Thomas II

The word used by Isaiah in this passage is ALMAH,which means "maiden".
The actual word for "virgin" is BETHULAH, which Isaiah uses in 23:12 and in 37:22 and 47:1 and 62:5, so he is familiar with the terminology.
But the issue is the name IMMANUEL, which Jesus was not named.

sharon45

Right, because the boy himself is not that important, he represents a passage of time, not the Messiah.

Steven Avery

Hi Noah.
I am well aware that it is the favorite tactic of the anti-mish crew to throw out accusations of lying whenever they can, without really being consistent, or thinking it through properly, or checking sources carefully and honestly before accusing.

Here is Gill on Abarbanel on Micah 5:2

"And Abarbinel {g}, mentioning those words in Micah 4:13; "arise, and thresh, O daughter of Zion," observes, "this speaks concerning the business of the King Messiah, who shall reign over them, and shall be the Prince of their army; and it is plain that he shall be of the house of David: and it is said, "O thou, Bethlehem Ephratah," which was a small city, in the midst of the cities of Judah; and "although thou art little in the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall come forth unto me" a man, a ruler in Israel, "whose goings forth are from the days of old"; the meaning is, the goings forth of the family of that ruler are from the days of old; that is, from the seed of David, and a rod from the stem of Jesse, who was of Bethlehem Judah."

{g} Mashmiah Jeshuah, fol. 62. col. 2.

So what exactly are you accusing Gill of having "lied" about ?

It will be nice when the translation of Isaac Abarbanel's three volumes on Messiah are in English, until that time one should be appreciative for the little tidbits we get from John Gill and any others who have taken the time and effort to share from his work.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Thomas II

Please tell me more about this. What do you mean?

sharon45

Just like the boy in Isaiah 8 also represents a passage of time.

Immanuel means god is with us, IOW, on our side and is going to help us. The boy in Isaiah 8 also has a decriptive name for what is to take place.

noah

praxeus staed:
This was where it began. I was stating that tza'ir cannot apply to the town as indicating it was small. Notsri responded with:
The person "quoting" the Abarbanel:

1) Didn't mention that he was quoting the Radak.
2) Didn't mention that the Radak was speaking Midrashically and removed tza'ir and replaced it with "katan", since "tza'ir" can never apply to a town, which the "scholar" omitted.
3) The Abarbanel specifically stated that the Radak's Midrash is not to be understood that the Moshiach will come from Bethlehem, because the verse doesn't say that, according to the Abarbanel. The "Scholar" omitted this.
4) The "scholar" then went on to translate the verse as though the Abarbanel was indicating that it would come from Beth-Lechem.
(See post 141 in this thread)

THAT is why I said that the "scholar",Gill, lied.

But that is also a side point. Notsri still hasn't chosen an option to commit to. He is probably trying to get an answer.


Now let's get on to the rest of your post.
You said:
It's ironic that someone of your ilk would choose to bring up the issue of lying in such an accusatory way.
First of all, let's make perfectly clear who the "mish" gang is.
They are a bunch of xians who have taken it upon themselves to hasten the return of their messiah aka Jesus. In order for JC to return they believe, they must get Jews to convert to xianity.
To this end they have set up an expensive (hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars in fact), elaborate and extensive framework and campaign to convert Jews to Jesus based on lies and deceptions. They try to make Christianity more attractive to Jews by trying to make it look like Judaism. They dress up like Jews, in their churches they pretend to carry out some Jewish rituals etc. etc. They follow Jews around setting up action centers in areas populated by Jews where they also establish "Hebrew Christian synagogues". Missionaries often target college campuses, hospitals, drug rehabilitation programs, seniors' residences, and shopping malls in Jewish neighborhoods, as well as the Israeli community, Soviet immigrants and intermarried couples.They prey on Jews who do not know their own texts and traditions well enough to rebut the missionaries' deceptions. They deliberately misquote, mistranslate and misinterpret Jewish scriptures and rabbinical texts in an attempt to "prove" that Jesus was both the Jewish Messiah and God. Their delegitimization of Judaism, in concert with their misleading exploitation of Jewish symbols, religious artifacts and even traditional music, serve to confuse the potential convert, making him or her more vulnerable.
In short they're predators. They're slick, well organized and well funded snake oil salesmen.
Jews for Jesus and Messianc Judaism etc. is a cultural holocaust in the making. They want to erase Judaism, all its customs and traditions, and replace it with Christianity.

