JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: q_q_ on July 08, 2008, 05:03:10 PM
-
Adam was created on rosh hashana. So that is actually where we start counting the 57xx years. Not from the first day.
It's possible that the 6 or 7 days prior contained eras.
I have read that we have such a tradition that 6 contained eras - dunno about 7th.
And of course the sun had not appeared until day 4. So what was a day during days 1-3? I think this ambiguity was pointed out by the RAMBAN.
The idea of pushing a 24hr 6 or 7 days might be more of a charedi reaction to science.
You can go either way to make the reconciliation.. But the torha does not come out and say one way or the other. 24hr or eras.
There was a kabbalist - rabbi yitzchak of akko - a student of the RAMBAN. Who had the earth as 15 billion years old.
http://www.jewishmag.com/8MAG/WORLDS/worlds1.htm
There is alot of tradition in there being secrets in genesis, and things not necessarily to be taken literally.
The following may be of interest
The Age of the Universe - A Torah True Perspective
by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan <-- brilliant torah scholar
http://www.lulu.com/content/86052
This is purely reconciliation.
Not saying that the Torah states one way or the other.
Torah and science are separate.
Other books of interest may be those of Natan Aviezer - "in the beginning", and 2 of gerald shroeder's books. "Genesis and the big bang", and "the science of G-d"(picture of a hand on the cover).
In that latter book by Natan Aviezer, he says we even have a tradition of there being creatures before Adam that looked similar to man but were not man, and they had tails.
-
it is an interesting topic really... But i think in a past ask JTF, Chaim put it quite well..
"Does it really matter? All I know is that Hashem exists and that Sinai took place and that we have to do what's right."
-
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...
-
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...
This was posted for those with a belief in torah, , who are faced with certain ideas that science has aroused, that it is claimed that these ideas contradict the torah. And there are torah jews that would like to answer these problems.
You are welcome to reject the torah or duck the question, whatever you want. But the work done in this area is very important.
In your liberal mind, you see no problem, so that works, and may lead you the right way, but for the wrong reason. You don't see a problem because you don't grasp the facts of the argument, or even realise that there is an argument.
For logical people, if you believe A and you believe B, and they don't agree, then that's a problem.
I personally, am not bothered whether the earth is 57xx years old, or many billions of years old.
BUT
If the Torah said flat out that the earth was one of the other, then a scientific claim the other way would be a problem, which can be addressed or ducked.
What I have shown is that the Torah does not say one way or the other.
So my position is no different from Chaim's there. The torah can be reconciled with both. Clash solved.. So now let Scientific study produce science and torah study produce torah.
But if you think they don't reconcile, and you believe both, then there is a conflict.
-
I believe that God gave us the means to discover the ways in which he molded his creation through the power of science. I accept evolution, abiogenesis, etc. because I believe God worked through those processes to create.
-
I say, whatever science shows us..whether it be the scientific age of theuniverse, how it came to be, evolution, etc etc etc...we should learn from it from an open mind and see it as Gd's way of showing us how He does His magic..how it got here and if it coincides with the Torah or not is really a moot point. Gd exists and however He created the universe really doesn't matter to me...Let's learn our science and make us better people and help us to survive...
This was posted for those with a belief in torah, , who are faced with certain ideas that science has aroused, that it is claimed that these ideas contradict the torah. And there are torah jews that would like to answer these problems.
You are welcome to reject the torah or duck the question, whatever you want. But the work done in this area is very important.
In your liberal mind, you see no problem, so that works, and may lead you the right way, but for the wrong reason. You don't see a problem because you don't grasp the facts of the argument, or even realise that there is an argument.
For logical people, if you believe A and you believe B, and they don't agree, then that's a problem.
I personally, am not bothered whether the earth is 57xx years old, or many billions of years old.
BUT
If the Torah said flat out that the earth was one of the other, then a scientific claim the other way would be a problem, which can be addressed or ducked.
What I have shown is that the Torah does not say one way or the other.
So my position is no different from Chaim's there. The torah can be reconciled with both. Clash solved.. So now let Scientific study produce science and torah study produce torah.
But if you think they don't reconcile, and you believe both, then there is a conflict.
good point..i'll leave it at that.
-
By about 4 billion years :P
-
By about 4 billion years :P
since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too. And yes, I know you mean well.
-
By about 4 billion years :P
since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too. And yes, I know you mean well.
Come on man I'm just kidding :)
I have nothing against your beliefs.
-
By about 4 billion years :P
since you are not jewish, you are certainly not a torah scholar, and from what I vaguely recall - you are not even bible believing, , and so making jokes that the torah does not reconcile with science, is rude and you are way out of your depth.
It also shows that you didn't read the first post, but that's good. The torah is the inheritance and betrothed of the jewish people, and for a gentile to study it, is making him similar to an adulterer and a thief. So it's good that you don't. But don't then mock too. And yes, I know you mean well.
Come on man I'm just kidding :)
I have nothing against your beliefs.
Joking about them like that is not funny. I am not offended - though it was and is offensive to -joke- that a person's religious beliefs conflict with science. But if you are making a joke it should be funny. So bear that in mind.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
-
I was once watching some religious tv show, where one of the guests said that all those years ago, the earths position towards the sun was different. And therefore, one day, back then, would have been much longer than 24 hours. I don't remember the tv show or who the guest was.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
it might say days but doesn't describe what a day really is...
but so be it...Gd is clever..I take what He gives us...knowledge from science and Torah.
-
Re: "...Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?..."
Scripture also mentions that multitiudes of the blind and crippled, together with those with leprosy, who were a begging class and a permanent fixture at the gates of each and every town.
Shouldn't we therefore have the blind and disabled and lepers all sleeping at the gates to all of our cities and towns today?
And shouldn't we therefore build walls around all of our cities and towns, so that they be "scripturally correct"?
The Scriptures never mentioned any Jews going to the optometrist to be measured for lenses manufactured from Saudi oil (plastic lenses) so they wouldn't be considered legally blind anymore, so shouldn't doing something anti-scriptural be banned and against the law?
And shouldn't the recently discovered medical cures and treatments for leprosy be abolished and banned also?...I don't recall anything in Scripture at all, relating to leprosy being caused by a microbe spread through mucous emissions, spittle, coughing and sneezing...what it says in Torah is that the High Priest must be in charge of determining leprosy and treating it.
How dare any of you question Scripture?
After all...the Word is the Word...right?
If science discovers that lenses end being legally blind, that same science being the one and the same which has cured leprosy, that same science being the one and the same that has determined that the Earth is older than 5,000 years, then shouldn't we cling only to Torah and arrest and kill all of those who continue to spread their poisonous lies of "Science" against us?
Jews are supposed to be blind and have leprosy, just like Torah says.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
But this was specifically about age of the universe. And there is within our tradition, rishonim, etc that the 6 days *can be taken not literally. It is a great difficulty actually to take them literally considering what many rishonim say about those passages. Consider for instance Rashi. According to him all was created on Day 1! If that is the case, it is impossible to take it literally. Obviously there is more to it. And the hints in the text allude to it (in addition to our oral tradition about "secrets" of creation etc), but because of the way the language is in the text, this is why Rashi and others gave us these kind of insights. In some instances to insist upon a "literal" reading is actually insisting upon a simplistic or incorrect reading, in contradiction to language and hints in the text, and that the "literal" reading is really when someone *doesn't take it literally!
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
This is a very Christian view of the Bible, and you are entitled to it, but we Jews have a tradition on the text that goes way beyond the simplistic reading. In certain instances, we maintain that one cannot properly understand the text without these traditions and explanations that we have passed down to us. But this is for Jews, not gentiles. Anyone correct me if I'm wrong on that, but I think that's the basic idea.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
This is a very Christian view of the Bible,
what is, the pshat? ;-)
or putting the words "literal days" into the text?
(those 2 were rhetorical questions. I know what you mean)
anyhow, see my point regarding day 4, (1st post) so even from the plain text, it is hard to maintain that they were literal days.
<snip>
-
Yeah , I have to thank you for posting this though. This is the kind of question I struggle with as a BT. I really want to get some writings of Aryeh Kaplan.
-
Yeah , I have to thank you for posting this though. This is the kind of question I struggle with as a BT. I really want to get some writings of Aryeh Kaplan.
a very good book for jews is
handbook of jewish thought vol 1 and 2. Particularly vol 1. It will blow you away.
his scholarship is awesome.. Tons of references.
his translations are not so good. But for example his 5 books of th torah translation is worth it for its scholarship.
He wrote many books simultaneously.. translated the 5 books of the torah, in 9 months!
The volume of material that he produced is unbelievable.
He was listed as one of america's most promising young physicists, but he chose to follow the rabbinic path.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
But this was specifically about age of the universe. And there is within our tradition, rishonim, etc that the 6 days *can be taken not literally. It is a great difficulty actually to take them literally considering what many rishonim say about those passages. Consider for instance Rashi. According to him all was created on Day 1! If that is the case, it is impossible to take it literally. Obviously there is more to it. And the hints in the text allude to it (in addition to our oral tradition about "secrets" of creation etc), but because of the way the language is in the text, this is why Rashi and others gave us these kind of insights. In some instances to insist upon a "literal" reading is actually insisting upon a simplistic or incorrect reading, in contradiction to language and hints in the text, and that the "literal" reading is really when someone *doesn't take it literally!
Rashi and Ramban who say it was all created on Day 1 explain that the hiyuli (essential substance for creation) was created on Day 1 and then G-d "unfolded" from that essential substance the components neccesary for the particular creations of each day, but they never say that 6 days should not be taken literally.
Saying otherwise really messes with the whole reason we keep Shabbat.
We keep our Sabbath to remind us of how G-d created the world in 6 days (the Torah says that explicitly). If it wasn't really six days then we're not doing a very good job at all of reliving what happened then.
-
try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.
Have you come to discuss, or to troll?
-
Everyone should know that while scripture has many layers of meaning, they can't contradict the simple meaning of the verse unless our sages tell us it's only an analogy.
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
This gets a bit philosophical.. But
Adam, (created in a mature state, for obvious reasons)
Suppose earth was created in a mature state within 6 24hr days.
Earth, (created in a mature state, plants, oxygen, if it wasn't then it wouldn't supply man)
And we accept those. And so people try to compare other things to those. But the mature Adam, and mature Earth(plants, oxygen), have a good reason.
Why fossils though?
Why rings on trees?
Suppose the carbon dating (which is extrapolating, assuming the same pattern of carbon emmissions over billions of years, through big environmental changes e.g. a big flood. So it may well be wrong), but suppose it is correct. And the fossils were made by G-d to appear really old.
Sure, the earth in a mature state.. But in the necessary ways. To supply man.
An answer I heard from X regarding the fossils, is that they are planted to fool us into thinking that this all came about naturally without G-d.
I wouldn't put it past G-d to do that (he did turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt). But I think the fossils example is different to the Adam and Earth example. The Adam and Earth example has obvious reasons, not involving G-d planting false information and playing tricks on us.
Another example X gave, to try to justify this thinking, is the tradition that G-d creates the world continuously, and since that is the case, So, X asks, why have the laws of physics , why should G-d keep creating the world as if it all runs automatically. The answer that X gave, was that it is to fool us into thinking that G-d doesn't run the world, that he isn't required, that everything just happens automatically. I disagree.. again. I think there is a very obvious reason for the laws of physics, which is that without them, it would be difficult to operate in the world. We need a somewhat predictable system we can work in.
We do have a tradition that G-d hides his presence, but that's not lying, planting false evidence.
So lulab, my point to you is that although one might accept that Adam and to an extent, the Earth was created in a mature state. I think there is too significant a difference between that and fossils, to draw a parallel and say well you accept this so you can accept that. You mention trees, I guess the rings on the trees is similar to the fossils example
-
The Bible says G-d created the earth in six literal days and provides a clear geneaological timeline starting from Adam.
Why should I try to force Scripture to fit some g-dless atheist's notion of how old he thinks the universe should be?
I agree with this. If you believe in the Bible you believe G-d created a ready made world from scratch. He didn't make Adam a baby. He made him a grown man who in fact was one day old. So when G-d created man, the rocks and the trees he Created them with the scientific appearance of things looking older than they really are. Believing that is no more far fetched than the fact that something could be created from nothing.
But this was specifically about age of the universe. And there is within our tradition, rishonim, etc that the 6 days *can be taken not literally. It is a great difficulty actually to take them literally considering what many rishonim say about those passages. Consider for instance Rashi. According to him all was created on Day 1! If that is the case, it is impossible to take it literally. Obviously there is more to it. And the hints in the text allude to it (in addition to our oral tradition about "secrets" of creation etc), but because of the way the language is in the text, this is why Rashi and others gave us these kind of insights. In some instances to insist upon a "literal" reading is actually insisting upon a simplistic or incorrect reading, in contradiction to language and hints in the text, and that the "literal" reading is really when someone *doesn't take it literally!
Rashi and Ramban who say it was all created on Day 1 explain that the hiyuli (essential substance for creation) was created on Day 1 and then G-d "unfolded" from that essential substance the components neccesary for the particular creations of each day, but they never say that 6 days should not be taken literally.
I don't think it makes sense to say this and then also say that the day as we understand it and experience it was what G-d was operating within. What we know as a day is the rising and setting of the sun (or from an external perspective, the rotation of the earth and the sun's relation to it). So before the sun was created (or before it was "unfolded" if you want to use that term), what constituted a day? Certainly not what we understand to be a day.
Furthermore, when you use the term "unfolding" (I need to review the Rashi I don't remember well the description), could you explain what this means?
Saying otherwise really messes with the whole reason we keep Shabbat.
We keep our Sabbath to remind us of how G-d created the world in 6 days (the Torah says that explicitly). If it wasn't really six days then we're not doing a very good job at all of reliving what happened then.
Shabbat is not "reliving" creation though. It is a commemoration of creation. And you could make precisely the opposite argument. G-d wanted to give the Jewish people the gift of Shabbat and the way to do that was to name the account of creation within the context that we could understand by using the term day regardless of what it really amounted to from G-d's perspective as opposed to ours. Thus rather than have a once every x billion years Shabbat, the stages of creation called days give us a once a week Shabbat. Yes the stages of G-d's creation were for us like a day. I do such and such one day then go to sleep wake up and accomplish such and such the next day, etc. G-d doesn't have the same kind of limitations though. That's essentially what it amounts to in terms of humans conceptualizing it. It's describing G-d within our own framework, but does He operate within our own human framework?
-
try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.
Have you come to discuss, or to troll?
he came to discuss
-
try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.
Have you come to discuss, or to troll?
he came to discuss
It won't make any difference telling him that. So better to be wise and not bother. And not interrupt intelligent discussion with stupid discussion.
-
All of you are wrong!
It's not the number of DAYS in which Creation took place!
IT'S THE NUMBER OF NIGHTS! 8;)
-
Hey q_q ... Im 100% agreement with you on this... And i think a lot of religious individuals are fine with the idea of an old earth.
-
try reading my first post , it destroys your little arguments in at least 3 places.
Have you come to discuss, or to troll?
he came to discuss
It won't make any difference telling him that. So better to be wise and not bother. And not interrupt intelligent discussion with stupid discussion.
what do you mean intelligent versus stupid? It's an opinion that was made...
