stephan huller

Apparently it isn't just the Karaites and the Samaritans interpret these same scriptures as metaphors which emphasize the importance of remembering and cherishing Torah. The Falashas (another pre-mishnaic community) do not see the need to wear phylacteries. Only the Rabbanites wear tefillin. Another example is that the rebels of Bar Kochba did not wear tefillim either. It is yet another example of rabbinic innovation.

Duvduv

It is impossible to know what the Beta Israel (Falasha is derogatory in their view) believed or not. Much of their writings were destroyed in their conflicts with the Christians. No one even really knows where they originated from. They have no indication of a group of professional scribes to write and produce tefillin or mezuzas, or for that matter Hebrew Torahs on scrolls. Are you going to argue that the they have an original religion of Judaism because they must have used Ge'ez since they had no remnant of using Hebrew?
You still cannot prove that tefillin are an "innovation," whether such an innovation was ever questioned in any rabbinical literature by rabbis who otherwise debate so many things, or whether there may have even been a group of erstwhile rabbinical Jews who rejected this element.

Duvduv

That's really funny. I make a practical point and you insult me personally. That's called argumentum ad hominem.

stephan huller

No it's not. They don't use phylacteries. This follows a pattern where the Rabbanites are demonstrated to be inventing endless novelties which people like you take as something other than what they are ... man-made innovations that have nothing to do with the Pentateuch. The question of 'what is Jewish?' really has two answers or perhaps better - requires two questions be asked.

1. what was Judaism? Because the true religion of Israel is lost, dead and never to be resurrected.

and

2. what is Judaism? And the answer is an innovation developed in the second to fifth centuries that has very little to do with the original orthodoxy.

People that continue to practice what they think is the Jewish religion are just as deluded as those Christian who pretend that they are living the original life proscribed by Jesus. In either case between us and the right answer is a lot of innovation taken to be 'holy truths' but is little more than a religious novelty dated to no earlier than the third century CE.

The only thing that modern Judaism did for the world (aside from maintaining the state of Israel - a powerful argument can be made that secular Jews were the driving force behind 1948) was limit the influence of Christianity over secular culture. This in the name of 'offending' their traditions which ironically were established long after Christianity was formulated in its present form and arguably Judaism itself being reconstituted to resist the influence of said religion. In other words, Judaism in its present form is a reaction to the influence of Christianity or if you will Judaism as we know it began life as a protest religion against the influence of Christianity. No wonder so many prominent atheists are Jewish. They are only continuing the original mandate of the religion they abandoned.

Judaism has been dead so long that people no longer even know what they should be looking for or even that there is a corpse.

Duvduv

The fact that they do not know use tefillin is not evidence of what they did or did not use 1000 ago. For all you know they had scribes 500 years ago but lost them over time because of the persecutions they endured.
They do not have mezuzas and they do not have Torah scrolls, so does that mean they never did?

Their holy language is Ge'ez so does that mean that original Judaism was transmitted in Ge'ez? I guess you would say that it is possible since the only living remnant of ancient Judaism is what is known as rabbinic Judaism. So perhaps the Saduccees or the predecessors had a Torah scroll in Ge'ez, although according to the Samaritan tradition would argue otherwise going back to their arch enemy Ezra the Scribe.

I see the rest of your agenda in your polemics here but do not share them at all.

stephan huller

Sure. I am the one with an agenda. Only Jews who use the Mishnah and Gemara have these stupid pieces of paper hanging from their head. But it has nothing to do with this third century innovation. No. To argue with you is to have an agenda because God wanted men to overthrow his original utterances. It's all part of the 'cosmic plan.' As I said earlier this even stupider than the Christian getting around the Pentateuch because the Rabbanites do it with an air of superiority and arrogance. It's all nonsense. I don't take sides.

Duvduv

I have difficulty interacting with someone who has a heavy grudge about the rabbinic Jewish system as part of his approach to examining the events of history. I won't even do that vis a vis a believing Christian.
I don't consider religion and religious history nonsense, whether my own, whether Shia Islamic, Roman Catholic or Calvinist or any others. If I did I wouldn't be here, especially if the purpose here is to analyze things seriously instead of using the forum as some kind of Piccadilly Circus.

stephan huller

I don't have a grudge against any religion. If orthodox Christians tell me that their system of belief is dated only to the third century, we get along just fine. The same thing applies to Samaritans and Jews. For some reason the early third century marks an ecumenical 'restart' to the three monotheistic traditions. I don't know why. I can't figure out how it was encouraged, or who was behind it. It just was.

Duvduv

Then I suggest you reread your postings.

stephan huller

What? It is unproductive to deal with a partisan who thinks he's acting as an objective observer. The rabbinic tradition is not 'Judaism.' It was the triumphant third century Jewish effort at ecumenicism. But it would naive to think that traditions and people didn't get steamrolled along the way. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...der-rebellious The example of Meir's uncomfortable relation with his master and the emerging tradition is the most obvious example of the choice that members of older traditions had to make in order to join the new compromise. Indeed why did he have to change his name (his old name was 'Savior'!)? Why did his wife have a 'white' name (= Valeria)? Why in the middle of his life did he flee to Babylonia? What is the famous "Bruriah incident" (מעשה דברוריא)? Meir is a most interesting figure. He is key to making sense of the age. But what we know amounts to the dirt under his fingernails. I am fascinated by Jewish history and what I know prevents me from being a partisan. I am usually accused of being 'too interested' too Jewish for the forum. This is a nice change.