcomings. Yes, however, isn’t the punishment for adultery stoning? I understand the justifications applied to his case theologically, but still….
No wonder the Christian inventors set it aside and reference faith as something back to Abraham, a man who lived some 440 years before Moses invented Law breaking.
Moses did not invent 'law braking'. When Cain gets angry the Tanak introduces the idea of sin. Cain lived many years before Abraham or Moses. Here in lies the difference between Christian and Jewish, I suppose? Paul (the busy-body) says God does not ‘impute’ their sins against them since the Law did not exist back then. No Law, no sin. So what you say is news to my ignorant Jewish understanding (but I have learned a lot from you, which I greatly appreciate it!) Of course, in a secular observatin it appears Moses does "invent" or write up the Law.

Which reminds me. Considering the popular concepts of adultery and fornication, and the idea that God (via Jesus) is to take the Church as his bride.... did God commit adultery with Mary or is there some other exemption in the Law. If God ‘married’ her before he impregnated her, did Joseph commit adultery or maybe even Mary (she had other kids besides the first one.)

Maybe God can break Laws if the moment moves him to do so?
The idea of gods interacting in this fashion with humans is pagan. The 'Laws' you are referring to were not given by pagan godsThat’s a good point. The Law is given to the Hebrew faith, not the masses. That’s often another Christian mistake in their eagerness to ‘rule the world’ and the rest of the Universe, especially the Jewish god. So then, is the Jewish God interacting with Christians? You know what they claim!

Ixcatl

quote:

Originally posted by Ixcatzin:
LJ: False witness refers to individuals providing evidence in a court law. It does not include all types of lies.

quote:

Originally posted by All4Truth:
Bearing false witness, for a Christian, would also include telling a lie to accomplish a purpose that would cause harm to your neighbor. ...Now about the neighbor, Jesus has given specific understanding of who the Christian's neighbor is. To be clear EVERYBODY. So for the Christian, telling a lie ABOUT anybody is breaking the commandment.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:
All4One - your last post delves into technicalities and interpretations and what you believe. That's all fine, but doesn't fully address my point. You earlier noted that there are certain unchangeable commandments that a Jew or Christian cannot violate and still claim that faith - especially claiming it in defense of their actions. My point is that the unchangeable nature of those rules is subject to wildly differing interpretations, and thus someone can work around pretty much any of 'em and still HONESTLY claim to be a faithful believer. (Honesty defined here as something the individual believes to be true, whether others agree or not.)

At that point we simply get into the "No True Scotsman" argument, where the people who disagree with the criminal try to distance themselves from his interpretations and his actions. The real problem, however, is the Bible/Torah itself, which is confusing enough that even reasonable people can widely vary on their interpretations. I note that Ixcatzin and you still appear to have distinctly different readings of the 9th Commandment:

quote:

Originally posted by Ixcatzin:
LJ: False witness refers to individuals providing evidence in a court law. It does not include all types of lies.

quote:

Originally posted by All4Truth:
Bearing false witness, for a Christian, would also include telling a lie to accomplish a purpose that would cause harm to your neighbor. ...Now about the neighbor, Jesus has given specific understanding of who the Christian's neighbor is. To be clear EVERYBODY. So for the Christian, telling a lie ABOUT anybody is breaking the commandment.

And this disagreement is on an issue nearly as basic as you can get - the Ten Commandments. No wonder there's so much disagreement on other issues, like the place of women in the Church, homosexuality, abortion, and so on.

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
Hi All,

Lots of talk went on about several posts, some of them mine. I will try to get them all in on one reply.

Ixcatzin: By outsiders I meant those who have not agreed to be bound by G-d's commands. As I read scripture, the commandments (10) are universal.
No, the 10 commandments ARE NOT universal, the 7 Laws of Noah are. The Commandments in the Torah (including the 10 you are referring to) are for ISRAEL ONLY. Check it out: the first Commandment says in Exodus 20 says "I am HaShem your G-d Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, You shall have no other gods before Me." If you read the Bible, you will find statements about ISRAEL taken out of Egypt. No other nation was taken out of Egypt by G-d. So, how is this commandment universal?


Spoken to the Children of Israel, written on stone, and protected by Aaron and the Levites for memorial to the world. The penalties for breaking these laws and ordinances were accepted by Israel and also binding on their children. If I am incorrect in these words, please correct me.
No, the Torah was not protected by Aaron and the Levites, but by Israel as a Nation.