-
A discussion of whether I am or am not a troll, while there is intelligent discussion going on.
I am not going to respond further to you anymore on this stupid issue. And the fact that you are of the opinion that I am not a troll, is irrelevant to me.
-
To YESHA, based on a brief discussion we had in PM. I would like to say this here..
The points I gave (which are all in first post here) weren't of the issue of old earth young earth being debated.
rather, the point that the 57xx years claim is FROM the creation of ADAM. All agree on that.
There is no source that has it as from the beginning of the first day.
any debate , would be whether the days preceding Adam, were 24hr or eras.
But I didn't provide much of a debate on that.
I did mention about day 4, which would support that days 1-3 were not regular days. And we can't just assume days are 24hr. And I think (I read this very indirectly, so may be wrong) the RAMBAN mentions a tradition that 6 of the 7 days contained eras).
-
A discussion of whether I am or am not a troll, while there is intelligent discussion going on.
I am not going to respond further to you anymore on this stupid issue. And the fact that you are of the opinion that I am not a troll, is irrelevant to me.
who is this a response to?
-
I don't think Q_Q is a troll as I know he has defended JTF against the puppy mill/biscuit feeder forum attacks and that is praiseworthy. With that aside, I can't really agree with Q_Q in any Torah based discussion as I know that you have expressed strong anti Lubavitch sentiment. To express hatred towards the one jewish group that really and sincerely loves every jew is beyond me and unforgivable. This is why I have to be skeptical of your Torah interpretations. I do not think you are a troll and I think we need to work together for the benefit of the cause but I have to say that I do not agree with you here or on the other issues.
-
I don't think Q_Q is a troll as I know he has defended JTF against the puppy mill/biscuit feeder forum attacks and that is praiseworthy. With that aside, I can't really agree with Q_Q in any Torah based discussion as I know that you have expressed strong anti Lubavitch sentiment. To express hatred towards the one jewish group that really and sincerely loves every jew is beyond me and unforgivable. This is why I have to be skeptical of your Torah interpretations. I do not think you are a troll and I think we need to work together for the benefit of the cause but I have to say that I do not agree with you here or on the other issues.
Since nobody seems to have anything intelligent to say on the subject of the thread.
You are welcome to hijack this thread to make your claim. But QUOTE ME
I am quite lubavitch friendly.
And I know that there was a thread quite recently where Lulab made a post, which Tzvi -rightly- criticised. You criticised Tzvi. And I said Tzvi was Right for criticising that post. The post, and later the thread, revolved around the Moshichist issue within lubavitch, and the more extreme position of those that believe he never died. These ideas should at least be understood as controversial, and not mainstream. They may be brought up in intellectual debate(IMO, despite the dangers to lurking ignoramouses). But they should not be presented -in any form-, to a newcomer who is ignorant and asking for help.
(And that is what Tzvi criticised. And I would and did defend Tzvi criticising that)
And the fact that you don't see that, shows that you have something clouding your judgement. Maybe you think that lubavitch is a holy cow and no element of it can be criticised in any way. Maybe a person reading it wouldn't know what was going on, but I don't think you are naiive, or stupid. Maybe you had such hatred of Tzvi, that you are convinced his post was anti all lubavitch. And when I defended tzvi, you say I am against lubavitch. Whatever the psychology behind your poor judgement is. I have described the situation, see above paragraph, about the post and the moshichist and worse issue. And that was what the Tzvi's post was all about. And it's not anti lubavitch to defend that. Though you thought it was then, and clearly still do.
-
I was about to respond as well, but qq defended himself.
I would stress to you DWI that is is not "hateful of Lubavitch" for someone to not be a Lubavitcher (ie disagree with aspects of Lubavitch outlook/theology and/or follow a different path within Torah Judaism). You seem to confuse the two. I am not a Lubavitch Chabad chassid, but that does not make me "anti-Lubavitch" and it does not make me view the Lubavitcher Rebbe any lesser, who I believe was one of the greatest Torah minds of the generation and a groundbreaking Jewish leader. And chabad does some great work. A person has a right to disagree on points of contention with various chassidic, charedi, MO groups, what have you. This doesn't mean they 'express hatred' of that group. I do not choose chassidishe path but I have no lack of respect for the greatest Torah minds and leaders within the chassidic movement. And I love Chabad. But I certainly disagree strongly with anyone who says the Rebbe was moshiach. I have a right to disagree. And I won't go after somebody over it especially here where we are focused on other things.
A person ESPECIALLY has a right to disagree and point out his contentions on the issue of Chabad messichism, which even WITHIN CHABAD is a major point of contention. If there was a non-messichist Chabad chassid on here (and they do exist despite the claims of some messichists), he would perhaps bring up the same argument as Tzvi!
-
"Those who felt impelled to interpret certain passages in the Torah differently from the time-honoured tradition, did so only in the mistaken belief that the Torah view on the age of the world was at variance with science; otherwise they would not have sought new interpretations in the Torah. There is no need to seek new reinterpretations in the Torah to 'reconcile' them with science" (Lubavitcher Rebbe).
There is a solid body of scientific evidence for a young universe eg the rate of decrease of the earth and sun's magnetic fields, the rate of decrease in the size of the solar disc, the high residual warmth of the moon and mere half-inch of dust on its surface,the decrease in the speed of light, the paucity of helium and micro-meteoric dust in the atmosphere, the rate of mineral deposition into the oceans, the fallacious premises of radiometric dating, the still "unwrapped" state of the arms of the great spiral galaxies, the thickness of Saturn's rings, the continued existence of short-term comets, human population statistics, the dearth of human records and artifacts older than a few thousand years, polystrate fossils, the non-organic theory for the origin of oil, dendochronolgy, pleochroic haloes etc etc
-
the decrease in the speed of light
???
Please explain.
-
I was about to respond as well, but qq defended himself.
I would stress to you DWI that is is not "hateful of Lubavitch" for someone to not be a Lubavitcher (ie disagree with aspects of Lubavitch outlook/theology and/or follow a different path within Torah Judaism). You seem to confuse the two. I am not a Lubavitch Chabad chassid, but that does not make me "anti-Lubavitch" and it does not make me view the Lubavitcher Rebbe any lesser, who I believe was one of the greatest Torah minds of the generation and a groundbreaking Jewish leader. And chabad does some great work. A person has a right to disagree on points of contention with various chassidic, charedi, MO groups, what have you. This doesn't mean they 'express hatred' of that group. I do not choose chassidishe path but I have no lack of respect for the greatest Torah minds and leaders within the chassidic movement. And I love Chabad. But I certainly disagree strongly with anyone who says the Rebbe was moshiach. I have a right to disagree. And I won't go after somebody over it especially here where we are focused on other things.
A person ESPECIALLY has a right to disagree and point out his contentions on the issue of Chabad messichism, which even WITHIN CHABAD is a major point of contention. If there was a non-messichist Chabad chassid on here (and they do exist despite the claims of some messichists), he would perhaps bring up the same argument as Tzvi!
I know the difference between someone who is not a lubavitcher Chassid and an outright lubavitch hater. I am fine with having legit debates on these issues but it was clear to me from some of the previous discussions about this very issue that made me get the feeling that the hatred towards lubavitch which was espoused by certain people was frightening. Besides, the Chasidim who believe that the Lubavitcer rebbe was moshiach have very sound reasons for believing so. Their reasons are much more sound than those who criticise them and say they aren't jewish.
-
Besides, the Chasidim who believe that the Lubavitcer rebbe was moshiach have very sound reasons for believing so.
That's what you think.
But you are incorrect to put words in qq's mouth regardless. And aside from that, I don't think you know what you're talking about in regards to moschiach and who he is or isn't. But keep in mind, that is a topic of dispute WITHIN Chabad. There are also Chabad chassidim who do not believe what you said. They certainly don't hate Lubavitch either.
And I would add that outside of chabad, all mainstream (and fringe) orthodox groups disagree with that opinion as well. You might say they could all be wrong while the messichists are right, but at some point you have to ask yourself why that is that everyone else disagrees and why it was so contentious.... And then check out the actual material in support or in opposition to the issue in question. You will see very quickly and very obviously why it is that no Orthodox Jewish groups agree with Chabad messichistim, other than Chabad messichistim.
-
Besides, the Chasidim who believe that the Lubavitcer rebbe was moshiach have very sound reasons for believing so.
That's what you think.
But you are incorrect to put words in qq's mouth regardless. And aside from that, I don't think you know what you're talking about in regards to moschiach and who he is or isn't. But keep in mind, that is a topic of dispute WITHIN Chabad. There are also Chabad chassidim who do not believe what you said. They certainly don't hate Lubavitch either.
And I would add that outside of chabad, all mainstream (and fringe) orthodox groups disagree with that opinion as well. You might say they could all be wrong while the messichists are right, but at some point you have to ask yourself why that is that everyone else disagrees and why it was so contentious.... And then check out the actual material in support or in opposition to the issue in question. You will see very quickly and very obviously why it is that no Orthodox Jewish groups agree with Chabad messichistim, other than Chabad messichistim.
Of course they have sound reasons for believing he is moshiach but that is not the crust of this debate. You obviously are not very sympathetic towards lubavitch and that is putting it mildly. And I know more about this than you think. I know that Lubavitchers are chasidim in the truest sense of the word.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
I said I knew more about it than you think, not that I have explanations for everything. I myself am not a lubavitcher, I merely am neutral and don't like to see a wonderful group of jews attacked. I am sure a Meshichiast Lubavitcher Chasid could answer your question very easily. I know that the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled much of what Moshiach is supposed to. I think you should ask your question to a Lubavitcher, which I am not.
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
it's ok, this is not important.. he made his point of no substance, I responded.. And anybody can judge for themselves. And if it was of any importance, then I would say to you, that as with the left, those that don't get it never will, and those that get it got it already anyway. So discussion is pointless. And this discussion is of no importance anyway.
if people were to give any credence to DWI's empty post, after my response, then it would imply that their minds are defective, and the thought of defective minds mean nothing to me. So there are really multiple reasons why I couldn't care less
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
it's ok, this is not important.. he made his point of no substance, I responded.. And anybody can judge for themselves. And if it was of any importance, then I would say to you, that as with the left, those that don't get it never will, and those that get it got it already anyway. So discussion is pointless. And this discussion is of no importance anyway.
if people were to give any credence to DWI's empty post, after my response, then it would imply that their minds are defective, and the thought of defective minds mean nothing to me. So there are really multiple reasons why I couldn't care less
I am not a moshichiast, nor am I a lubavitcher. I only said that the way you discuss Chabad seems very hateful to a person viewing the posts. I saw the thread in which you were arguing with Lubab, who is a Lubavitcher Chassid and is much more qualified to answer your questions. He seemed to make things very clear.
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
it's ok, this is not important.. he made his point of no substance, I responded.. And anybody can judge for themselves. And if it was of any importance, then I would say to you, that as with the left, those that don't get it never will, and those that get it got it already anyway. So discussion is pointless. And this discussion is of no importance anyway.
if people were to give any credence to DWI's empty post, after my response, then it would imply that their minds are defective, and the thought of defective minds mean nothing to me. So there are really multiple reasons why I couldn't care less
I am not a moshichiast, nor am I a lubavitcher. I only said that the way you discuss Chabad seems very hateful to a person viewing the posts. I saw the thread in which you were arguing with Lubab, who is a Lubavitcher Chassid and is much more qualified to answer your questions. He seemed to make things very clear.
You are deluded. I didn't say you were a moshichist or a lubavitcher.
You seem unable to quote me
I will help you. You are now referring to a different thread, one where I debated lulab about his idea that every rabbi agrees. I did not criticise chabad/lubavitch at any point. The moshichist issue did not come up in that one.
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
it's ok, this is not important.. he made his point of no substance, I responded.. And anybody can judge for themselves. And if it was of any importance, then I would say to you, that as with the left, those that don't get it never will, and those that get it got it already anyway. So discussion is pointless. And this discussion is of no importance anyway.
if people were to give any credence to DWI's empty post, after my response, then it would imply that their minds are defective, and the thought of defective minds mean nothing to me. So there are really multiple reasons why I couldn't care less
I am not a moshichiast, nor am I a lubavitcher. I only said that the way you discuss Chabad seems very hateful to a person viewing the posts. I saw the thread in which you were arguing with Lubab, who is a Lubavitcher Chassid and is much more qualified to answer your questions. He seemed to make things very clear.
You are deluded. I didn't say you were a moshichist or a lubavitcher.
You seem unable to quote me
I will help you. You are now referring to a different thread, one where I debated lulab about his idea that every rabbi agrees. I did not criticise chabad/lubavitch at any point. The moshichist issue did not come up in that one.
I agree, you did not say that I was a moshichiast or a Lubavitcher. The reason why I mentioned that was to explain to you why I do not know the intricacies about whether the rebbe is Moshiach or not. I never said I was a complete expert in regards to that. All I said was that the Lubavitchers are obviosly not insane and that they have valid reasons for believing in what they do. Their is no reason to attack them over this.
-
Just two seconds ago you said they had valid reasons. Either you know or you don't know. Obviously now you are admitting you don't know. Which begs the question..... Why get on Tzvi and qq so ruthlessly over calling this idea into question (actually they called into question using that stance to answer a beginner and/or presenting it as mainstream when it most certainly isn't).
it's ok, this is not important.. he made his point of no substance, I responded.. And anybody can judge for themselves. And if it was of any importance, then I would say to you, that as with the left, those that don't get it never will, and those that get it got it already anyway. So discussion is pointless. And this discussion is of no importance anyway.
if people were to give any credence to DWI's empty post, after my response, then it would imply that their minds are defective, and the thought of defective minds mean nothing to me. So there are really multiple reasons why I couldn't care less
I am not a moshichiast, nor am I a lubavitcher. I only said that the way you discuss Chabad seems very hateful to a person viewing the posts. I saw the thread in which you were arguing with Lubab, who is a Lubavitcher Chassid and is much more qualified to answer your questions. He seemed to make things very clear.
You are deluded. I didn't say you were a moshichist or a lubavitcher.
You seem unable to quote me
I will help you. You are now referring to a different thread, one where I debated lulab about his idea that every rabbi agrees. I did not criticise chabad/lubavitch at any point. The moshichist issue did not come up in that one.
I agree, you did not say that I was a moshichiast or a Lubavitcher. The reason why I mentioned that was to explain to you why I do not know the intricacies about whether the rebbe is Moshiach or not. I never said I was a complete expert in regards to that. All I said was that the Lubavitchers are obviosly not insane and that they have valid reasons for believing in what they do. Their is no reason to attack them over this.
you can't quote me so just be quiet.
-
Lets not forget that we are discussing fellow jews, and extremely righteous ones at that. We can't go wrong being extra careful with our words towards them.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
No, their are not thousands of candidates. Only the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled them all such as bringing jews closer to judaism. While other rabbeim fulfilled some of the req, none fulfilled as many as the lubavitcher rebbe.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
No, their are not thousands of candidates. Only the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled them all such as bringing jews closer to judaism. While other rabbeim fulfilled some of the req, none fulfilled as many as the lubavitcher rebbe.
The RAMBAM himself brought many jews back to judaism. And he wasn't killed. So you can presume he the messiah too.
Moshe Rabbeinu too.