Second of all, Messianic Jews aka the Jews for Jesus crownd can not be allowed to frame this phenomenon in terms of sides. When praxeus referred to the "anti-mish crew" he was attempting to make it seem as though there are two sides in this thereby lending it a greater air of legitmacy. There are not two sides to this. There were not two sides at Auschwitz. There is only one side. Are there two sides when someone is attacked by street thugs on his way home from work? Missionaries are assaulting Judaism. Jews are just coming out of the post-holocaust era and want to be left alone. Many Jews I talk to and have read refer to the missionary problem as the deaths of their souls another type of death for jews, the murder of their souls. That they are no different than any other type of xians who seek to murder them both physically and spiritually.
So I hope youre proud praxeus and the rest of your Jews for Jesus crowd.

Now on another point praxeus seems to think we counter-missonaries like to throw allegations of lying around. Praxeus, I challenge you here and now to show me where this is so. Remember to make sure the allegations are unsubstantiated. There is nothng wrong with calling something a lie if that is exactly what it is. And as you attempt to do so please take a look at a couple of links I found (with almost no effort) to xian websites accusing counter-missionaries of lying.
http://www.therefinersfire.org/ca.htm

http://www.kingmessiahproject.com/rrj_main.html

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...&ct=clnk&cd=18

Pot calling the kettle black praxeus?

BTW praxeus, have you heard of ex-Jews for Jesus. I urge all readers to cruise on over there and find out just what Jews for Jesus is really all about. Believe me it's not pretty.
Make sure to read the exchange between ex-Jews for Jesus and the president of Jews for Jesus, David Brickner.
You can also check out the very good ex-Jews for Jesus blog which is quite informative.
Please don't stop there. The daughter of a leading Jews for Jesus missionary thinks here father's organization stinks. Here's her website.

Finally, for those who would like to get the necessary info together to properly refute xians citing Jewish texts and tradtions, I recommend these sites:

Outreach Judaism

Jews for Judaism

Messiah Truth

Their Hollow Inheritance

It's absurd really, one religion tyying to shove itself down the throat of another. Especially when the one religion, Judaism, contradicts every major tenent of the other, Christianity. Imagine a dyed in the wool capitalist trying to use Das Kapital to convince Marxists that they really believe in the free market, private enterprise and the like.

Notsri

Noah: you've "debunked" Gill's excerpt by consulting the wrong source. It derives from Abarbanel's tract Mashmia Yeshuah, while you, of course, looked for it in his commentary on the Prophets—hence Praxeus' incredulity.

Steven Avery

Ok.. so John Gill was fully accurate and there was simply a typical eposting mishamash.
Yes, I could have a music band, Praxeus and the Ilks.

You are apparently talking about Jews for Jesus, with a worldwide network, some expensive buildings, lots of campaigns and an annual budget said to be around $12 million, a bit less than multi-hundreds of millions.

Exactly like you did here, quick to accuse and denigrate John Gill, as Tovia Singer when he doctored Psalm 110 to accuse, or the tawdry accusations on Isaiah 53:9, or lots of other cases. A lot of times the accusation is against the believers when they are simply taking a regular position of historic Judaism (eg. b'motav being a reference to a singular number). It really is a bit tedious to go into here, and you of course will always seek to defend any accusation, as per your rant here. I stopped paying a lot of attention to the details of the anti-mish arguments after running into such junque time and again.

You posted three sort of believer web-sites. Lou Rugg's site (King Messiah Project) is more Christian than Messianic, yet it is a respectable site. The one of Koniuchowsky (from the google cache) I completely separate myself from, because of integrity concerns. The third, Refiners Fire I do not know and would have to look at.

http://www.kingmessiahproject.com/rrj_main.html
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...&ct=clnk&cd=18

http://www.therefinersfire.org/ca.htm

Sure. I'm friends with a gal who contributed to the site. And since I am quite distant from Jews for Jesus in life and doctrine, I don't follow these things that closely. The ex site was a bit tedious when I read it. A bit like reading ex-chassids who rip the cloistered rebbe-culture. If I feel JfJ are unfairly attacked, I will defend them (including Moshe Rosen), and if I feel they are improperly lauded, I will offer counterpoint.

As for the anti-mish sites, I'm quite familiar with them, and they vary in quality and integrity. I picked up Drazin's book in Tzfat, and know a number of the 'Messiah Truth" folks. Some of these folks I respect, one I had a nice shabbat dinner, others I know from this and that (voice chat, conferences, etc). Including the former head of Jews for Judaism, Mark Powers, who I consider a decent chap.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

noah

Notsri said:
Not really. Commentators often use the same writings for each, recompiling and republishing for specialized events.

I have checked the quote lifted by the translator and it is bearable (not great, but passable), but it is certainly the same quote if he had lifted it from the commentary on Micah. (The use of words and verb forms are the same, although his choice of translation needs work).

But one sentence was missing, which, halachally is required, the sentence that attributes the quote to the Radak by the Malbim, which includes the comment that it is not to be taken literally, based on the use of different words to force a new meaning into it.