Brother Tawodi has already answered about G-D not belonging to any group. According to my study and research, G-D selects and man has nothing to say about it. Many Christians through their behavior have created a rift with our Jewish brothers and sisters that should never have been. I can not fix it, but I will not agree with either side that says one group is held above the other by G-D. Scripture is clear that G-D is not a respecter of persons. Ruth, Rahab and many others are clear indications. Not to mention the specific instructions given through Moses about strangers in the Israel congregation.
Jews do not claim ownership of G-d. That is ridiculous. We claim that the Torah belongs to Israel only. G-d agrees with that, He says that in the the OT.

BobApril: Last one. You mentioned Israel carrying out war against its enemies. Not murder as I see it. Just as I mentioned above for Christians. Survival and establishment of their nation. You would have a better discussion if you had posted genocide, but that word is not listed in the 10 commandments. I can not be 100% on this statement, but it seemed that Israel made peace with those who were not its enemies but were very efficient against any who opposed them.

ReduceTension: I have read many posts from our Jewish brothers or sisters with comments about Mary's conception. Is anything too hard for G-D? I admit, I am perplexed at the statements I have read. The only answer I can come up with is that many look for a rationale to refute Jesus. No need for that, as they can just say they do not believe or follow Jesus.
4T you are getting confused, the argument has nothing to do with G-d's abilities, but rather G-d's character. The questions to ask are: Would the G-d of Israel behave as a heathen god? Would the G-d of Israel, the One that forbids pagan practices (ANY PAGAN PRACTICE) to His Nation, would act in a pagan way by 'overshadowing' a married woman to make her conceive? Is He like the pagan gods, to behave in such a way? These are the questions that need an answer. For these under pagan influence (i.e., Hellenistic) the acceptance of miraculous impregnations was easy to accept. For a nation under the guidance of the G-d of Israel, these ideas were idolatrous at best. It has nothing to do with looking for an excuse or a rationale to refute Jesus.

LJ

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:
All4One - your last post delves into technicalities and interpretations and what you believe. That's all fine, but doesn't fully address my point. You earlier noted that there are certain unchangeable commandments that a Jew or Christian cannot violate and still claim that faith - especially claiming it in defense of their actions. My point is that the unchangeable nature of those rules is subject to wildly differing interpretations, and thus someone can work around pretty much any of 'em and still HONESTLY claim to be a faithful believer. (Honesty defined here as something the individual believes to be true, whether others agree or not.)

At that point we simply get into the "No True Scotsman" argument, where the people who disagree with the criminal try to distance themselves from his interpretations and his actions. The real problem, however, is the Bible/Torah itself, which is confusing enough that even reasonable people can widely vary on their interpretations. I note that Ixcatzin and you still appear to have distinctly different readings of the 9th Commandment:

quote:

Originally posted by Ixcatzin:
LJ: False witness refers to individuals providing evidence in a court law. It does not include all types of lies.

quote:

Originally posted by All4Truth:
Bearing false witness, for a Christian, would also include telling a lie to accomplish a purpose that would cause harm to your neighbor. ...Now about the neighbor, Jesus has given specific understanding of who the Christian's neighbor is. To be clear EVERYBODY. So for the Christian, telling a lie ABOUT anybody is breaking the commandment.

And this disagreement is on an issue nearly as basic as you can get - the Ten Commandments. No wonder there's so much disagreement on other issues, like the place of women in the Church, homosexuality, abortion, and so on.

quote:

Originally posted by ixcatzin:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
Hi All,

Lots of talk went on about several posts, some of them mine. I will try to get them all in on one reply.

Ixcatzin: By outsiders I meant those who have not agreed to be bound by G-d's commands. As I read scripture, the commandments (10) are universal.
No, the 10 commandments ARE NOT universal, the 7 Laws of Noah are. The Commandments in the Torah (including the 10 you are referring to) are for ISRAEL ONLY. Check it out: the first Commandment says in Exodus 20 says "I am HaShem your G-d Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, You shall have no other gods before Me." If you read the Bible, you will find statements about ISRAEL taken out of Egypt. No other nation was taken out of Egypt by G-d. So, how is this commandment universal?
I agree that the commandments were given to Israel as a covenant for them to keep along with the other instructions recorded by Moses. However you seem to believe that these commandments began when they were spoken by G-D after He had brought them from Egypt. Now you know that is not true. In this particular post you have stated that there were 7 laws of Noah, which would have been a covenant if written down before by G-D. G-D has spoken to man many times but these were written as a covenant with His chosen people who should have been the ones teaching the world about G-D. However that did not happen.

Spoken to the Children of Israel, written on stone, and protected by Aaron and the Levites for memorial to the world. The penalties for breaking these laws and ordinances were accepted by Israel and also binding on their children. If I am incorrect in these words, please correct me.
No, the Torah was not protected by Aaron and the Levites, but by Israel as a Nation.
Read what is recorded in Numbers 18:3-5 and let me know what that means to you. I did not say anything about the Torah.