We have alot of candidates here.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
No, their are not thousands of candidates. Only the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled them all such as bringing jews closer to judaism. While other rabbeim fulfilled some of the req, none fulfilled as many as the lubavitcher rebbe.
The RAMBAM himself brought many jews back to judaism. And he wasn't killed. So you can presume he the messiah too.
Moshe Rabbeinu too.
We have alot of candidates here.
But why are you so strong in your beliefs that he is not the Moshiach? Even according to your theory that their are "many candidates," the Lubavitcher Rebbe is one of them so it is possible he is the moshiach.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
No, their are not thousands of candidates. Only the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled them all such as bringing jews closer to judaism. While other rabbeim fulfilled some of the req, none fulfilled as many as the lubavitcher rebbe.
The RAMBAM himself brought many jews back to judaism. And he wasn't killed. So you can presume he the messiah too.
Moshe Rabbeinu too.
We have alot of candidates here.
But why are you so strong in your beliefs that he is not the Moshiach? Even according to your theory that their are "many candidates," the Lubavitcher Rebbe is one of them so it is possible he is the moshiach.
That is not my theory at all. That is just me demonstrating the ludicrousness of this suggested interpretation
I do not think that the RAMBAM had in his mind that people should presume that he is the messiah.
-
I don't think we will convince you nor will you convince us. Lets just forget this debate for the good of the organization.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
But you're separating them into concepts: Presumed Moshiach and an actual moshiach, who presumed moshiach may or may not be... But once we receive evidence otherwise (such as, the Rebbe's death, not to mention that he was childless, among many other things he did not fulfill in his lifetime), it is no longer honest to still presume him Moshiach!
Also I haven't read this Rambam, but can you show me that the Rambam truly separated into two sets of requirements?
And by this criteria of going solely by chezkat moschiach's criteria (assuming that that is truly a distinction, but I have asked for proof of this), which doesn't include building the beit hamikdash, how can I exclude the Maharal or Rashi? Or any number of other great rabbis who brought the Jews closer to Judaism?
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
But you're separating them into concepts: Presumed Moshiach and an actual moshiach, who presumed moshiach may or may not be... But once we receive evidence otherwise (such as, the Rebbe's death, not to mention that he was childless, among many other things he did not fulfill in his lifetime), it is no longer honest to still presume him Moshiach!
Also I haven't read this Rambam, but can you show me that the Rambam truly separated into two sets of requirements?
And by this criteria of going solely by chezkat moschiach's criteria (assuming that that is truly a distinction, but I have asked for proof of this), which doesn't include building the beit hamikdash, how can I exclude the Maharal or Rashi? Or any number of other great rabbis who brought the Jews closer to Judaism?
see my post. Yes, he splits them.
see my post, you just repeated my post about presuming dozens of other rabbis.
see my post, this is not the basis ..
see my post, rambam does split the requirements.
RAMBAM says that if somebody fights the wars of G-d then we may presume(assume for the moment) that he is moshiach, and if he fulfills the full requirements, then we know he is. But if he is killed, then we know he isn't.
Clearly none of these rabbis faught the wars of G-d.
But even if one pretends that the RAMBAM meant spiritual wars. Then as I said..
Look.. You are just repeating what I said, but in a less skilled way. This is ridiculous. Why do you do that?
-
This is ridiculous. Why do you do that?
a. I was responding to Lubab. not to qq or anyone else.
b. I don't know that what you say is necessarily true. I was asking Lubab to show me from the source if he disagreed. You did not say in your post that Rambam split the requirements either! . You do say it this time, but really I asked Lubab for proof, which you do not show. But your explanation here vis a vis "presumed and actual" makes sense. The intial statement from Lubab I didn't understand.
c. I did repeat your point about the other rabbis who could fit Lubab's criteria. I guess this was a mistake. Try to calm down.
-
well maybe somebody can type out the beginning of the relevant chapter from hilchot melachim for you.
or you can accept that it says about presuming, and knowing for sure.
Lulab gave a source - hilchot melachim. It's not a big book. I would say , probably chapter 10 is where it is.
But to back up what he said any more than a book name, he'd have to quote a whole chapter. And it's not reasonable for you to just expect somebody to type out a whole chapter.
But since rabbi kahane referred to it a few times, it's worth buying. I have one published by moznaim, but for some reason I can't find it.. I looked earlier.
Anyhow, the fact about presuming and knowing for sure, do not change the demonstrated ridiculousness of this interpretation . which is just wrong on so many levels. Firstly, that it's not even the basis of them saying the L rebbe is the messiah anyway. The basis is either mad speculation, or chabad texts. But not the RAMBAM.
They might try to show that it doesn't contradict the RAMBAM.. Which is still ludricrous. But logically, this is no basis for them proving anything from the RAMBAM. So even if they could show, without being ludricous, that it didn't contradict the RAMBAM, then it's still really not irrelevant.
I can wear underpants on my head, that doesn't contradict the RAMBAM. And it doesn't make a nonsense out of the RAMBAM either! Or make any ludricous interpretation. It just doesn't contradict him. So just having something that doesn't contradict, is not relevant.
-
well maybe somebody can type out the beginning of the relevant chapter from hilchot melachim for you.
or you can accept that it says about presuming, and knowing for sure.
Lulab gave a source - hilchot melachim. It's not a big book. I would say , probably chapter 10 is where it is.
But to back up what he said any more than a book name, he'd have to quote a whole chapter. And it's not reasonable for you to just expect somebody to type out a whole chapter.
But since rabbi kahane referred to it a few times, it's worth buying. I have one published by moznaim, but for some reason I can't find it.. I looked earlier.
Anyhow, the fact about presuming and knowing for sure, do not change the demonstrated ridiculousness of this interpretation . which is just wrong on so many levels. Firstly, that it's not even the basis of them saying the L rebbe is the messiah anyway. The basis is either mad speculation, or chabad texts. But not the RAMBAM.
They might try to show that it doesn't contradict the RAMBAM.. Which is still ludricrous. But logically, this is no basis for them proving anything from the RAMBAM. So even if they could show, without being ludricous, that it didn't contradict the RAMBAM, then it's still really not irrelevant.
I can wear underpants on my head, that doesn't contradict the RAMBAM. And it doesn't make a nonsense out of the RAMBAM either! Or make any ludricous interpretation. It just doesn't contradict him. So just having something that doesn't contradict, is not relevant.
Why such SINA?
-
well maybe somebody can type out the beginning of the relevant chapter from hilchot melachim for you.
or you can accept that it says about presuming, and knowing for sure.
<snip>
furthermore. even if they did, it doesn't make the case lulab wants, because of the ludricous implications demonstrated. And because anybody with any sense that doesn't read into the text, knows that fighting the wars of G-d, means fighting wars. Not spiritual wars sending out mitzva mobiles.
And as mentioned, if anybody faught spiritual wars, it was the RAMBAM himself. But it would be absurd to think that he or anybody else presumed himself to be moshiach.
-
Ignore DWI. And then he will not succeed in his goal of stopping all torah discussion. He talks about hatred against others, but the only possible hatred is a growing one towards him.
Don't worry. I am sure that Chaim will not ban discussion that is in a thread like this as DWI wants
Do ignore him when you choose to address whatever you address next
-
Ignore DWI. And then he will not succeed in his goal of stopping all torah discussion. He talks about hatred against others, but the only possible hatred is a growing one towards him.
Don't worry. I am sure that Chaim will not ban discussion that is in a thread like this as DWI wants
Do ignore him when you choose to address whatever you address next
Again, you are demonstrating why you are a SONE YISRAEL as well as a fool. You cover your hatred of lubavitch under a "Torah discussion" guise.
I wish you would speak with respect when its Lubavitch you are talking about.
-
I don't think Q_Q is a troll as I know he has defended JTF against the puppy mill/biscuit feeder forum attacks and that is praiseworthy. With that aside, I can't really agree with Q_Q in any Torah based discussion as I know that you have expressed strong anti Lubavitch sentiment. To express hatred towards the one jewish group that really and sincerely loves every jew is beyond me and unforgivable. This is why I have to be skeptical of your Torah interpretations. I do not think you are a troll and I think we need to work together for the benefit of the cause but I have to say that I do not agree with you here or on the other issues.
Since nobody seems to have anything intelligent to say on the subject of the thread.
You are welcome to hijack this thread to make your claim. But QUOTE ME
I am quite lubavitch friendly.
And I know that there was a thread quite recently where Lulab made a post, which Tzvi -rightly- criticised. You criticised Tzvi. And I said Tzvi was Right for criticising that post. The post, and later the thread, revolved around the Moshichist issue within lubavitch, and the more extreme position of those that believe he never died. These ideas should at least be understood as controversial, and not mainstream. They may be brought up in intellectual debate(IMO, despite the dangers to lurking ignoramouses). But they should not be presented -in any form-, to a newcomer who is ignorant and asking for help.
(And that is what Tzvi criticised. And I would and did defend Tzvi criticising that)
And the fact that you don't see that, shows that you have something clouding your judgement. Maybe you think that lubavitch is a holy cow and no element of it can be criticised in any way. Maybe a person reading it wouldn't know what was going on, but I don't think you are naiive, or stupid. Maybe you had such hatred of Tzvi, that you are convinced his post was anti all lubavitch. And when I defended tzvi, you say I am against lubavitch. Whatever the psychology behind your poor judgement is. I have described the situation, see above paragraph, about the post and the moshichist and worse issue. And that was what the Tzvi's post was all about. And it's not anti lubavitch to defend that. Though you thought it was then, and clearly still do.
nothing intelligent to say?! Who do you think you are?! You are so high and mighty that you have a right to say that when one wants to give an opinion on something they are dumb?!
I agree with you Dr. Dan. Q_Q is an overall belligerent person who always pretents to be having a torah discussion when he is in fact attacking righteous Jews. Why the hell he would dedicate so much time to harassing lubavitch is beyond me. It is not my forum though so I would hope Chaim could step in and set the record straight.
-
I don't think Q_Q is a troll as I know he has defended JTF against the puppy mill/biscuit feeder forum attacks and that is praiseworthy. With that aside, I can't really agree with Q_Q in any Torah based discussion as I know that you have expressed strong anti Lubavitch sentiment. To express hatred towards the one jewish group that really and sincerely loves every jew is beyond me and unforgivable. This is why I have to be skeptical of your Torah interpretations. I do not think you are a troll and I think we need to work together for the benefit of the cause but I have to say that I do not agree with you here or on the other issues.
Since nobody seems to have anything intelligent to say on the subject of the thread.
You are welcome to hijack this thread to make your claim. But QUOTE ME
I am quite lubavitch friendly.
And I know that there was a thread quite recently where Lulab made a post, which Tzvi -rightly- criticised. You criticised Tzvi. And I said Tzvi was Right for criticising that post. The post, and later the thread, revolved around the Moshichist issue within lubavitch, and the more extreme position of those that believe he never died. These ideas should at least be understood as controversial, and not mainstream. They may be brought up in intellectual debate(IMO, despite the dangers to lurking ignoramouses). But they should not be presented -in any form-, to a newcomer who is ignorant and asking for help.
(And that is what Tzvi criticised. And I would and did defend Tzvi criticising that)
And the fact that you don't see that, shows that you have something clouding your judgement. Maybe you think that lubavitch is a holy cow and no element of it can be criticised in any way. Maybe a person reading it wouldn't know what was going on, but I don't think you are naiive, or stupid. Maybe you had such hatred of Tzvi, that you are convinced his post was anti all lubavitch. And when I defended tzvi, you say I am against lubavitch. Whatever the psychology behind your poor judgement is. I have described the situation, see above paragraph, about the post and the moshichist and worse issue. And that was what the Tzvi's post was all about. And it's not anti lubavitch to defend that. Though you thought it was then, and clearly still do.
nothing intelligent to say?! Who do you think you are?! You are so high and mighty that you have a right to say that when one wants to give an opinion on something they are dumb?!
if you look at the position in the thread where I posted that, then search up for anything Torah based, you would be hard pressed to find anything after you made your non torah comment (second post).
Since then there has been some Torah discussion.
We(doesn't include you) have managed to squeeze in some Torah discussion, between the nonsense that DWI posted.
The criticism I wrote in that post, applies to prior posts, particularly yours. It does not necessarily apply to the dozen or so posts that have been made since then. And clearly there has been some Torah discussion since.
DESPITE the non Torah nonsense.
-
i purposely removed that thread because i realized as i read below that these posts are a discussion that does not involve me..but with DWI, qq and kahanebt..please disregard it.
-
correct
-
I don't think Q_Q is a troll as I know he has defended JTF against the puppy mill/biscuit feeder forum attacks and that is praiseworthy. With that aside, I can't really agree with Q_Q in any Torah based discussion as I know that you have expressed strong anti Lubavitch sentiment. To express hatred towards the one jewish group that really and sincerely loves every jew is beyond me and unforgivable. This is why I have to be skeptical of your Torah interpretations. I do not think you are a troll and I think we need to work together for the benefit of the cause but I have to say that I do not agree with you here or on the other issues.
Since nobody seems to have anything intelligent to say on the subject of the thread.
You are welcome to hijack this thread to make your claim. But QUOTE ME
I am quite lubavitch friendly.
And I know that there was a thread quite recently where Lulab made a post, which Tzvi -rightly- criticised. You criticised Tzvi. And I said Tzvi was Right for criticising that post. The post, and later the thread, revolved around the Moshichist issue within lubavitch, and the more extreme position of those that believe he never died. These ideas should at least be understood as controversial, and not mainstream. They may be brought up in intellectual debate(IMO, despite the dangers to lurking ignoramouses). But they should not be presented -in any form-, to a newcomer who is ignorant and asking for help.
(And that is what Tzvi criticised. And I would and did defend Tzvi criticising that)
And the fact that you don't see that, shows that you have something clouding your judgement. Maybe you think that lubavitch is a holy cow and no element of it can be criticised in any way. Maybe a person reading it wouldn't know what was going on, but I don't think you are naiive, or stupid. Maybe you had such hatred of Tzvi, that you are convinced his post was anti all lubavitch. And when I defended tzvi, you say I am against lubavitch. Whatever the psychology behind your poor judgement is. I have described the situation, see above paragraph, about the post and the moshichist and worse issue. And that was what the Tzvi's post was all about. And it's not anti lubavitch to defend that. Though you thought it was then, and clearly still do.
nothing intelligent to say?! Who do you think you are?! You are so high and mighty that you have a right to say that when one wants to give an opinion on something they are dumb?!
if you look at the position in the thread where I posted that, then search up for anything Torah based, you would be hard pressed to find anything after you made your non torah comment (second post).
Since then there has been some Torah discussion.
We(doesn't include you) have managed to squeeze in some Torah discussion, between the nonsense that DWI posted.
The criticism I wrote in that post, applies to prior posts, particularly yours. It does not necessarily apply to the dozen or so posts that have been made since then. And clearly there has been some Torah discussion since.
DESPITE the non Torah nonsense.
I guess your version of Torah is figuring out ways to attack Lubavitch. For such a torah based person, you are filled with tremendous hate.
-
DWI considers the torah discussion of this thread to be outside of bounds, and he thinks it should be banned.
see this thread
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.0;topicseen
KahaneBT is just as irritated by DWI's attitude here as I am.. And others too.
