Questions about Judaism answered by a Jew!

[Grace Seeker]

My apologies that this is not actually a question but a comment.


I do think it is important for us Christians to recognize there is an element of truth in what Rav is saying about the way we Christians see prophecies with regard to Jesus in the Old Testament. Not all of those passages which we cite as prophecies were understood to be prophecies of the Messiah prior to Jesus. Rather, once we had his life to examine, we then in re-reading the Hebrew scriptures looked at them with new ways of thinking and saw Jesus in passages that we had not conceived of as relating to him in advance of them.

Whether that is because they were originally intended as prophecies and we were too blind to see them for what they were in advance of seeing the events unfold in Jesus' life, or whether that is because they were not written about Jesus at all, but people have simply read back into them an understanding that was unintended by the authors is for each person to interpret for him/herself.

Rav, I would be interested in a list of passages that Jews today understand to be prophecies regarding the still expected Messiah.

 

[rav]

Rav, I would be interested in a list of passages that Jews today understand to be prophecies regarding the still expected Messiah.

Shalom Grace Seeker,

1. First of all, he must be Jewish - "...you may appoint a king over you, whom the L-rd your G-d shall choose: one from among your brethren shall you set as king over you." (Deuteronomy 17:15)

2. He must be a member of the tribe of Judah - "The staff shall not depart from Judah, nor the sceptre from between his feet..." (Genesis 49:10)

3. He must be a direct male descendant of King David and King Solomon, his son - "And when your days (David) are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall issue from your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will make firm the throne of his kingdom forever..." (2 Samuel 7:12 - 13)

4. He must gather the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel -"And he shall set up a banner for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." (Isaiah 11:12)

5. He must rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem - "...and I will set my sanctuary in their midst forever and my tabernacle shall be with them.." (Ezekiel 37:26 - 27)

6. He will rule at a time of world-wide peace - "...they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore." (Micah 4:3)

7. He will rule at a time when the Jewish people will observe G-d's commandments - "My servant David shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall follow My ordinances and be careful to observe My statutes." (Ezekiel 37:24)

8. He will rule at a time when all people will come to acknowledge and serve one G-d - "And it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, says the L-rd" (Isaiah 66:23)

9. All of these criteria are best stated in the book of Ezekiel Chapter 37 verses 24-28:

And David my servant shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd. they shall also follow My judgments and observe My statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given to Yaakov my servant, in which your fathers have dwelt and they shall dwell there, they and their children, and their children's children forever; and my servant David shall be their prince forever. Moreover, I will make a covenant of peace with them, it shall be an everlasting covenant with them, which I will give them; and I will multiply them and I will set my sanctuary in the midst of them forevermore. And my tabernacle shall be with them: and I will be their G-d and they will be my people. Then the nations shall know that I am the L-rd who sanctifies Israel, when My sanctuary will be in the midst of them forevermore.​

If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be "The Messiah." A careful analysis of these criteria shows us that to date, no one has fulfilled every condition.

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/general-messiah-criteria.html

 

[Grace Seeker]

5. He must rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem - "...and I will set my sanctuary in their midst forever and my tabernacle shall be with them.." (Ezekiel 37:26 - 27)

So one who came at a time when there was a temple in existence could never be considered the Messiah, as there would be no need for rebuildiing. Then why where there people (not just followers of Jesus, but others) who looked for a Messiah during the Roman occupation before the temple was destroyed?


Could any of these passages be interpreted figuratively or spiritually and not necessarily literally?

 

[wafa islam]

I cant believe I haven't seen this thread before.

100++ pages and I haven't noticed it !! Anyways thank you for posting this lavikor 201. It is very nice because the religion of Judaism and Islam has much in common Alhamdulilah (All praises are due to Allah).

And yes as you said, there are not many Jews who are posting here..

Peace

 

[wafa islam]

Re: Questions about Judaism awnsered by a Jew!

Hashem= G-d.... as Allah = G-d


When not praying you never use G-d's name... therefore when you refer to G-d you refer to him as "Hashem" I hope that clears it up.

Yes and I heard that the word 'Elohim' means God. But why many names for God. (Correct me if I am wrong).

Peace.