It is unlikely that the Abarbanel would have written one thing quoting the Radak, and then in a different book write the exact same thing and forget to mention a single sentence that he was quoting the Radak, and not himself, and that the Radak should not be taken literally.

Perhaps this was just "literary" license by the translator. I don't have the book he quoted, nor can I find it. My guess is that the mangled title is giving me this problem.

The translator also doesn't point out that in his translation he didn't even note that the Radak verse being quoted by the Abarbanel has certain word differences that would only work by rewriting the text,for example tza'ir is missing, which is beacause it can never be applied to a place, which was the initial point being made.

But perhaps that was not intentional either, but was just poor writing on his part.

In either case, the Abarbanel notes that Micah 5:2 cannot refer to the birthplace of the Moshiach, and the Radak, which he quotes, shows that tza'ir cannot be used to refer to a place.

You also left something out in your cut and paste Notsri:
"Kinchi" is the Radak. So at least I can see that Gill was forthright in indicating that the Abarbanel was explaining the Radak, although his wording of it is confusing and you might not know that given the way he wrote it. Although Gill, being the good Baptist, did leave out the one sentence that would have undermined eveything and did translate it to go along with the Christian viewpoint. Furthermore, the book mentioned by John Gill doesn't seem to have been written by the Abarbanel. I cannot find it in his list of writings. Perhaps he was simply quoted in that book by some anonymous author whom we will never know. It's uncertain.

In any case this Abarbanel thing is a distraction. It doesn't help your case Notsri.

The main issue is that I am still waiting for you to select option #1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. It seems to be taking a rather long time to get any commitment!
Here are the choices once again:
1) Tza'ir is an adjective that is attached to Bethlehem-Efratah
2) Tza'ir is an adjective that is attached to "clans"
3) Tza'ir is an adjective attached to "You"
4) Tza'ir is a noun.
5) Other (has not even been touched upon in this entire thread)

It's just basic Hebrew.

In addition you still have not answered these points despite your mention of several, in fact many scholars:

1)The RSV, NRSV, NAS, NAB, NEB, REB, the Amplified Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, and others agree that Micah was referring to a family clan rather than a town. As I said before why are they wrong and you right? You can bet they were more knowledgeable and deliberate in their translations than you are and have been.

2) Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible refers to the Bethlehem Ephrathah in this passage as something that is "little to be among the chiefs of Judah," which also suggests (quite strongly) that Micah is referring to people and not a town.

3) The Septuagint refers to the house of Ephrathah not town.
Quote:
And thou, Bethlehem, house of Ephrathah, art few in number to be reckoned among the thousands of Judah: yet out of thee shall one come forth to me, to be a ruler of Israel

4) The language of the verse mitigates against just one town's being mentioned. Please note that the verses says "art few in number to be reckoned among the thousands of Judah"
a) You don't refer to one as few. The two words are almost opposites.

b) There were not thousands of towns in Judah. The area was too small.

5) And rather obviously, we always read "House of so and so" to be referring to people and not geographical areas.

6) As Uri Y. asked you, where in the Old Testament is a city addressed by the name of a single family within it?

noah

<edit>

praxeus wrote:
Actually no. See my post to Notsri above.

Oh stop, my ribs.

Actually if you read my post praxeus you will see that I am talking about messianics period. Not just Jews for Jesus. Don't try to rephrase my argument into a straw man that you can bat down so easily. It's a common missionary tactic by the way. However, you let your cockiness get away on you here and it was all too easy to spot. Read my posts or don't respond to them.

Here's a cocky little tactic. He doesn't dare challenge the meat of my post so he resorts to childish dodges. He just inserts an elegant little non-rebuttal. The impression praxeus wants of course is to make it look as though he has dispensed with the meat of my post elegantly and easily by not dealing with it, rather just dismissing it with a couple of words, one of them pejorative and inaccurate. Nice try paraxeus.
My post was not an anti-mish rant. Tell me praxeus is there such a thing as an "anti-holocaust rant" or an "anti-rape rant".
Another absurdity here is that once again praxeus is attempting to categorize a side in this (missionary) problem thereby creating a "two sides" dynamic to this problem which will, he hopes. lend the messianic enterprise an air of legitimacy. It is a common tactic used by holocaust deniers.
Oh that's interesting. You say I'm way off base bringing up the holocaust in comparision to the messianic campaign? Actually no. I have a degree in German Studies and a year of grad work in it as well. Believe me I know the topic.
Just to rehearse the main point here of course, let's keep in mind that the messianic agenda is a cultural holocaust. Make no mistake. Messianics want to erase Judaism and replace it with Christianity. Their underlying belief is absurd, that they know Judaism better than Jews.
Their tactics are thug like. I touched on it in my earlier post but I'd like to give you a quote from a Jews for Jesus official at the beginning of one of their disinformation campaigns to convert Jews:
In other words they are going to stick the issue right in the face of Jews. NO respect for Jews' space or privacy or sensibilities etc. etc. etc. Just their B.S. right in Jews' faces. What a wonderful organization.