We can safely ignore DWI.
It is obvious that Chaim would not be banning content such as that which is in this thread.
But I think it has reached a stage where DWI needs to be corrected personally, by chaim or moderators, because he is making quite an effort to wreck a torah discussion. And he is good at wrecking forums with endelss posts.
-
DWI considers the torah discussion of this thread to be outside of bounds, and he thinks it should be banned.
see this thread
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.0;topicseen
KahaneBT is just as irritated by DWI's attitude here as I am.. And others too.
We can safely ignore DWI.
It is obvious that Chaim would not be banning content such as that which is in this thread.
But I think it has reached a stage where DWI needs to be corrected personally, by chaim or moderators, because he is making quite an effort to wreck a torah discussion. And he is good at wrecking forums with endelss posts.
Q_Q, I would bet that you don't even know the Aleph Bais. You think every word that comes out of your mouth is Torah when nothing could be further from the truth. You merely spew verbal vomit and take out your anger against the wonderful lubavitch chasidim.
-
you haven't quoted me once. But let this thread be your evidence.
-
you haven't quoted me once. But let this thread be your evidence.
Whatever, all I know is that I have defended Lubavitch all along so I have a clear conscious. You are the one that needs to worry about judgment day.
-
you haven't quoted me once. But let this thread be your evidence.
Whatever, all I know is that I have defended Lubavitch all along so I have a clear conscious. You are the one that needs to worry about judgment day.
Good, so if you really believe that, then shut up then.
-
you haven't quoted me once. But let this thread be your evidence.
Whatever, all I know is that I have defended Lubavitch all along so I have a clear conscious. You are the one that needs to worry about judgment day.
Good, so if you really believe that, then shut up then.
I will shut up when the attacks on Lubavitch stop.
Your posts seem to be inline with what they have over at the hamas forums. Have you considered joining the Al-Kassam forum?
-
So then be serious..
QUOTE me, if you're serious
Start up a new thread, and document the anti lubavitch senitements that you think I have.
-
So then be serious..
QUOTE me, if you're serious
Start up a new thread, and document the anti lubavitch senitements that you think I have.
But when I quoted you, you were unhappy about that as well. You are a waste of time and need to be ignored. I just hope you dont bash Lubavitch so I will be able to comfortably ignore you.
-
QUOTE ME
you haven't done it once.
-
the decrease in the speed of light
???
Please explain.
http://ldolphin.org/constc.shtml
-
The old earth people mention a large number of totally different measurements from different disciplines, that give us an old earth, and thus they rubbish claims of a young earth. [1 - natan aviezer FnF]
Yet you claim to do the same for the young earth. i.e. Providing different measurements from different disciplines to defend a young earth.
You said
Page3 of this thread (note- between that and this post, this wasn't discussed, so nobody missed anything)
"There is a solid body of scientific evidence for a young universe eg the rate of decrease of the earth and sun's magnetic fields, the rate of decrease in the size of the solar disc, the high residual warmth of the moon and mere half-inch of dust on its surface,the decrease in the speed of light, the paucity of helium and micro-meteoric dust in the atmosphere, the rate of mineral deposition into the oceans, the fallacious premises of radiometric dating, the still "unwrapped" state of the arms of the great spiral galaxies, the thickness of Saturn's rings, the continued existence of short-term comets, human population statistics, the dearth of human records and artifacts older than a few thousand years, polystrate fossils, the non-organic theory for the origin of oil, dendochronolgy, pleochroic haloes etc etc "
Perhaps you could create a young earth thread, describing the source for this.. Is it many many complex sources? do you have a really strong background in physics?
Or is your understanding from "popular books"(rather than scientific journals). Popular books are fine, and in that instance, it means that we could all study the sources.
I must point out though, my scientist friend has always said, that he isn't interested in any research unless it has passed the peer review process in a -good- scientific journal. He actually refuses to read "popular books" ! So that would probably be a big difference between the old earth research and the young earth research.
[1]
(I read this is natan aveizer's "Fossils and faith" - he accepts old earth and evolution and rejects the physics aspect of gerald shroeder's "Genesis and the big bang")
-
The basis is either mad speculation, or chabad texts. But not the RAMBAM.
They might try to show that it doesn't contradict the RAMBAM.. Which is still ludricrous. But logically, this is no basis for them proving anything from the RAMBAM. So even if they could show, without being ludricous, that it didn't contradict the RAMBAM, then it's still really not irrelevant.
I see what you're saying.
-
Really? So where's the beis hamikdash?
There's two stages in the revelation of Moshiach according to the Rambam's Mishne Torah: Chezkat Moshiach (presumed messiah) and Vadai Moshiach (definite Messiah). Most lubavitchers maintain that the Rebbe fulfilled the criteria for Chezkas Moshiach which does not demand the building of of the Beis Hamikdosh but still does give the Messianic candidate a legal presumption that he's Moshiach, nonetheless.
I don't have a hilchot melachim near me right now.. I recall many conditions before presuming somebody is the messiah, one of which is fighting the wars of G-d. So you read in "spiritual wars" I suppose.
In which case, there a thousands of other rabbis that we can presume are the moshiach.
And by your definition, since they die naturally (or appear to), and are not killed, that doesn't disqualify them.
So you can have thousands of candidates.
The reality is, that the RAMBAM is not the basis for you saying he is the messiah. It is (fringe perhaps) chabad literature/theology, that is your basis.
No, their are not thousands of candidates. Only the Lubavitcher rebbe fulfilled them all such as bringing jews closer to judaism. While other rabbeim fulfilled some of the req, none fulfilled as many as the lubavitcher rebbe.
The RAMBAM himself brought many jews back to judaism. And he wasn't killed. So you can presume he the messiah too.
Moshe Rabbeinu too.
We have alot of candidates here.
They've been dead way too long to still be candidates. The Rebbe's work is still very felt and active in this generation and that's why his cadidacy remains valid. The Rebbe explained this in regards to why David hamelech lost his candidacy in a sicha. The efforts they started must continue.
We also have a medresh which tells us that in each generation there is someone who is ready to be Moshiach and if that generation merits he'll be revealed as such. It's pretty clear that the messianic candidate must be someone who lived in that generation.
-
well maybe somebody can type out the beginning of the relevant chapter from hilchot melachim for you.
or you can accept that it says about presuming, and knowing for sure.
Lulab gave a source - hilchot melachim. It's not a big book. I would say , probably chapter 10 is where it is.
But to back up what he said any more than a book name, he'd have to quote a whole chapter. And it's not reasonable for you to just expect somebody to type out a whole chapter.
But since rabbi kahane referred to it a few times, it's worth buying. I have one published by moznaim, but for some reason I can't find it.. I looked earlier.
Anyhow, the fact about presuming and knowing for sure, do not change the demonstrated ridiculousness of this interpretation . which is just wrong on so many levels. Firstly, that it's not even the basis of them saying the L rebbe is the messiah anyway. The basis is either mad speculation, or chabad texts. But not the RAMBAM.
They might try to show that it doesn't contradict the RAMBAM.. Which is still ludricrous. But logically, this is no basis for them proving anything from the RAMBAM. So even if they could show, without being ludricous, that it didn't contradict the RAMBAM, then it's still really not irrelevant.
I can wear underpants on my head, that doesn't contradict the RAMBAM. And it doesn't make a nonsense out of the RAMBAM either! Or make any ludricous interpretation. It just doesn't contradict him. So just having something that doesn't contradict, is not relevant.
There were over 100 Paskning Rabbonim (both chabad and non-chabad) who signed on to a docment which stated that the Rebbe actually did fulfill all the criteria for a presumed Moshiach. Those Rabbis know that Rambam a lot better than you do.
You can find this document online: http://www.psakdin.net/en/
This was classified as a Psak Din. A legal ruling. It cannot be overridden by q_q no matter how much he may disagree with it.
And DWI you should quote how q_q just called the teachings of the Rebbe (a gaon olam by all accounts) "fringe". Very disrespectful to a great talmid chacham
-
I am willing to say that
Lubavitchers that believe the Lubavitcher Rebbe is the messiah, are NOT a fringe group
That They are mainstream.
Of course, in the minds of most people, that would make me a -real- enemy of lubavitch.
The non moshichist lubavitchers are trying very hard to say that the moshichists are just a fringe group.
Fact is, since I am not in lubavitch, I cannot say whether the Moshichists are frindge. Or the Anti Moshichists are frindge.
I do know some VERY VERY ANTI chabad people, who say - as you do - that moshichists are mainstream.
Typically it's friends of lubavitch who play down the moshichist issue, and say it is a minority.
-
Now, regarding the statement you linked to, I am glad it is in English
Although I do not have hilchot melachim in front of me.
I am fairly sure that nowhere did it say that moshiach should be a prophet.
Secondly. If the Lubavitcher Rebbe had ruach hakodesh, as you say. Then that does not make him a prophet.
The RAMBAM himself, in "The Guide" puts Prophecy - a Navi - at Level 3.
It occurs in Visions and dreams.
Ruach HaKodesh is still available. And many rabbis are said to have had it. That does not make the said rabbi a Navi.
Even King Solomon was not a Navi , though he wrote with Ruach HaKodesh.
The RAMBAM, in "The Guide" says that Shir HaShirim(Song of Songs by King Solomon) is in Writings and not Prophets, because it was written with ruach hakodesh, not prophecy.
Ruach HaKodesh, and Navi level prophecy, are very different things.
A person with ruach hakodesh, is not a prophet.
So even he had it he is not a prophet.
And being a Prophet, to my recollection, is not a condition of the Presumed Messiah, or the actual messiah.
And if you want to talk about people that "know the RAMBAM better than me", then I can humbly add a thousand rabbis for every one you mention, and each of the thousand believes that the L Rebbe is not moshiach. So this intellectually stifling, anti intellectual argument of yours doesn't work anyway.
And you have to think for yourself and not say "oh, he knows better than me and he says it is this way, so it must be". Because as shown, it doesn't work.
Furthermore, people with good knowledge can be very illogical..
As an example. I heard that the Steipler Gaon said of ovadia yosef, that his sources , his breadth of knowledge, is fantastic, his responsa are interesting for his sources, but his conclusions are totally wrong.
-
Now, regarding the statement you linked to, I am glad it is in English
Although I do not have hilchot melachim in front of me.
I am fairly sure that nowhere did it say that moshiach should be a prophet.
Secondly. If the Lubavitcher Rebbe had ruach hakodesh, as you say. Then that does not make him a prophet.
The RAMBAM himself, in "The Guide" puts Prophecy - a Navi - at Level 3.
It occurs in Visions and dreams.
Ruach HaKodesh is still available. And many rabbis are said to have had it. That does not make the said rabbi a Navi.
Even King Solomon was not a Navi , though he wrote with Ruach HaKodesh.
The RAMBAM, in "The Guide" says that Shir HaShirim(Song of Songs by King Solomon) is in Writings and not Prophets, because it was written with ruach hakodesh, not prophecy.
Ruach HaKodesh, and Navi level prophecy, are very different things.
A person with ruach hakodesh, is not a prophet.
So even he had it he is not a prophet.
And being a Prophet, to my recollection, is not a condition of the Presumed Messiah, or the actual messiah.
And if you want to talk about people that "know the RAMBAM better than me", then I can humbly add a thousand rabbis for every one you mention, and each of the thousand believes that the L Rebbe is not moshiach. So this intellectually stifling, anti intellectual argument of yours doesn't work anyway.
And you have to think for yourself and not say "oh, he knows better than me and he says it is this way, so it must be". Because as shown, it doesn't work.
Furthermore, people with good knowledge can be very illogical..
As an example. I heard that the Steipler Gaon said of ovadia yosef, that his sources , his breadth of knowledge, is fantastic, his responsa are interesting for his sources, but his conclusions are totally wrong.
575
You need to learn the sicha from Parshas Shoftim 5751 where the Rebbe addresses the prophesy issue at length. I am certain you can find it at sichosinenglish.com
You also need to read the ruling of the psak din more carefully. They are not saying it's a precondition to Messianiship. It is clearly not.
They are using that to establish that his words must be heeded and thefore...just read it again and you'll see.
-
It says
"in light of the Rebbe's encouragement of the proclamation "Yechi Adoneinu", it is incumbent on every single Jew to heed the Rebbe's words and believe that he is indeed King Moshiach, "
Now. Suppose they are right , and the Lubavitcher Rebbe believed himself to be moshiach
(I have heard that he encouraged people when they called him moshiach).
I am not really arguing that here.
My point is. That as that thing says. Their argument is not that from the RAMBAM it is clear thet the Lubavitcher Rebbe is moshiach.
They are saying - In light of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's words/teachings, it is clear that he is moshiach. Or the presumed moshiach.
Say that if you want..
I haven't studied both sides enough to say either way. On whether the lubavitcher rebbe believed he was the messiah or not.
But that was never what the discussion was about. You brought up the RAMBAM. And it was purely on that. Whether from the RAMBAM, we can conclude that the Lubavitcher Rebbe is the presumed moshiach, or moshiach.
I know you have a theological belief from shulchan aruch haRav, that every rabbi's statements are one, and do not disagree. But that is your belief, or a chabad specific belief. And to an extent, the belief of some non chabad people too, but most jews believe that rabbis disagreed sometimes.
-
this is really what I said originally, and maintained. Which is that the source of your belief in the L Rebbe's status, is derived from the chabad teaching. And not just from looking at the RAMBAM.
-
Our belief IS based on the Rebbe's teachings, but anyone who knows the Rambam well would come to that conclusion without those teachings.
This psak din is just the tip of the iceburg. The books by Rabbi Shalom Ber Walpo is where you need to go for a line by line breakdown of how the Rebbe meets the Rambam's critera.
That psak din says according to the Rambam's criteria he's met the qualifications for a Navi, which means his words must be listened to.
So it's the Rebbe's words but it's completely within the framework of the Rambam.
The Rambam isn't here today to apply what he said to this situation, that's what the Rabbis are for.
So you can say it's based on the Rebbe's words and that's true, but they wouldn't have such authority if those words didn't carry with them to power of having being said by a prophet.
-
even if he did predict the future with ruach hakodesh, that does not make him a prophet.
As the RAMBAM said. Prophecy is in visions and dreams.
I did read something , probably the sichos that you refer to, where the L Rebbe said something along the lines of, previous generations being a taste of the judges, and his or his father's being a taste of the prophets. (and looking at early chassidic stories e.g. "not just stories" by rabbi Avraham J twersky, the early chassidim did seem judge like).
But the only reason one might think he is a prophet, is because he says so. That is not how one ascertains that one is a prophet. And a Navi-prophecy, is not ruach hakodesh. those 2 things have to be distinguished too.
-
even if he did predict the future with ruach hakodesh, that does not make him a prophet.
As the RAMBAM said. Prophecy is in visions and dreams.
I did read something , probably the sichos that you refer to, where the L Rebbe said something along the lines of, previous generations being a taste of the judges, and his or his father's being a taste of the prophets. (and looking at early chassidic stories e.g. "not just stories" by rabbi Avraham J twersky, the early chassidim did seem judge like).
But the only reason one might think he is a prophet, is because he says so. That is not how one ascertains that one is a prophet. And a Navi-prophecy, is not ruach hakodesh. those 2 things have to be distinguished too.