 

[rav]

Shalom to both of you,

So one who came at a time when there was a temple in existence could never be considered the Messiah, as there would be no need for rebuildiing. Then why where there people (not just followers of Jesus, but others) who looked for a Messiah during the Roman occupation before the temple was destroyed?


Could any of these passages be interpreted figuratively or spiritually and not necessarily literally?

Grace, I am right now looking in my library for a specific sefer which explains it very well, however, I am having no luck as I cannot remember which sefer wrote the explanation. If you give me time, I will try and locate it. If I cannot find it soon, I will just translate the Talmud, tractate Avoda Zara for you, since it explains it clearly, but I am dying to find which sefer the Vilan Gaon explained the concept.

Yes and I heard that the word 'Elohim' means God. But why many names for God. (Correct me if I am wrong).

Peace.

The word “Hashem” means literally “the name”. “Ha” in Hebrew is written before a word giving it “the” and “Shem” in Hebrew means “Name”. Jews will not mention G-d’s name outside activities of holiness like praying. Therefore, when speaking about G-d in common discussions the word “Hashem” will be used when referring to G-d, although some will just say “G-d”, but not the Hebrew word which refers to G-d.

 

[rav]

Shalom Grace Seeker,

I was unable to find the sefer of the Vilna Gaon I was looking for, so I will have to explain it without the Kabalistic explanation that was so beautiful. So basically, keep in mind that King Solomon (who built the first Holy Temple) was a “messiah” – or an “anointed king”. It was feasible that the Messiah could have come throughout the first or second Bais Hamikdash eras but he did not since none of the prophecies were fulfilled.

Ezekiel Chapters 40-47 describe in great detail what the Bais Hamikdash will look akin to in the age of the Moshiach. That Temple has not yet been built so that messianic prophecy has not yet been satisfied.

Could the Moshiach have come during any of those times? Yes, of course, the Messiah can be born at any time. But unless all the prophecies are fulfilled (including those in Ezekiel 40-47) that individual cannot be the Moshiach. Ezekiel wrote regarding the Bais Hamikdash after the destruction of the first Temple. The second Temple was not built to his vision. Somehow that Temple would have to have been destroyed to fulfill the prophecy.

And that did indeed occur. Didn’t it?

 

[YEh]

My apologies that this is not actually a question but a comment.

I do think it is important for us Christians to recognize there is an element of truth in what Rav is saying about the way we Christians see prophecies with regard to Jesus in the Old Testament. Not all of those passages which we cite as prophecies were understood to be prophecies of the Messiah prior to Jesus. Rather, once we had his life to examine, we then in re-reading the Hebrew scriptures looked at them with new ways of thinking and saw Jesus in passages that we had not conceived of as relating to him in advance of them.

Whether that is because they were originally intended as prophecies and we were too blind to see them for what they were in advance of seeing the events unfold in Jesus' life, or whether that is because they were not written about Jesus at all, but people have simply read back into them an understanding that was unintended by the authors is for each person to interpret for him/herself.

Rav, I would be interested in a list of passages that Jews today understand to be prophecies regarding the still expected Messiah.

Well said, I should have mentioned this from the beginning of our discussion, thanks Grace Seeker :thumbs_up
We do have different interpretations of the text, based our belief, I believe there is enough signs in the stories of the great patriarchs that does point to Blood be used as atonement for sin, the fact that a lamb is used for sacrificing to be of great significance.

rav, what significance do the Jews apply to the blood atonements, why was it ordered, and why wasn't repenting of sins enough ?

YEh

Thank you for your explanations it has given me much food for thought

 

[YEh]

Untrue. Abraham went through with the sacrifice with the intention of killing his son, solely because G-d commanded him to do so.

"will provide for Himself the lamb" means i.e., He will see and choose for Himself the lamb (Targum Jonathan), and if there will be no lamb, my son will be for a burnt offering. And although Isaac understood that he was going to be slaughtered,“ they both went together,” with one accord (lit. with the same heart). - [from Gen. Rabbah 56:4]

Said Rabbi Abba: Abraham said to Him,“ I will explain my com....... I did not say to you,“ Slaughter him,” but,“ Bring him up.” You have brought him up; [now] take him down. — [from Gen. Rabbah 56:8]

I understand what your saying, perhaps I am not communicating myself clearly enough.
I will try again with a question.