While I might forgive someone for bad translating and not informing the reader that the adjective "little" was "katan" and not "tza'ir" as in the original and that the verb for "to be" was dropped, it is hard to be so forgiving about leaving off the prior sentence that states that the quote was from the Radak and it was the Abarbanel's explanation of it, lest someone take it literally.
See my post to Notsri.
In any case the Abarbanel is a loser issue for Notsri.

Just so readers will have a point of reference here's Rabbi Singer's article on Psalm 110
Here's another article dealing with the translation issue.

You're going to have to elaborate on this but here's an excerpt from a website defending Singer against this allegation:
Please fill me in. You know of course that Isaiah 53:9 does not refer to JC.

I have yet to see that. Perhaps you should read Uri Yosefs article regarding Isaiah 53 and b'motav.
In case you don't want to, here is the relevant section from Uri's article:
Again, note the tactic of dodging the issue setting up a bit of a smokescreen by attempting to degrade my post calling it a rant. Pejoratives will get you nowhere praxeus. If you don't want to get it on then get out of the thread but don't hide behind your garbage evasions and cockiness.

This is just too much. Since when have you been in any position to judge who is and who is not a christian? Just to let you know praxeus. There are thousands of varieties of christianity. Each one of them believes they are the true believers. Time to get real praxeus.

Gee what a surprise! praxeus has again employed a pejorative hoping against hope, I guess, that no one will notice. Guess what praxeus? I noticed. And you know what? Calling my post junque is an admission of your inability to grapple with the issue. You remind me of the sidewalk commandos we used to kick out of the nightclub I worked in. Full of B.S. and yellow streaks. They used to get tougher the farther up the sidewalk they got from us.
Oh yeah, lots of motor mouth insults and B.S. but no meat on the bone praxeus. Spare us the tough guy "been there done that B.S." and get down to the substance or get out of this thread.
BTW, I don't believe for a moment that you're not a member or a sympathizer of the messianic Judaism crowd. Your public profile says messianic. You link to a messianic discussion group in your signature. Time to be honest.
BTW what's this Shalom business in your signature? Are you Jewish. Or is that more missionary appropriations of Jewish culture?
Nice try praxeus. The only reason you'd find it tedious is if you don't like what they're saying. They are not malcontents or some other disgruntled group with an axe to grind. If you have an honest example of their disingenuosness, please let me know. But once again praxeus, the issue is substance not pejoratives and sweeping dismissals.

Oh please. Like you would know. Like you're familiar with them. Like you are qualified to judge the quality or the integrity of the anti-missionary sites. Just to let you know praxeus, those sites and others are all recommended and endorsed by the Jewish community.

Well praxeus, do you feel I am unfairly attacking Jews for Jesus? Come on. Let's get it on. Surely a fair minded, even handed guy like you will have something substantive to say either way about what I have said about JfJ.

I'd like to close this post with some info about Jews for Jesus. They are not Jews. They are frauds.

1.The founder of Jews for Jesus, Reverend Mort “Moishe� Rosen, was
ordained as a Baptist minister in 1957, more than a decade before founding Jews for Jesus. He is a graduate of two evangelical Christian schools, the Northeast Bible College (1957) and Western Conservative Baptist Seminary (1986)
Source: http://jfjonline.org/branches/staff/rosen/index.htm

2)The current Executive Director of Jews for Jesus, David Brickner, is also an ordained Baptist minister. Reverend Brickner was ordained by the Baptist General Conference. He, like Reverend Rosen, has degrees from two evangelical Christian schools, the Moody Bible Institute and the Fuller School of World Missions. Both of Brickner’s parents have been involved in evangelism of the Jewish people.
Source: http://jfjonline.org/pub/newsletters...uly96/meet.htm

3) Larry Dubin, the Campaign Leader of the Baltimore “Behold Your God� program, is a graduate of the Dallas Theological Seminary, an evangelical Christian seminary.
Source:http://www.jfjonline.org/pub/newsletters/2003-01/dc.htm

4) Jews for Jesus is a member of the following evangelical Christian organizations: World Evangelical Alliance, Evangelical Alliance of Great Britain, Evangelical Alliance of South Africa, Evangelical Federation of France, the Interdenominational Foreign Mission Association, Canadian Council for Christian Charities, Evangelical Council on Financial Accountability and the Lausanne Consultation on Jewish Evangelism
Source: http://www.jfjonline.org/about/associations.htm

5) Jews for Jesus requires all of its staff members to join an evangelical Christian church.
Source: http://www.jfjonline.org/pub/newslet...untability.htm