You must learn what the Rambam says about establishing a prophet. He needs to predict accurately three major events. The Rebbe did much more than that.
Start reading: http://www.moshiach.net/blind/lwm-5763/353.htm#The%20Rebbe's%20Prophecy
-
The problem that started this all is the attitude of "My Rebbe knows it all" this is an unfortunate attitude that only seperates the Jewish nation. The problem is that the people in this sect, have soo much emphasized their lives on the Rebbe and how perfect he is, how he is the "Tzaddik Yesod Olam" that they have crossed the actualy boundaries where anyone from an objective standpoint can see that this is even crossing Orthodox Judaism is becoming more and more like another world religion today.
And Lubab- The signitures of the 100 Rabbis does not say much, forst of all when was this, before or after he died? Also most if not all I would presume were his followers, and the last Lubavitch Rebbe believed in making all of his Talmidim into Rabbi's where we see many people (like yourself) with the title as Rabbi because he encouraged you to have the title, BUT one should not forget that most of the people who belive this and who probably signed were his followers to the point where whatever he said was and is like the word of G-d literally (even where some are even claiming he is G-d incarnate or whatever (G-d forbiddd).
+ If it is by quantity then I bet someone can bring more then 200 Rabbis who would say that this messianism is lunacy and is resembling another world religion that's preachig till today which also started similar to this.
This is something from Israel613.com but makes a lot of sense.
TO OUR GOOD FRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH:
WHAT A GREAT WORK YOU DO ON BEHALF OF ALL JEWS. YOU ARE ALWAYS INVOLVED IN GREAT ACTS OF KINDNESS TOWARDS THE JEWISH PEOPLE, BRINGING THEM CLOSER TO TORAH AND MITZVOT
THERE IS NO ONE ELSE THAT DOES AS MUCH KINDNESS AS YOU DO, FOTUNATE IS YOUR LOT
NEVERTHELESS BE WARNED ABOUT SOME TROUBLING DEVELOPMENTS WHICH YOU SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT
YOU ARE MAKING THE REBBE INTO A FALSE MESSIAH AND WHO KNOWS WHAT ALL THIS WILL LEAD TO?
PLEASE LEARN HOW TO LOOSE, IF THE REBBE IS JUST THE REBBE, IS THAT NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU?
LET HASHEM DECIDE WHO THE MOSHIACH IS, BE PATIENT, BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS YET WHO THE MOSHIACH WILL BE
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
-
The problem that started this all is the attitude of "My Rebbe knows it all" this is an unfortunate attitude that only seperates the Jewish nation. The problem is that the people in this sect, have soo much emphasized their lives on the Rebbe and how perfect he is, how he is the "Tzaddik Yesod Olam" that they have crossed the actualy boundaries where anyone from an objective standpoint can see that this is even crossing Orthodox Judaism is becoming more and more like another world religion today.
And Lubab- The signitures of the 100 Rabbis does not say much, forst of all when was this, before or after he died? Also most if not all I would presume were his followers, and the last Lubavitch Rebbe believed in making all of his Talmidim into Rabbi's where we see many people (like yourself) with the title as Rabbi because he encouraged you to have the title, BUT one should not forget that most of the people who belive this and who probably signed were his followers to the point where whatever he said was and is like the word of G-d literally (even where some are even claiming he is G-d incarnate or whatever (G-d forbiddd).
+ If it is by quantity then I bet someone can bring more then 200 Rabbis who would say that this messianism is lunacy and is resembling another world religion that's preachig till today which also started similar to this.
This is something from Israel613.com but makes a lot of sense.
TO OUR GOOD FRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH:
WHAT A GREAT WORK YOU DO ON BEHALF OF ALL JEWS. YOU ARE ALWAYS INVOLVED IN GREAT ACTS OF KINDNESS TOWARDS THE JEWISH PEOPLE, BRINGING THEM CLOSER TO TORAH AND MITZVOT
THERE IS NO ONE ELSE THAT DOES AS MUCH KINDNESS AS YOU DO, FOTUNATE IS YOUR LOT
NEVERTHELESS BE WARNED ABOUT SOME TROUBLING DEVELOPMENTS WHICH YOU SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT
YOU ARE MAKING THE REBBE INTO A FALSE MESSIAH AND WHO KNOWS WHAT ALL THIS WILL LEAD TO?
PLEASE LEARN HOW TO LOOSE, IF THE REBBE IS JUST THE REBBE, IS THAT NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU?
LET HASHEM DECIDE WHO THE MOSHIACH IS, BE PATIENT, BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS YET WHO THE MOSHIACH WILL BE
1. Tzaddik Yesod Olam comes from Tanach, Judaism, not any other religion.
2. Let Hashem decide is not an accurate statement. The Rabmam gives us criteria for pointing out who is Moshiach so WE can decide.
3. The 100 Rabbanim were NOT all lubavitchers as I stated previously. But we're always in a catch 22. Whenever someone supports this idea they will automatically be branded a Lubavitcher and therefore all their credibility is somehow lost in these people's eyes.
Lubavitchers views on this should be taken very seriously though as they are the group of Jews who study the laws of Moshiach more than any other group. It is a focul point of the yeshiva curriculum which is not so in any other yeshiva.
4.You can bring your 200 Rabbis and I welcome you to, but they must bring proof from Torah sources which most critics of Lubavitch rarely do. Even if you did, we go by the yeshiva which has expertise in the topic as I said above.
5. That psak din was before the Rebbe passed away but that is irrelevant because the issue under discussion is whether he met the criteria for a presumed Moshiach. Whether he still maintains the position today is another matter that I'm happy to discuss.
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
Suppose that he had ruach hakodesh.. You said so yourself.
So he could have predicting things with divine help.
That does not make somebody a Navi.
And by the way.
The idea that a rabbi with ruach hakodesh saying that he is moshiach, makes it so.
That is not in the RAMBAM.
The RAMBAM lists requirements, that's it.
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
Suppose that he had ruach hakodesh.. You said so yourself.
So he could have predicting things with divine help.
That does not make somebody a Navi.
And by the way.
The idea that a rabbi with ruach hakodesh saying that he is moshiach, makes it so.
That is not in the RAMBAM.
The RAMBAM lists requirements, that's it.
FOR THE TENTH TIME. READ WHAT THE RAMBAM SAYS SOMEONE MUST DO TO BECOME A NAVI. THEN COME BACK TO ME AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT THE REBBE DID AND COMPARE. WE DON'T JUST MAKE THIS STUFF UP OURSELVES. YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE BOOKS.
-
And as mentioned.
I don't think that the Lubavitcher Rebbe faught the wars of G-d.
The RAMBAM didn't either, he met the requirements as much as the Lubavitcher Rebbe.
And I don't think anybody would be crazy enough to claim that the RAMBAM believed people should presume that he (The RAMBAM) is/was moshiach, along with a hundred other rabbis and Moses-Moshe Rabbainu.
If you say they were spiritual wars. Then accept thousands of presumed moshiachs.
Predicting the future has NOTHING to do with it.
-
even if he did predict the future with ruach hakodesh, that does not make him a prophet.
As the RAMBAM said. Prophecy is in visions and dreams.
I did read something , probably the sichos that you refer to, where the L Rebbe said something along the lines of, previous generations being a taste of the judges, and his or his father's being a taste of the prophets. (and looking at early chassidic stories e.g. "not just stories" by rabbi Avraham J twersky, the early chassidim did seem judge like).
But the only reason one might think he is a prophet, is because he says so. That is not how one ascertains that one is a prophet. And a Navi-prophecy, is not ruach hakodesh. those 2 things have to be distinguished too.
You need to follow what it says in hilchos yesodei hatorah10:5. The Rambam gives two ways you can establish if someone was a navi.
Then go back and read that link and see what the Rebbe did and if it matches up.
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
Suppose that he had ruach hakodesh.. You said so yourself.
So he could have predicting things with divine help.
That does not make somebody a Navi.
And by the way.
The idea that a rabbi with ruach hakodesh saying that he is moshiach, makes it so.
That is not in the RAMBAM.
The RAMBAM lists requirements, that's it.
FOR THE TENTH TIME. READ WHAT THE RAMBAM SAYS SOMEONE MUST DO TO BECOME A NAVI. THEN COME BACK TO ME AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT THE REBBE DID AND COMPARE. WE DON'T JUST MAKE THIS STUFF UP OURSELVES. YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE BOOKS.
I probably don't have the text at hand. But what exactly are you suggesting I read?
Book and Chapter ?
And do you think that the Lubavitcher Rebbe's predictions are any greater than the prediction of a rabbi 200 years ago, who looked at a midrash about rabbis going on a journey in the water and realising that they were on a giant fish. And he said, this teaches that one day the jewish people are going to rule over another in the land of israel, and were moshiach not to come(or if moshiach doesn't come), they would be thrown into the sea.
Of course We believe moshiach has to come regardless.
But if the lubavitcher was a navi.. Wouldn't that "prophecy" make that rabbi a "navi" in your eyes.
There is no evidence there of visions or dreams.
The RAMBAM says that in the messianic era, prophecy will be restored. You are assuming we are in the messianic era. And that we have prophets.. All these assumptions are off base.
According to the RAMBAM, A Navi when he receives his prophecy falls flat on his face and has visions and/or dreams. (Besides correctly predicting the future). This is in The Guide. BY THE RAMBAM.
-
Learn what Rabbi Moshe Feinstein said about what "the wars of G-d" means. Read Rabbi Wolpos detailed analysis on all the places where that phrase show up throughout Torah literature.
Also learn about the Rebbe's role in the death of Stalin and his strategic advisory of Israeli military intelligence officials in the actual physical wars.
Ask and learn with an open mind. Don't just criticize. At this point your just brining up questions that I have already answered several times.
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
Suppose that he had ruach hakodesh.. You said so yourself.
So he could have predicting things with divine help.
That does not make somebody a Navi.
And by the way.
The idea that a rabbi with ruach hakodesh saying that he is moshiach, makes it so.
That is not in the RAMBAM.
The RAMBAM lists requirements, that's it.
FOR THE TENTH TIME. READ WHAT THE RAMBAM SAYS SOMEONE MUST DO TO BECOME A NAVI. THEN COME BACK TO ME AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT THE REBBE DID AND COMPARE. WE DON'T JUST MAKE THIS STUFF UP OURSELVES. YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE BOOKS.
I probably don't have the text at hand. But what exactly are you suggesting I read?
Book and Chapter ?
And do you think that the Lubavitcher Rebbe's predictions are any greater than the prediction of a rabbi 200 years ago, who looked at a midrash about rabbis going on a journey in the water and realising that they were on a giant fish. And he said, this teaches that one day the jewish people are going to rule over another in the land of israel, and were moshiach not to come(or if moshiach doesn't come), they would be thrown into the sea.
Of course We believe moshiach has to come regardless.
But if the lubavitcher was a navi.. Wouldn't that "prophecy" make that rabbi a "navi" in your eyes.
There is no evidence there of visions or dreams.
The RAMBAM says that in the messianic era, prophecy will be restored. You are assuming we are in the messianic era. And that we have prophets.. All these assumptions are off base.
According to the RAMBAM, A Navi when he receives his prophecy falls flat on his face and has visions and/or dreams. (Besides correctly predicting the future). This is in The Guide. BY THE RAMBAM.
Learn Hichcos yesodei Hatorah 10:5 before forming such a steadfast opinion.
2 ways it can happen. It's there in black and white. He needs to predict major events "paam achar paam" (again and again...three times is sufficient) or an already proven navi needs to testify that the other person is a navi. The Rebbe had both of those.
-
Someone explain who RAMBAB was and if he was bad.
-
And about predicting the future, it does not always make someone a Prophet. For example I can predict that the price of oil is going to be over 200$ a barrel in a year from now, but that does not make me a Prophet (if it comes true). One would have to see the exact words of the L Rebbe, and if what he said was totally unpredictable and yett he was able to make the predictions precisly, and even with that it is not enough, because their are also people who know these types of things, yett are involved and get it from Tummah. OR even some religious people who can read hands, faces, etc. but it is a science and does not necessarily prove one thing or another.
+ About the lubavitchers learning about Moshiach, thus qualifying them more than anyone else on the subject as you said- as I and others have seen- they first believed in the L Rebbe to be Moshiach and THEN looked at different sources in Torah to try to make the picture fitt, it is not different then the xtian missionaries who try to prove that yeshu was the messiah, by bringing Jewish texts and reinterpreting them to fitt their belief.
+ maybe not only to do with the Lubavitch issue, but something even broader- do you know what the RambaN said about a Rabbi or leader who makes people be in Awe/ Fear of him instead of fearing G-d and being in AWE of G-d? He said that that Rabbi will go into the deepest HELL and wont ever get out, if what he was doing is get people to worship him instead of G-d (im not pointing fingers, nor am I in the position to judge anyone, BUT this should at least be a cocern for people and expecially the leaders who are given all this Kavod).
-
And about predicting the future, it does not always make someone a Prophet. For example I can predict that the price of oil is going to be over 200$ a barrel in a year from now, but that does not make me a Prophet (if it comes true). One would have to see the exact words of the L Rebbe, and if what he said was totally unpredictable and yett he was able to make the predictions precisly, and even with that it is not enough, because their are also people who know these types of things, yett are involved and get it from Tummah. OR even some religious people who can read hands, faces, etc. but it is a science and does not necessarily prove one thing or another.
+ About the lubavitchers learning about Moshiach, thus qualifying them more than anyone else on the subject as you said- as I and others have seen- they first believed in the L Rebbe to be Moshiach and THEN looked at different sources in Torah to try to make the picture fitt, it is not different then the xtian missionaries who try to prove that yeshu was the messiah, by bringing Jewish texts and reinterpreting them to fitt their belief.
+ maybe not only to do with the Lubavitch issue, but something even broader- do you know what the RambaN said about a Rabbi or leader who makes people be in Awe/ Fear of him instead of fearing G-d and being in AWE of G-d? He said that that Rabbi will go into the deepest HELL and wont ever get out, if what he was doing is get people to worship him instead of G-d (im not pointing fingers, nor am I in the position to judge anyone, BUT this should at least be a cocern for people and expecially the leaders who are given all this Kavod).
Why do people just make up their own judaism instead of just following what the Ramabam already said.
The events the Rebbe predicted were collosal in nature and COMPLETELY contrary to what the entire wold was saying.
If you have that three times by a great G-d fearing Torah scholar-you've got yourself a navi.
-
Someone explain who RAMBAB was and if he was bad.
He was Maimonides, very good. A Great Torah Scholar, Doctor and Philosopher who codified Jewish law.
-
And about predicting the future, it does not always make someone a Prophet. For example I can predict that the price of oil is going to be over 200$ a barrel in a year from now, but that does not make me a Prophet (if it comes true). One would have to see the exact words of the L Rebbe, and if what he said was totally unpredictable and yett he was able to make the predictions precisly, and even with that it is not enough, because their are also people who know these types of things, yett are involved and get it from Tummah. OR even some religious people who can read hands, faces, etc. but it is a science and does not necessarily prove one thing or another.