So in your understanding, G-d will provide the lamb instead of Abraham sacrificing his son.
From Genesis 22, I quoted eariler that G-d told him to sacrifice his son, so Abraham was going to do it without hestitation, because G-d commanded it.

Did Abraham know that G-d was going to save his son or did he have faith that he will save him ? Since G-d didn't mention before hand that he would do so.
He just said sacrifice your son for me.

Genesis 22
6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "Father?"
"Yes, my son?" Abraham replied.
"The fire and wood are here," Isaac said, "but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?"

You can see here how Isaac thinks that they are going to sacrifice a lamb for a burnt offering. What does Abraham say in response ?

Quote:8 Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together.

To my understanding Isaac was basically kept in the dark about being sacrificed as a test of faith for Abraham. Otherwise he wouldn't of asked "but where is the lamb ?"
And Abraham was kept in the dark about G-d providing a lamb to sacrifice inplace of his son.

When Isaac asks about where is the lamb, Abraham answers, G-d will provide one, was Abraham lying to Isaac then ?

Did he have faith in G-d because he did what G-d said ? Or because he had faith that G-d will save his son ?

I believe he had faith in G-d because he didn't withhold his son, but he also did this because he had faith that G-d would spare his son.

Does that make sense to you ?

Christians have this same faith of Abraham which G-d equates with righteousness.
We believe that G-d provided the sacrifice on behalf of us, so that we are not cast from his presence in the afterlife; caused to die spiritually.
We believe this is the test of Abraham and of the whole world. To have faith that G-d has provided the ultimate sacrifice for us. This is our faith.

YEh

 

[YEh]

No Yeh, I am afraid no such similarity exists. First this is a Q/A thread so this is not for debate, create another thread for such a debate. Second, from your mistransted verses, you have recieved no meaning from the passage at all.

To say that G-d has a son is absurd. It is a myth that has origins in ever pagan society that has existed before Christianity. If you wish to see where Christianity is foretold in the Tanakh, I will show you:

Christian missionaries try to support their theology by supposedly quoting the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). In this analysis, real quotes from the Tanakh turn the tables and debunk Christianity. Passages from the prophet Isaiah in the Tanakh and associated references from Torah are compared with passages in the so called New Testament (Christian Bible)

Isaiah (Yeshayahu) , in Chapter 24 warns of coming chaos:

24:1 Behold the L-rd empties the land and lays it waste, and He shall turn over its face and scatter its inhabitants. 2. And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest, as with the slave, so with his master, as with the maidservant, so with her mistress, as with the buyer, so with the seller, as with the lender, so with the borrower, as with the creditor, so with the one who owes him. 3. The land shall be emptied and it shall be pillaged, for the L-rd has spoken this thing. 4. The land has mourned, it has withered, the land has been humbled and withered, the highest of the people of the land have been humbled.​

Then he says WHY this will happen:

24:5 And the land has deceived because of its inhabitants, for they transgressed instructions, infracted statutes, broke the everlasting covenant. 6. Therefore, an oath has consumed the land, and the inhabitants thereof were wasted; ...​

The so called New Testament advocates all three of these things; that people transgress the laws, change the ordinance and break the everlasting covenants. So, let us now examine these very problems, using the Christian Bible!

Before we proceed, let's take a look at the Christians bible. It is supposedly from their god, inspired by their holy ghost; the authors are unknown and when written no one knows, but to Christianity that does not matter. Why not you ask? Because the only glue that holds the Christian religion (Pauline Christology) together is not facts, not history, not G-d's Torah, but " blind faith." In other words, simply an intoxication with their dead man-god, Jesus.

1. Transgressing the Law:

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" (Galatians 3:13 King James Version)

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. (Galatians 3:24-25)

But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. (Romans 7:6)

But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. (Galatians 5:18)

For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (Hebrews 7:12)

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, (Romans 4:13 -16)​

I would like to correct your understanding of Christianity regarding the transgressing of the law.

Romans 3

Righteousness Through Faith

21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.[/QUOTE]

We do not therefore uphold the law because of obligation, we uphold the law because of faith. We believe Jesus obeyed the law to his death, the law (punishments) could not touch him (since he did nothing against the law). So Jesus fulfilled the law.
So the law was finished and completed by Jesus. So now we are justified by faith in Jesus.