Brother Tawodi has already answered about G-D not belonging to any group. According to my study and research, G-D selects and man has nothing to say about it. Many Christians through their behavior have created a rift with our Jewish brothers and sisters that should never have been. I can not fix it, but I will not agree with either side that says one group is held above the other by G-D. Scripture is clear that G-D is not a respecter of persons. Ruth, Rahab and many others are clear indications. Not to mention the specific instructions given through Moses about strangers in the Israel congregation.
Jews do not claim ownership of G-d. That is ridiculous. We claim that the Torah belongs to Israel only. G-d agrees with that, He says that in the the OT.
I am talking about the 10 commandments written on stone, given as a memorial and Holy because they were written by G-D Himself. Are we talking about the same thing.

BobApril: Last one. You mentioned Israel carrying out war against its enemies. Not murder as I see it. Just as I mentioned above for Christians. Survival and establishment of their nation. You would have a better discussion if you had posted genocide, but that word is not listed in the 10 commandments. I can not be 100% on this statement, but it seemed that Israel made peace with those who were not its enemies but were very efficient against any who opposed them.

ReduceTension: I have read many posts from our Jewish brothers or sisters with comments about Mary's conception. Is anything too hard for G-D? I admit, I am perplexed at the statements I have read. The only answer I can come up with is that many look for a rationale to refute Jesus. No need for that, as they can just say they do not believe or follow Jesus.
4T you are getting confused, the argument has nothing to do with G-d's abilities, but rather G-d's character. The questions to ask are: Would the G-d of Israel behave as a heathen god? Would the G-d of Israel, the One that forbids pagan practices (ANY PAGAN PRACTICE) to His Nation, would act in a pagan way by 'overshadowing' a married woman to make her conceive? Is He like the pagan gods, to behave in such a way? These are the questions that need an answer. For these under pagan influence (i.e., Hellenistic) the acceptance of miraculous impregnations was easy to accept. For a nation under the guidance of the G-d of Israel, these ideas were idolatrous at best. It has nothing to do with looking for an excuse or a rationale to refute Jesus.
I do not believe I am confused. You and others make a claim that for G-D to cause life to begin in the womb of one of His creations as PAGAN. That is your claim and I disagree with your statement.

Here are some texts, please explain (there are many more of like words):

Genesis 4:1
1And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Genesis 4:25
25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Genesis 20:18
For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.

Judges 13:3
3 And the Angel of the LORD appeared to the woman and said to her, “Indeed now, you are barren and have borne no children, but you shall conceive and bear a son.

I have said it before and I will continue to say it now. G-D is in charge and not any of us here. We differ on the meaning of the same texts. That is OK by me. I can read and do not need anyone to read to me.

Isaiah 7:14 has been translated and debated to mean many things. It is a stumbling block between Christian and Jew. It will that way until the day of Judgment. Then one of us will be proven correct.

Peace between us.


LJ

Ixcatl

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
Hello my sister,

quote:

Originally posted by ixcatzin:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:
Hi All,

Lots of talk went on about several posts, some of them mine. I will try to get them all in on one reply.

Ixcatzin: By outsiders I meant those who have not agreed to be bound by G-d's commands. As I read scripture, the commandments (10) are universal.
No, the 10 commandments ARE NOT universal, the 7 Laws of Noah are. The Commandments in the Torah (including the 10 you are referring to) are for ISRAEL ONLY. Check it out: the first Commandment says in Exodus 20 says "I am HaShem your G-d Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, You shall have no other gods before Me." If you read the Bible, you will find statements about ISRAEL taken out of Egypt. No other nation was taken out of Egypt by G-d. So, how is this commandment universal?
I agree that the commandments were given to Israel as a covenant for them to keep along with the other instructions recorded by Moses. However you seem to believe that these commandments began when they were spoken by G-D after He had brought them from Egypt. Now you know that is not true. In this particular post you have stated that there were 7 laws of Noah, which would have been a covenant if written down before by G-D. G-D has spoken to man many times but these were written as a covenant with His chosen people who should have been the ones teaching the world about G-D. However that did not happen.

Spoken to the Children of Israel, written on stone, and protected by Aaron and the Levites for memorial to the world. The penalties for breaking these laws and ordinances were accepted by Israel and also binding on their children. If I am incorrect in these words, please correct me.
No, the Torah was not protected by Aaron and the Levites, but by Israel as a Nation.
Read what is recorded in Numbers 18:3-5 and let me know what that means to you. I did not say anything about the Torah.
Numbers 18:3-5 is talking about the care of the mishkan, not the 10 Commandments. Maybe you misunderstood because did not read Numbers 18:1? Here:"And the LORD said unto Aaron: 'Thou and thy sons and thy fathers' house with thee shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary; and thou and thy sons with thee shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood." Numbers 18:3 says: "And they shall keep thy charge, and the charge of all the Tent; only they shall not come nigh unto the holy furniture and unto the altar, that they die not, neither they, nor ye." Nobody is talking about the 10 Commandments.