+ About the lubavitchers learning about Moshiach, thus qualifying them more than anyone else on the subject as you said- as I and others have seen- they first believed in the L Rebbe to be Moshiach and THEN looked at different sources in Torah to try to make the picture fitt, it is not different then the xtian missionaries who try to prove that yeshu was the messiah, by bringing Jewish texts and reinterpreting them to fitt their belief.
+ maybe not only to do with the Lubavitch issue, but something even broader- do you know what the RambaN said about a Rabbi or leader who makes people be in Awe/ Fear of him instead of fearing G-d and being in AWE of G-d? He said that that Rabbi will go into the deepest HELL and wont ever get out, if what he was doing is get people to worship him instead of G-d (im not pointing fingers, nor am I in the position to judge anyone, BUT this should at least be a cocern for people and expecially the leaders who are given all this Kavod).
Why do people just make up their own judaism instead of just following what the Ramabam already said.
The events the Rebbe predicted were collosal in nature and COMPLETELY contrary to what the entire wold was saying.
If you have that three times by a great G-d fearing Torah scholar-you've got yourself a navi.
Do you concider Rashbi to be a Prophet? Or the Arizal, or Rabbi Nachman Mi Breslev? (just a few exampes of many)
-
You can't take one thing the RAMBAM wrote, and then ignore another.
Guide for the purplexed,by the RAMBAM
Chapter 36
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp123.htm
"
This is a real fact, and the cause is evident; the pre-requisites [of prophecy] have been lost. In the Messianic period--may it soon commence--prophecy will therefore again be in our midst, as has been promised by God.
"
The lubavitcher rebbe knew this.. that's why in that thing you mentioned, and writings i have seen of his. He referred to the era we are in as a taste of the messianic era.
-
You can't take one thing the RAMBAM wrote, and then ignore another.
Guide for the purplexed,by the RAMBAM
Chapter 36
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp123.htm
"
This is a real fact, and the cause is evident; the pre-requisites [of prophecy] have been lost. In the Messianic period--may it soon commence--prophecy will therefore again be in our midst, as has been promised by G-d.
"
The lubavitcher rebbe knew this.. that's why in that thing you mentioned, and writings i have seen of his. He referred to the era we are in as a taste of the messianic era.
Yes we are in the era of Moshiach and prophesy has begin to return. The Rebbe explains about this at length in that sicha from 5751 parshas shoftim.
So therefore, to answer Tzvi, those Rabbis you mention were probably NOT prophets.
-
You've got it backwards. He didn't refer to this era as the generation of Moshiach just so he could be established as a prophet. You know nothing of the Rebbe if you think he would manipulate things for his own personal aggrandizement. In both cases he was telling the truth. If you learn the sicha it's all backed up by the classical sources but you'd prefer to criticize and argue..fine with me! But I can't waste any more time on it.
-
Moreover.
I once asked a wonderful chabad rabbi, a difficult question..
After reading something, perhaps something of sichos, where the L Rebbe says that we are in a taste of the messianic era, and his something along the lines of, father in law was a prophet and previous genreations were judges.. something like that..
I asked him. Why is it that all these prophets just htappened to be the L Rebbe's family.
This rabbi could answer any question I asked him. He is brilliant. He used to be on askmoses about 5 years ago.
He said that the concept of rabbis us being in an era with a taste of prophecy, and so on, predates lubavitch, and even predates chassidut. It existed around the time of the arizal too. And it refers to a period of 2000 years, from 4000-6000.
Now..
If you say that the messianic era or taste of it began then.. And that any rabbi that predicts a major event is a presumed messiah, you still have quite a few.
There were some rabbis that predicted the holocaust, and hitler's birth, but were ignored. THe Chofetz Chaim made a famous prediction. Others are mentioned in rabbi antelman's "to eliminate the opiate".
Do you presume that they were messiah's too?
The fact is that the idea of a taste of the messianic era from 4000-6000, is not in the RAMBAM
Prophecy ended.
And whether somebody is a prophet or not has nothing to do with the requirements to test to see if somebody is moshiach.
-
You can't take one thing the RAMBAM wrote, and then ignore another.
Guide for the purplexed,by the RAMBAM
Chapter 36
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp123.htm
"
This is a real fact, and the cause is evident; the pre-requisites [of prophecy] have been lost. In the Messianic period--may it soon commence--prophecy will therefore again be in our midst, as has been promised by G-d.
"
The lubavitcher rebbe knew this.. that's why in that thing you mentioned, and writings i have seen of his. He referred to the era we are in as a taste of the messianic era.
So therefore, to answer Tzvi, those Rabbis you mention were probably NOT prophets.
Exactly, so why would you assume that the L Rebbe was a prophet, when these Rabbis have made farr more predictions and Torah revelations then all the Chabad Rabbis put together (not even in an insulting way, but Rashbi alone was able to sustain the whole World , yett the L Rebbe is greater then him?) + if he was the higher Tzaddik then according to Kabbalah and Hassidut, doesn't the "lower Tzaddik" have opposition while the "Upper Tzaddik" no one objects to and he has no opposition. Doesn't this thread alone along with the Hundreds of Talmidi Hachamim (basically everyone except Lubavitchers) who oppose him prove that he was not and is not the "upper Tzaddik who'm no one opposes and everyone accepts.
Also doesn't Chazal say that Moshiah will not come from a prominent family, and no one would think he is Moshiach, until one day G-d is going to reveal to him his mission. Unlike the L Rebbe who's family is famous and got the position because he is the physical heir to the Lubavitch Rebbe "throne" (Something which is also a problem to begin with because now we have all of these pressumed Kings, who's followers will only go agains't the Real Moshiah when he comes because they would be saddened that their Rebbe is not Moshiah.
-
I find it interesting, to say the least, how you guys obsess over various Torah sages living long after the Exile began, taking their interpretations and accummulated knowledge as more G-d's Word than even the Torah.
I have a feeling that were Ha'Shem appear to you all and be appalled that something you believe to be true is incorrect, that all of you would denounce G-d right to His Face for daring to disagree with Rambam or any of the other Rabbinic Sages
Me?
I read and study them all, never forgetting that they're mere mortal men and not infallible gods.
-
I find it interesting, to say the least, how you guys obsess over various Torah sages living long after the Exile began, taking their interpretations and accummulated knowledge as more G-d's Word than even the Torah.
I have a feeling that were Ha'Shem appear to you all and be appalled that something you believe to be true is incorrect, that all of you would denounce G-d right to His Face for daring to disagree with Rambam or any of the other Rabbinic Sages
Me?
I read and study them all, never forgetting that they're mere mortal men and not infallible gods.
That's actually quite an immature misunderstanding and false conclusion from the whole discussion
-
He predicted with precision the end of two Arab Israeli wars and the fall of communist Russia when no one else dared say such things.
There were many more predictions but those three are the most publicized.
Communist Russia is back on the rise but under a different totalitarianism...
Secondly, there are other people who have predicted certain things with great precision...but that's a whole other story.
I do not doubt that the Rebbe was a wonderful heavenly human being...may he never be forgotten. May all of his teachings and doings always be remembered and even imitated in the proper manner.
Moshiach? Listen..sit back and wait..continue to do righteous deeds because that's what the Rebbe wants all Jews to do rather than worship him.
-
I find it interesting, to say the least, how you guys obsess over various Torah sages living long after the Exile began, taking their interpretations and accummulated knowledge as more G-d's Word than even the Torah.
I have a feeling that were Ha'Shem appear to you all and be appalled that something you believe to be true is incorrect, that all of you would denounce G-d right to His Face for daring to disagree with Rambam or any of the other Rabbinic Sages
Me?
I read and study them all, never forgetting that they're mere mortal men and not infallible gods.
In short. The RAMBAM wrote a codification of the Talmud. Not much of his own opinion.
That is why it is so accepted.
A discussion over whether something agrees with the RAMBAM, if the argument comes out that it does.
Any logical people understand that that does -not- necessarily mean that the RAMBAM was correct.
We have what we have, and a mature minded person understands in its proper perspective, what conformance to one opinion or another, to one book or another, implies. And the position that that book has. And so on.
If a group claims conformance to a classical rabbi, then it is a relevant discussion to see if that is really the case. It doesn't mean one makes the conclusions that you suggest.
-
Also another thing Lubab (besides the earlier points I made, that you haven't answered)
Doesn't Chazal and Rambam say that prophecy only exists when the majority of the nation is in the land of Israel and the Beit Maikdash is standing. As we know when the L Rebbe gave what you claim to be Prophecies, weren't most Jews in galut, and wasn't/ isn't the Beit Mamikdash still not rebuilt? (unless of-course you will claim like some Lubavitchers that the building in 770 Brooklyn is Beit Moshiach and is like the Beit Hamikdash or whatever ::) ).
Also Rambam and Chazal say that prophecy does exist, BUT it only goes to little kids and crazy people (literally - I think the word is Meshugaim or something like that), and it is said that if someone claims to you that he is a prophet and has prophecy, and if he is not a little kid, then you know what he is.
-
BUT it only goes to little kids and crazy people
Talking about yourself again?
Don't think for a minute that we didn't see what you wrote on Guzzy's forum.
Why you haven't been banned is something I have no understanding of whatsoever.
-
Lubab, even though I am a small person compared to a tzaddik like yourself (I say that because of the respect and patience you have with people who are hateful towards one of the holiest people who ever lived) but at this point I think its wise not even to waste energy typing repsonses to the Lubavitch detractors. I read all the posts by the people who are anti lubavitch and while they are clearly wrong and refutable, its just not worth the effort anymore. Some people believe that a "Rabbi" who lives in luxury with fancy clothes and collects a check from the Israeli govt at the expense of jewish lives is noble. Others think that a man like Eliezer shach who spent most of his time smearing Lubavitch and their rebbe was holy. Lubab, me and you will not be able to convince them nor will they be able to change our minds. The only benfit I see to this thread is that the more posts we make, the more we are boosting jtf in the search engines. I think that the actions of Chabad on the ground is so far superior to any other jewish group that it is laughable. Its a shame that the Lubavitcher rebbe is just treated like a bowling ball by some.
-
BUT it only goes to little kids and crazy people
Talking about yourself again?
Don't think for a minute that we didn't see what you wrote on Guzzy's forum.
Why you haven't been banned is something I have no understanding of whatsoever.
Chaimfan, what did he write on the splinter? I am too lazy to open up my proxy and see for myself as you know I have been banned from the puppy mill long ago.
-
BUT it only goes to little kids and crazy people
Talking about yourself again?
Don't think for a minute that we didn't see what you wrote on Guzzy's forum.
I am bringing words from Chazal, something you have no buisness in, this discussion is a Torah discussion, something you do not believe in, so thus have no say in so stay out.
What did I write on the Kahane forum? I can write wherever I want and I can write anything I want. I do not know what you are referring to, but I personally do not have to answer to you or to anyone.
Now aside from this disturbence, people should get back to the discussion.
-
Here is that wonderfully righteous, pious Jew Tzvi defending Tina Greco:
http://forum.deleted.org/index.php/topic,3187.msg19170.html#msg19170
One thing I do not understand with all of these people who complained that their pics were posted or address was posted and felt their lives were/are in danger, why did they post the pictures online to begin with? And what is the difference if they are on the Kahane forum or the JTF forum or wherever, or if they are on myspace/yourface and wherever grinko or whoever else got the information. Same goes for Chaim's old address. Yes tino is a nazi, etc. but why the big commotion I do not understand if expecialy that address appeared on all the JTF T.V. shows, where anyone in Queens with a telivision could have viewed it?
* sorry correction- it was the P.O. Box which is different, but still the people with the pictures, those who post their pics online should know that they could be seen by anyone including nazis, soo get out of all the nonsense on myspace/yourface.
Chaim, please ban this kapo animal. You saw this post too. I know it.
PS: Why is Tzvi's AIM name extasy17? Does he drop a lot of X? The way he writes and thinks, I would not doubt it.
-
I am bringing words from Chazal, something you have no buisness in, this discussion is a Torah discussion, something you do not believe in, so thus have no say in so stay out.
What did I write on the Kahane forum? I can write wherever I want and I can write anything I want. I do not know what you are referring to, but I personally do not have to answer to you or to anyone.
Now aside from this disturbence, people should get back to the discussion.
Now how would you know what I believe in, pipsqueak?
I, on the other hand, know exactly what you believe in. I think you are a white supremacist. You claim to be a Torah Jew, but yet defend the Nazis Tina Greco and Kelly Scott/Maureen/Taylor. You also talk like a white supremacist, speaking against "Mexicans" and whoever else isn't Aryan enough for your tastes.
Give me one reason to believe you aren't a WN, jerkface.
-
Tzvi, why do you have such strong feelings against the moshichiasts? I am not a lubavitcher nor a mashichiast yet I love lubavitch dearly. They are the only ones that practice what they preach. Why all this SINA?
-
Here is that wonderfully righteous, pious Jew Tzvi defending Tina Greco:
http://forum.deleted.org/index.php/topic,3187.msg19170.html#msg19170
One thing I do not understand with all of these people who complained that their pics were posted or address was posted and felt their lives were/are in danger, why did they post the pictures online to begin with? And what is the difference if they are on the Kahane forum or the JTF forum or wherever, or if they are on myspace/yourface and wherever grinko or whoever else got the information. Same goes for Chaim's old address. Yes tino is a nazi, etc. but why the big commotion I do not understand if expecialy that address appeared on all the JTF T.V. shows, where anyone in Queens with a telivision could have viewed it?
* sorry correction- it was the P.O. Box which is different, but still the people with the pictures, those who post their pics online should know that they could be seen by anyone including nazis, soo get out of all the nonsense on myspace/yourface.
Chaim, please ban this kapo animal. You saw this post too. I know it.
PS: Why is Tzvi's AIM name extasy17? Does he drop a lot of X? The way he writes and thinks, I would not doubt it.
That's not defending grinko, I already told dwi about it when he addressed me, I was telling people not to post their personal info and pics online to places like myspace/facebook because nazi would see all of these Jews online, and this has what to do with the discussion?
-
Tzvi, why are Chabad rabbis the only ones willing to risk their lives and go to all corners of the world to help jews?
-
I am bringing words from Chazal, something you have no buisness in, this discussion is a Torah discussion, something you do not believe in, so thus have no say in so stay out.
What did I write on the Kahane forum? I can write wherever I want and I can write anything I want. I do not know what you are referring to, but I personally do not have to answer to you or to anyone.
Now aside from this disturbence, people should get back to the discussion.
Now how would you know what I believe in
Because you say you are xtian. ::)
-
That's not defending grinko, I already told dwi about it when he addressed me, I was telling people not to post their personal info and pics online to places like myspace/facebook because nazi would see all of these Jews online, and this has what to do with the discussion?
Sure looks like you are defending her to me. None of those pics were posted publicly anywhere on the web, which is something you would know if you actually listened to an Ask JTF. You are a supporter of Guzzy and his little wetback whore Rivera and all of the other wildlife over there, as well as white nationalists like Tina and Kelly.
-
ok enough already...the originaly discussion started by qq was a good one....
and enough of this "I'm a better jew than you" crap also!!
And the "I'm better because i'm a Jew and your not" crap as well!!!
Mods, please help in bringing a decision to these types of people...
-
Tzvi its best not to offend the righteous gentiles who come here to support Israel and the Jewish people. We already discussed that Xtian is offensive to righteous gentiles.
About Chabad, whenever I see videos of Israeli soldiers going into battle, only Chabad rabbis go to the front lines to give the soldiers encouragement, to bless them and to lift their spirits with food and nosh. This speaks volumes about their mesiras nefesh and kindness.
-
I see this discussion has gone into name calling (as usual by cf),
Lubab wants to prove his point (that his Rebbe is Moshiah) so me and qq are not allowed to bring legit questions?
And by the way doing x does not make someone have the right to do anything from then on.
-
Because you say you are xtian. ::)
Got a problem with that? I know your type. You hate Christians (and JTF) more than you hate Muzzies. Why don't you save us all some time and stay on Guzzy's forum? Nobody will pick on your prejudiced arse there.
-
OK, Dan, I am done. I just cannot stand how he puts up this expert Torah Jew act here and over on the splinter forum defends Tina Greco. He should be banned.
-
OK, Dan, I am done. I just cannot stand how he puts up this expert Torah Jew act here and over on the splinter forum defends Tina Greco. He should be banned.
I never defend grinko, you are a lier.
-
I see this discussion has gone into name calling (as usual by cf),
Lubab wants to prove his point (that his Rebbe is Moshiah) so me and qq are not allowed to bring legit questions?
And by the way doing x does not make someone have the right to do anything from then on.
But Tzvi, you are doing the opposite of what Chabad does. They look for the good in every jew. You are looking for what you consider the bad in Lubavitch. I dont think that it is a good track to be on. Lubavitch go out of their way to help fellow jews and we should have the utmost respect for them.
-
I never defend grinko, you are a lier.
I posted your exact quote here on this page. Go scroll back up, or do you not know how to do that?
BTW, I think what you meant to type was "I never defended Greco; you are a liar."
-
I see this discussion has gone into name calling (as usual by cf),
Lubab wants to prove his point (that his Rebbe is Moshiah) so me and qq are not allowed to bring legit questions?
And by the way doing x does not make someone have the right to do anything from then on.
But Tzvi, you are doing the opposite of what Chabad does. They look for the good in every jew. You are looking for what you consider the bad in Lubavitch. I dont think that it is a good track to be on. Lubavitch go out of their way to help fellow jews and we should have the utmost respect for them.
Do you understand what a Torah discussion is? No one here is doing any bashing (besides CF as usual). If Lubab wants to prove a point, why cant anyone bring sources and questions for him, and ask him to prove his point?
And what does someone doing something good give them full legitimacy to claim something else? (for example them spreading Torah, so they are then allowed to freely claim their Rebbe is Moshiah), it is just the missionaries who provide people with $ and help, soo then Jews have to accept their teachinfs just because they are nice people? What does the first part have to do with the latter? It is also like me giving you $, and then having the right to to anything to you since at first did a good thing?
-
I'd like to see you criticize the Satmar for considering their "rebbe" Joel Teitelbaum (YIMACH SCHMO VEZICHRO) the Maschiach just as much as you attack the righteous Chabad/Lubavitch Jews. But I am not holding my breath. ::)
-
I see this discussion has gone into name calling (as usual by cf),
Lubab wants to prove his point (that his Rebbe is Moshiah) so me and qq are not allowed to bring legit questions?
And by the way doing x does not make someone have the right to do anything from then on.
But Tzvi, you are doing the opposite of what Chabad does. They look for the good in every jew. You are looking for what you consider the bad in Lubavitch. I dont think that it is a good track to be on. Lubavitch go out of their way to help fellow jews and we should have the utmost respect for them.
Do you understand what a Torah discussion is? No one here is doing any bashing (besides CF as usual). If Lubab wants to prove a point, why cant anyone bring sources and questions for him, and ask him to prove his point?
And what does someone doing something good give them full legitimacy to claim something else? (for example them spreading Torah, so they are then allowed to freely claim their Rebbe is Moshiah), it is just the missionaries who provide people with $ and help, soo then Jews have to accept their teachinfs just because they are nice people? What does the first part have to do with the latter? It is also like me giving you $, and then having the right to to anything to you since at first did a good thing?
Listen, as I said before, nobody will convince each other. You, QQ and others will not support Chabad while me and others will. Their is no question that the Lubavitcher rebbe was one of the holiest men to ever live. Their is nobody that spread goodness all over the world like he did. The fact that he was such a kind, warm person was just icing on the cake.
-
Listen, as I said before, nobody will convince each other. You, QQ and others will not support Chabad while me and others will. Their is no question that the Lubavitcher rebbe was one of the holiest men to ever live. Their is nobody that spread goodness all over the world like he did. The fact that he was such a kind, warm person was just icing on the cake.
DownwithIslam, he is not going to listen to you. You are spinning your wheels. Tzvi hates anybody who considers the Lubavitch rebbe the messiah, just like he hates everyone who considers Jesus the messiah, like me. The only "maschiach" for him is the Nazi collaborator Teitelbaum (ys"vz).
-
I think that if Tzvi was exposed to Chabad and felt their warmth, he would change his mind(at least I hope).
-
I think that if Tzvi was exposed to Chabad and felt their warmth, he would change his mind(at least I hope).
I was exposed to Chabad, and I have talked to Chabad people (And I dont know if they are messianics or not, but that is not the point). Are they warm welcoming people, yes. But what does that have to do with me or any Jew accepting their Rebbe to be Moshiach. What does warm, welcoming, etc. Have to do with us accepting their teachings if it goes agains't the Torah. Anyway I have already posted
"TO OUR GOOD FRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH:
WHAT A GREAT WORK YOU DO ON BEHALF OF ALL JEWS. YOU ARE ALWAYS INVOLVED IN GREAT ACTS OF KINDNESS TOWARDS THE JEWISH PEOPLE, BRINGING THEM CLOSER TO TORAH AND MITZVOT
THERE IS NO ONE ELSE THAT DOES AS MUCH KINDNESS AS YOU DO, FOTUNATE IS YOUR LOT
NEVERTHELESS BE WARNED ABOUT SOME TROUBLING DEVELOPMENTS WHICH YOU SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT YOU ARE MAKING THE REBBE INTO A FALSE MESSIAH AND WHO KNOWS WHAT ALL THIS WILL LEAD TO? PLEASE LEARN HOW TO LOOSE, IF THE REBBE IS JUST THE REBBE, IS THAT NOT ENOUGH FOR YOU? LET HASHEM DECIDE WHO THE MOSHIACH IS, BE PATIENT, BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS YET WHO THE MOSHIACH WILL BE"
+ What have I written then is not legit in your eyes? Lubab says he knows a lot about Chabad, and I believe him. Why cant I ask legit questions and statements from Chazal to try to get answers? Also if people here (like cf) interpret my or QQ's or anyone else's questions to be attacks then that is their problem. They themselves are the one's who attack others and assume their mentality unto others, I never said YSV, or other disgusting things towards any Rebbe (or Rabbi) unlike someone here. They do not belong in this discussion because they have no clue what they are talking about, nor do they even understand what the discussion is about.
-
What have I written then is not legit in your eyes? Lubab says he knows a lot about Chabad, and I believe him. Why cant I ask legit questions and statements from Chazal to try to get answers? Also if people here (like cf) interpret my or QQ's or anyone else's questions to be attacks then that is their problem. They themselves are the one's who attack others and assume their mentality unto others, I never said YSV, or other disgusting things towards any Rebbe (or Rabbi) unlike someone here. They do not belong in this discussion because they have no clue what they are talking about, nor do they even understand what the discussion is about.
Once again you proved me right. You love tearing apart a tzaddik like the Lubavitcher rebbe, but you have a stroke whenever somebody attacks the kapo son of a schvartze whore who was Joel Teitelbaum (now getting a nice tan in the lake of fire). You just bury yourself deeper each time you type.
-
Tzvi, just admit it. You attack the Chabad nation because it is Zionist, and you defend the Satmar because you agree with Joel's teachings.
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
-
What have I written then is not legit in your eyes? Lubab says he knows a lot about Chabad, and I believe him. Why cant I ask legit questions and statements from Chazal to try to get answers? Also if people here (like cf) interpret my or QQ's or anyone else's questions to be attacks then that is their problem. They themselves are the one's who attack others and assume their mentality unto others, I never said YSV, or other disgusting things towards any Rebbe (or Rabbi) unlike someone here. They do not belong in this discussion because they have no clue what they are talking about, nor do they even understand what the discussion is about.
Once again you proved me right. You love tearing apart a tzaddik like the Lubavitcher rebbe, but you have a stroke whenever somebody attacks the kapo son of a schvartze whore who was Joel Teitelbaum (now getting a nice tan in the lake of fire). You just bury yourself deeper each time you type.
who are you describing like that?
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
-
Tzvi, Lubab has answered the questions over and over again. He has clearly presented his case. At this point we are just opening up opportunities for hatred. It isn't worth it. I myself have no feeling in either direction about whether the rebbe is moshiach or not. I am not a lubavitcher but I love Chabad and I think they are the finest of all the jewish people.
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
Tzvi, if this is at all "legit", then I want to see you asking some critical questions about the prophethood of Joel Teitelbaum. But it sure looks like he is one of your heroes. ::)
-
QQ, Yoel Teitelbaum Yiimach shmo vezichro was a nazi collaborator and is hopefully right up their in hellfire with mohamad. Yoel teitelbaum collaborated with the nazis in the kastner train ordeal and that makes him one of the most evil informers to ever inhabit this earth. We dont even have to get into his views on Israel to see the evil in yoel.
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
Tzvi, if this is at all "legit", then I want to see you asking some critical questions about the prophethood of Joel Teitelbaum. But it sure looks like he is one of your heroes. ::)
I do, but not here because their is no one who is a follower of his here, so who'm am I going to ask my concerns to, to you?
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
you're just an ignorant immature kid, you're not jewish, and you don't know what you're talking about.
-
you're just an ignorant immature kid, you're not jewish, and you don't know what you're talking about.
So, I take that as an admission that you worship that kapo Nazi as your "maschiach"?
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
you're just an ignorant immature kid, you're not jewish, and you don't know what you're talking about.
QQ, CF is a righteous gentile. You are an evil rasha and a follower of Mohamad the rapist. I would trust Chaimfan over a rasha like you anyday.
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
Chaimfan, do you think that Yoel Teitelbaum has expressed a sexual interest in mohamad as they are cellmates up in hellfire?
-
I'll keep mum on this one, DWI. I am sure that a bright Jew like yourself can figure out the answer for yourself. ;) ;D
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
Chaimfan, do you think that Yoel Teitelbaum has expressed a sexual interest in mohamad as they are cellmates up in hellfire?
You are agains't anyone asking questions to a Chabad expert (and representative), but you say things like this and then point the finger on us that we are bashing people ???
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
Tzvi, if this is at all "legit", then I want to see you asking some critical questions about the prophethood of Joel Teitelbaum. But it sure looks like he is one of your heroes. ::)
I do, but not here because their is no one who is a follower of his here, so who'm am I going to ask my concerns to, to you?
LOL, didn't you know? CF is an expert on Satmar Torah. He can explain all your shailos on the Satmar Rebbe's work...
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
Tzvi, if this is at all "legit", then I want to see you asking some critical questions about the prophethood of Joel Teitelbaum. But it sure looks like he is one of your heroes. ::)
I do, but not here because their is no one who is a follower of his here, so who'm am I going to ask my concerns to, to you?
LOL, didn't you know? CF is an expert on Satmar Torah. He can explain all your shailos on the Satmar Rebbe's work...
Thats it ??? I though he was an expert in the whole Torah and Talmud, I even though he was the Moshiach incarnated for a second their with his expertise.
-
Lubab- I would like to get back to the normal discussion (lets forget about the disturbance and move on). You would like to prove your point? Correct? I would like to get answers, so answer me my previous questions and concerns. (their were a few posts, so dont skipp please).
(Once again this is not an "attack", why cant I ask questions, or are the questions not legit?)
Tzvi, if this is at all "legit", then I want to see you asking some critical questions about the prophethood of Joel Teitelbaum. But it sure looks like he is one of your heroes. ::)
I do, but not here because their is no one who is a follower of his here, so who'm am I going to ask my concerns to, to you?
LOL, didn't you know? CF is an expert on Satmar Torah. He can explain all your shailos on the Satmar Rebbe's work...
Yes, and even more amazing is until quite recently in his life, he wouldn't have even heard of the name Satmar.
-
And anyway Lubab himself said
"But questions and comments are welcome and encouraged!"
So I dont see why what I or QQ have said and asked, even goes agains't what lubab has himself said, and why expecially cf and dwi have a problem with that when lubab himself is encouraging us asking questions (p.s. I still would like a response).
-
Yes, and even more amazing is until quite recently in his life, he wouldn't have even heard of the name Satmar.
Believe it or not, jackarse, other people out there know who your g-d Teitelbaum is. Including those hated goy untermensch.
-
The satmar rebbe? Or his son?
Newsflash, that pig was a "rebbe" about as much as his hero Adolf Hitler was.
Chaimfan, do you think that Yoel Teitelbaum has expressed a sexual interest in mohamad as they are cellmates up in hellfire?
You are agains't anyone asking questions to a Chabad expert (and representative), but you say things like this and then point the finger on us that we are bashing people ???
Firstly, attacking an informer like teitelbaum is a mitzva. And he was guilty of mesira. If his involvment in the kastner affair isn't mesira, nothing is.
Their is a difference between that and people here attacking lubavitch and their wonderful movt and rabbanim.
Chaimfan is an extremely righteous gentile. I wont say what certain other people are.
-
And anyway Lubab himself said
"But questions and comments are welcome and encouraged!"
So I dont see why what I or QQ have said and asked, even goes agains't what lubab has himself said, and why expecially cf and dwi have a problem with that when lubab himself is encouraging us asking questions (p.s. I still would like a response).
Lubab already stated that what is being said is hurtful.
-
DownwithIslam and Lubab are two of the most righteous people on this forum, let alone Jews. They know more Torah than you haters ever will. Keep on making fools of yourselves. I guess the dog trainer gets a big kick out of you bashing Jewish tzaddiks like the Lubavitchers.
-
And anyway Lubab himself said
"But questions and comments are welcome and encouraged!"
So I dont see why what I or QQ have said and asked, even goes agains't what lubab has himself said, and why expecially cf and dwi have a problem with that when lubab himself is encouraging us asking questions (p.s. I still would like a response).
Lubab already stated that what is being said is hurtful.
How in the world is it hurtful for someone to ask or comment something from the Rambam? This is insane. We got questions, he said he got answers, and the only ones that are making this into a hateful discussion are people like c.f. Their's nothing wrong to ask legit questions, but if anything is wrong it is saying YSV to a Rabbi (who is not part of this discussion at all anyway).
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
He said it to Tzvi first..
and to me after.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23330.msg249574#msg249574
But the fact that you even defend that he said it to me is a damning condemnation of you
-
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
I don't know what the heck you just said, but it sounds flippin' hilarious! :::D
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
He said it to Tzvi first..
and to me after.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23330.msg249574#msg249574
But the fact that you even defend that he said it to me is a damning condemnation of you
qq, gay esen fun yoel teitelbaums tuchis.
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
Sounds good :::D O0
-
There is of course something wrong with as CF is doing..
Telling jews like Tzvi or myself, that we think we are a master race.