Brother Tawodi has already answered about G-D not belonging to any group. According to my study and research, G-D selects and man has nothing to say about it. Many Christians through their behavior have created a rift with our Jewish brothers and sisters that should never have been. I can not fix it, but I will not agree with either side that says one group is held above the other by G-D. Scripture is clear that G-D is not a respecter of persons. Ruth, Rahab and many others are clear indications. Not to mention the specific instructions given through Moses about strangers in the Israel congregation.
Jews do not claim ownership of G-d. That is ridiculous. We claim that the Torah belongs to Israel only. G-d agrees with that, He says that in the the OT.
I am talking about the 10 commandments written on stone, given as a memorial and Holy because they were written by G-D Himself. Are we talking about the same thing.
Was that a question? The 10 Commandments were given (just like the rest of the Torah) to Israel ONLY. If you agree with that, then yes, we are talking about the same thing
BobApril: Last one. You mentioned Israel carrying out war against its enemies. Not murder as I see it. Just as I mentioned above for Christians. Survival and establishment of their nation. You would have a better discussion if you had posted genocide, but that word is not listed in the 10 commandments. I can not be 100% on this statement, but it seemed that Israel made peace with those who were not its enemies but were very efficient against any who opposed them.

ReduceTension: I have read many posts from our Jewish brothers or sisters with comments about Mary's conception. Is anything too hard for G-D? I admit, I am perplexed at the statements I have read. The only answer I can come up with is that many look for a rationale to refute Jesus. No need for that, as they can just say they do not believe or follow Jesus.
4T you are getting confused, the argument has nothing to do with G-d's abilities, but rather G-d's character. The questions to ask are: Would the G-d of Israel behave as a heathen god? Would the G-d of Israel, the One that forbids pagan practices (ANY PAGAN PRACTICE) to His Nation, would act in a pagan way by 'overshadowing' a married woman to make her conceive? Is He like the pagan gods, to behave in such a way? These are the questions that need an answer. For these under pagan influence (i.e., Hellenistic) the acceptance of miraculous impregnations was easy to accept. For a nation under the guidance of the G-d of Israel, these ideas were idolatrous at best. It has nothing to do with looking for an excuse or a rationale to refute Jesus.
I do not believe I am confused. You and others make a claim that for G-D to cause life to begin in the womb of one of His creations as PAGAN. That is your claim and I disagree with your statement.
Still confused. I did not claim that G-d causing life to begin in the womb of a woman was pagan. What I said is that the idea of G-d causing life to begin in the womb of a woman without the presence of a man is pagan. Furthermore, claiming G-d to be the biological father of such child is even more pagan. Big difference.


Here are some texts, please explain (there are many more of like words):

Genesis 4:1
1And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
The words 'knew' Eve his wife mean Adam HAD S E X with his wife. G-d allows the pregnancy to take place using the seed of the husband. G-d did not overshadowed Eve for her to conceive.

Genesis 4:25 25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
Again, the word Adam knew his wife means that he had S E X with Eve. The name Seth means compensation, that is why she said 'G-d has appointed [giving] me another seed [son] instead [to compensate for] of Abel whom Cain slew'. It does not mean, I got pregnant by G-d.

Genesis 20:18 For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.
What is the connection? This verse only indicates that G-d decides when or whom has kids (opens and closes wombs). Not that He does the impregnation (as in the case of Mary, without the participation of a male seed).

Judges 13:3 3 And the Angel of the LORD appeared to the woman and said to her, “Indeed now, you are barren and have borne no children, but you shall conceive and bear a son.
Are you saying that Samson was also conceived like Jesus? So Jesus is not the ONLY begotten Son of G-d, right? He is the second, Samson being the first one according to Judges 13.

I have said it before and I will continue to say it now. G-D is in charge and not any of us here. We differ on the meaning of the same texts. That is OK by me. I can read and do not need anyone to read to me. Isaiah 7:14 has been translated and debated to mean many things. It is a stumbling block between Christian and Jew. It will that way until the day of Judgment. Then one of us will be proven correct.

Peace between us.
[/color]

LJ

Ixcatl

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:
Did anybody specify WHICH ten commandments they were talking about?

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:
Did anybody specify WHICH ten commandments they were talking about?

At some point it was the one about to 'bear false witness'. Appears to be some difference between what the Jews and Christians think a lie is (as represented by the experts on here.)