QQ, leave tzvi out of this. We are adressing you now. Dont Lump tzvi into this. I deal with tzvi seperately. Chaimfan did refer to your ideaology as the master race. He was not referring to judaism, as you qq are not jewish. You are basicly a muslim. Chaimfan was not referring to judaism as you QQQQQ, are already chayiv kares.
Sounds good :::D O0
Are you Jewish?
-
Speaking of athiests....
In the past few years, a famous athiest scientist in the UK has decided that G-d exists because of his scientific findings....
He is no longer an athiest!!!
Is that awesome, or what?????
Yes, the torah lines up with science.......!!!!
O0
-
I love Chaim's answer on this subject...
I don't mind Jews or righteous gentiles who believe in the 6 literal day of the creation of the universe, as long as they are respectful to scientists and others who believe in the opposite...that it took billions of years for that to happen. I welcome their point of view as i hope they would be open minded to hear the other.
WHat matters the most is that Hashem created the universe 6 days or a billion years.
-
I love Chaim's answer on this subject...
I don't mind Jews or righteous gentiles who believe in the 6 literal day of the creation of the universe, as long as they are respectful to scientists and others who believe in the opposite...that it took billions of years for that to happen. I welcome their point of view as i hope they would be open minded to hear the other.
WHat matters the most is that Hashem created the universe 6 days or a billion years.
Yes, but that's a given at the level of discussion I started with my original post.
Anybody studying this discussion believes that the Torah is true, is the word of G-d, and so yes, that means HaShem exists. If we didn't believe in the Torah and haShem, then this whole discussion would be pointless , especially at this level.
-
Just one simple question for you, q_q: why did you originally (page 2 of this thread) feel the need to respond to me in such a smart mule way? How hard would it have been for you to say "I disagree that there were six literal days because blah blah blah blah..."? Kahane_Was_Right_BT said "The six-day belief is a very Christian idea etc. etc. etc." and went on to explain why he believed that.
Only you gave a nasty first response. I am interested in seeing your answer as to why.
-
Just one simple question for you, q_q: why did you originally (page 2 of this thread) feel the need to respond to me in such a smart mule way? How hard would it have been for you to say "I disagree that there were six literal days because blah blah blah blah..."? Kahane_Was_Right_BT said "The six-day belief is a very Christian idea etc. etc. etc." and went on to explain why he believed that.
Only you gave a nasty first response. I am interested in seeing your answer as to why.
As I said. What you wrote was already answered in my first post, in many places, it was so blatantly answered. That's why I referred you to it. If you thought that was a smart answer then you should have followed the advice.
Since you couldn't read it, or find your answer.
Here is a quote from it
"You can go either way to make the reconciliation.. But the torha does not come out and say one way or the other. 24hr or eras."
24hr is not an inherently christian idea. It's a natural idea.
But as I described in that first post, you can argue 24hr or eras.
And not just using jewish tradition. But the plain text itself. As I said already in my first post.
-
I love Chaim's answer on this subject...
I don't mind Jews or righteous gentiles who believe in the 6 literal day of the creation of the universe, as long as they are respectful to scientists and others who believe in the opposite...that it took billions of years for that to happen. I welcome their point of view as i hope they would be open minded to hear the other.
WHat matters the most is that Hashem created the universe 6 days or a billion years.
Yes, but that's a given at the level of discussion I started with my original post.
Anybody studying this discussion believes that the Torah is true, is the word of G-d, and so yes, that means HaShem exists. If we didn't believe in the Torah and haShem, then this whole discussion would be pointless , especially at this level.
no of course..and it is an interesting topic..I like reading Lubab's and your discussion on this matter...
-
Just one simple question for you, q_q: why did you originally (page 2 of this thread) feel the need to respond to me in such a smart mule way? How hard would it have been for you to say "I disagree that there were six literal days because blah blah blah blah..."? Kahane_Was_Right_BT said "The six-day belief is a very Christian idea etc. etc. etc." and went on to explain why he believed that.
Only you gave a nasty first response. I am interested in seeing your answer as to why.
CF, their is no need trying to reason with certain people anymore. We know the truth and we know who the the arrogant gorillas are. I think we should just forget it for the good of the movt. Our opponent here couldn't give a damn about the movt so we have to be mature about it and forget it.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
what I have said is that the torah can support either 24hr or eras.
I know you know alot less than that.
But constantly making statements boasting about your ignorance, is an effort to appear humble, is actually arrogant. A humble person doesn't boast continuously about how humble he is. It's a joke to boast about how humble you are.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
what I have said is that the torah can support either 24hr or eras.
I know you know alot less than that.
But constantly making statements boasting about your ignorance, is an effort to appear humble, is actually arrogant. A humble person doesn't boast continuously about how humble he is. It's a joke to boast about how humble you are.
Actually it isn't. Did you ever learn the gemarah in Sota where one of Chazal say..."people say there is no humility but that's not true...there is me".
Humility is knowing what you are.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
what I have said is that the torah can support either 24hr or eras.
I know you know alot less than that.
But constantly making statements boasting about your ignorance, is an effort to appear humble, is actually arrogant. A humble person doesn't boast continuously about how humble he is. It's a joke to boast about how humble you are.
Actually it isn't. Did you ever learn the gemarah in Sota where one of Chazal say..."people say there is no humility but that's not true...there is me".
Humility is knowing what you are.
Lubab, another gem of wisdom from you. Your humility and patience with the haters is something I could never replicate. Kol hakavod to you.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
what I have said is that the torah can support either 24hr or eras.
I know you know alot less than that.
But constantly making statements boasting about your ignorance, is an effort to appear humble, is actually arrogant. A humble person doesn't boast continuously about how humble he is. It's a joke to boast about how humble you are.
Actually it isn't. Did you ever learn the gemarah in Sota where one of Chazal say..."people say there is no humility but that's not true...there is me".
Humility is knowing what you are.
That case is different because that was someone who REALLY was humble, and they were talking about different traits that were gone from the world when one of the Hachamim passed away, when they mentioned humility, one of the Rabbis said no its not gone from the world because he is humble, he wasn't lying, nor boosting how humble he is, he was just saying that that trait is not gone from the world and he has it (While they were going through the list of good traits).
On the other hand are you also familiar with the statements of Rebbe Nachman Mu Breslev who talks about Humility that is the ultimate pridefullness. For example a person who boosts his humility (so-called), etc.
-
Re: "We know the truth..."
I'm glad you're so knowledgeable.
All I know, is that the more I learn, understand, and know, the more I realize that I don't really know anything at all.
what I have said is that the torah can support either 24hr or eras.
I know you know alot less than that.
But constantly making statements boasting about your ignorance, is an effort to appear humble, is actually arrogant. A humble person doesn't boast continuously about how humble he is. It's a joke to boast about how humble you are.
Actually it isn't. Did you ever learn the gemarah in Sota where one of Chazal say..."people say there is no humility but that's not true...there is me".
Humility is knowing what you are.
That case is different because that was someone who REALLY was humble, and they were talking about different traits that were gone from the world when one of the Hachamim passed away, when they mentioned humility, one of the Rabbis said no its not gone from the world because he is humble, he wasn't lying, nor boosting how humble he is, he was just saying that that trait is not gone from the world and he has it (While they were going through the list of good traits).
On the other hand are you also familiar with the statements of Rebbe Nachman Mu Breslev who talks about Humility that is the ultimate pridefullness. For example a person who boosts his humility (so-called), etc.
MassuDgoodname was not trying to use humility as a source of pride. That was merely a concoction QQ's hateful mind. He himself is an ego maniac so he thinks everyone else is too.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
Well you hate Lubavitch and the Tanya but you like the koran and hadith. I guess only a verse from the koran is intellectual to you.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
Well you hate Lubavitch and the Tanya but you like the koran and hadith. I guess only a verse from the koran is intellectual to you.
I guess you can quote quran and hadith without difficulty, maybe. Maybe not.
(it's not hard, they are online)
But you certainly can't quote me to defend your claim.
You had a whole thread of opportunities I offered you to quote me,
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.15
remember that thread?
The one where I mentioned how your non-jewish other half, CF(ChaimFan) claimed that myself and tzvi consider ourselves the master race. He couldn't quote us either. You defended him of course.
There's actually a quote button you can click, but that doesn't seem to help you either.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
Well you hate Lubavitch and the Tanya but you like the koran and hadith. I guess only a verse from the koran is intellectual to you.
I dont remember him ever saying anything agains't the Tanya (but I dont know his beliefs on that). I personally do not have an opinion either way (but for the record my Rav (and no it is not Rav Mizrachi) called it a deep Kabbalistic book. Nor has he (qq) said he likes the koran and hadith, and you know you are making this up (at least I hope you dont believe in what you write most of the time). No one spoke agains't the Tanya, in the past if I remember correctly Judea has said that the Tanya is wrong in a certain issue to do with Tzimtzut and that the opinion of the Vilna Gaon is correct, and also (if what Judea says is true, and I dont have reason to believe he is lying) Chaim also said something in the past agains't the Tanya (which is basially all of Chabad Lubavitch for generations) (so you should carry your jihad to him), while here their were only questions for Lubab. And if he was really offended he should state soo and explain what offends him soo much. And anyway I also think that if he has the correct answers he should write them, because by not answering our questions (after encouraging questions and comments) he is showing that he lost the argument, case closed.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
Well you hate Lubavitch and the Tanya but you like the koran and hadith. I guess only a verse from the koran is intellectual to you.
I dont remember him ever saying anything agains't the Tanya (but I dont know his beliefs on that). I personally do not have an opinion either way (but for the record my Rav (and no it is not Rav Mizrachi) called it a deep Kabbalistic book. Nor has he (qq) said he likes the koran and hadith, and you know you are making this up (at least I hope you dont believe in what you write most of the time). No one spoke agains't the Tanya, in the past if I remember correctly Judea has said that the Tanya is wrong in a certain issue to do with Tzimtzut and that the opinion of the Vilna Gaon is correct, and also (if what Judea says is true, and I dont have reason to believe he is lying) Chaim also said something in the past agains't the Tanya (which is basially all of Chabad Lubavitch for generations) (so you should carry your jihad to him), while here their were only questions for Lubab. And if he was really offended he should state soo and explain what offends him soo much. And anyway I also think that if he has the correct answers he should write them, because by not answering our questions (after encouraging questions and comments) he is showing that he lost the argument, case closed.
Tzvi, you are over exaggerating Chaims criticism of Lubavitch. He has criticized them extremely lightly as compared to his praises of them.
And you are making it seem that the only thing that Lubavitch goes by is the Tanya. That is false, in fact the last Lubavitch rebbe wrote many seforim which are held in high esteem. In regard to Lubab, I don't think anything he could say would convince you just like you wont convince us. Notice that I no longer address QQ directly as I consider him to be a anti semitic shaygitz.
-
i'm waiting for some intellectual content, though not from you of course.
Well you hate Lubavitch and the Tanya but you like the koran and hadith. I guess only a verse from the koran is intellectual to you.
I dont remember him ever saying anything agains't the Tanya (but I dont know his beliefs on that). I personally do not have an opinion either way (but for the record my Rav (and no it is not Rav Mizrachi) called it a deep Kabbalistic book. Nor has he (qq) said he likes the koran and hadith, and you know you are making this up (at least I hope you dont believe in what you write most of the time). No one spoke agains't the Tanya, in the past if I remember correctly Judea has said that the Tanya is wrong in a certain issue to do with Tzimtzut and that the opinion of the Vilna Gaon is correct, and also (if what Judea says is true, and I dont have reason to believe he is lying) Chaim also said something in the past agains't the Tanya (which is basially all of Chabad Lubavitch for generations) (so you should carry your jihad to him), while here their were only questions for Lubab. And if he was really offended he should state soo and explain what offends him soo much. And anyway I also think that if he has the correct answers he should write them, because by not answering our questions (after encouraging questions and comments) he is showing that he lost the argument, case closed.
Tzvi, you are over exaggerating Chaims criticism of Lubavitch. He has criticized them extremely lightly as compared to his praises of them.
And you are making it seem that the only thing that Lubavitch goes by is the Tanya. That is false, in fact the last Lubavitch rebbe wrote many seforim which are held in high esteem. In regard to Lubab, I don't think anything he could say would convince you just like you wont convince us. Notice that I no longer address QQ directly as I consider him to be a anti semitic shaygitz.
I actualy think the exact opposite. I dont neccessarily have questions on the Tanya and its teachings (Which I believe forms the basis of the whole movement), but I do (as about every other non-Chabad Orthodox group) on what has developed recently in the movement expecially in regards to messianism and the messianists.
Once again- Them or anyone doing something right does not give freedom to do something wrong. I cant say I keep Shabb-t so I can eat non-Kosher food. Nor can an Israeli who served in the army say that he doesn't have to keep Shabb-t and the laws just because he served in the army. One has nothing to do with the other.
"In regard to Lubab, I don't think anything he could say would convince you just like you wont convince us"
Not true, I have changed opinions before, and even if I wont change in this issue, shouldn't he provide the answers if he welcomed questions? If he wants to say he cant answer them, then fine, but no one should welcome questions on a subject and then just ignor them. And on top of that, someone who is an outsider should not comment on how another person feels or doesn't feel, if he is hurt, let him address whoever has hurt him, and explain what exactly is bothering him. Other then that, I am waiting either to get a response to the previous points and questions or I take this as a defeat in the argument by Lubab.
-
Tzvi, he didn't seem happy here.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.msg249284#msg249284
-
Tzvi, he didn't seem happy here.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.msg249284#msg249284
And he welcomed comments and questions in the very same thread, so I dont see why you have to jump in and disrupt the discussion. For the last time (Bli Neder) If he wants to answer them, fine, if not then okay.
-
Tzvi, he didn't seem happy here.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.msg249284#msg249284
And he welcomed comments and questions in the very same thread, so I dont see why you have to jump in and disrupt the discussion. For the last time (Bli Neder) If he wants to answer them, fine, if not then okay.
Tzvi, this is what suggest to you. Start a new thread with clearly numbered questions you have about Chabad and give Lubab a clear lace for him to respond to yuo and for others to be able to view it from the sidelines. If he answers your questions satisfactorily, then we will all be able to see for ourselves. I have looked through lubabs posts and it seems he has been answering lots of question. Start a new thread with all the questions that you still have that haven't been answere.
-
I don't have a list of questions to ask him.
Why do you think I am somehow obligated to think of a list of questions to ask him?
If you think that I have attacked lubavitch already, and you do, then quote me. And "we can discuss it", or rather, it can be discussed. I asked you to do so enough times in this thread. And you admitted that you would not.
http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=23352.msg249284#msg249284
I've even told you enough times about the number of times I have told you to quote me.
You are for some reason convinced I am a muslim. So clearly there is no way you are of the intellectual calibre or mental stability to even post sensibly in the general section. Let alone comment on a subject. You certainly cannot debate.
You lack even the ability to repeat what somebody has said, or quote them out of context. Or you know that if you do then you will get caught. So you just make the same claims and get caught anyway.
You try use the same technique as Goerbels, that if you repeat a lie often enough then people will believe it. But you are not as clever or successful.
I don't know if you're one of the people here that likes to mock black people - and they may be right sometimes - but I can tell you that almost every black person I have ever spoken to looks like socrates compared to you