YEh

 

[rav]

Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

Yeh, how on earth do you believe that you are "upholding the law"? Exodus 31:17 says: "The B'nei Yisrael shall preserve the Shabbos, to maintain the Shabbos for their generations, as an everlasting covenant." So how on earth are you upholding a law by belief in a religion which discourages Jews from following the Sabbath, although, it is "everlasting"?

Do you believe you "uphold" the law by:
1. Eating pork.
2. Mixing meat and milk.
3. Belief that G-d is not one. (See Deut 6:4)
4. Saying that the covanent for Jews to follow the Torah is not eternal.

If you do, then maybe your using a very distinct definition for "uphold" that I do not know about.

We do have different interpretations of the text, based our belief, I believe there is enough signs in the stories of the great patriarchs that does point to Blood be used as atonement for sin, the fact that a lamb is used for sacrificing to be of great significance.

On the contrary Yeh, the new testament completley distorts the text and if you believe in the hebrew text of the Tanakh, then in no way can you believe some of the claims of the gospels.

In my mind the writers of the Gospels formed the "Jesus" Messiah claim to try and fit him as a Messiah, by taking passages out of context and mistranslating.

An anology I will use: A hunter who proves to all he is the best hunter by shooting and arrow at a tree and then drawing a circle and bullseye around it after the shot has taken place yet he claims he got a "bullseye".

So in your understanding, G-d will provide the lamb instead of Abraham sacrificing his son.
From Genesis 22, I quoted eariler that G-d told him to sacrifice his son, so Abraham was going to do it without hestitation, because G-d commanded it.

Did Abraham know that G-d was going to save his son or did he have faith that he will save him ? Since G-d didn't mention before hand that he would do so.
He just said sacrifice your son for me.

First off, I do not know what Abraham was thinking because I am not Abraham however, did G-d ever even tell Abraham to sacrifice his son?

It says: "and bring him up there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains, of which I will tell you". Not "sacrifice him".

He did not say to him, “Slaughter him,” because the Holy One, blessed be He, did not wish him to slaughter him but to bring him up to the mountain, to prepare him for a burnt offering, and as soon as he brought him up [to the mountain], He said to him, “Take him down.” - [from Gen. Rabbah 56:8]

It is irrelevant what Abraham thought. There was never going to be a sacrifice taking place. Regardless of Abrahams actions. It was a test. Nothing more. Isaac was NEVER in any danger. Nothing was ever put in his place.

Does that make sense to you ?

No offense, but if your faith is based off this passage than I will say nothing more than that your claim is "senseless".

rav, what significance do the Jews apply to the blood atonements, why was it ordered, and why wasn't repenting of sins enough ?

Read these essays and then come back if you have any more questions:

http://messiahtruth.com/atonement.html
http://messiahtruth.com/blood.html

 

[YEh]

Could you answer this question for me please. I believe you must have missed it.

The blood of the passover lamb on the doorposts of the Jews houses in Egypt protected them from the wrath of the angel of death, why did the blood of the lamb save the Jews from death and destruction ??

In a purely Jewsish understanding.

YEh

Thanks.

 

[thirdwatch512]

Shalom!

i hope and pray that i got to this thread in time before you guys start your sabbath lol.

I am obviously a Christian, but on another forum i was talking with a muslim on the Deuteronomy 18:18 issue (the million year old issue lol.)

his perspective was interesting.. and i posted a response "debunking him", but i basically just pasted a few articles lol. and so yeah, i guess i was just wanting to ask what a Jew thought on some of the points he brought up (as Jews know Torah certainly a lot better then Christians! although fellow Christians, please respond.)

so, i guess i will just paste what he sent me lol.

This post is specially dedicated to kjf, as I see he was the person who were doing the most screaming.

Of course, others may want to join in (the screaming).

On the issue of 'brethren' in Deuteronomy, I would like to pose a few questions:

1. Deuteronomy 18 is narration of two separate events/issues.

1.1 The first part was talking about the 'brethren' of the Levites, and the inheritance issue. The 'brethren' here refers to the other 11 tribes of Israel. the issue did not concern the Arab 'brethren'.

This is evident in verses 6-7:

Quote:
6 And if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, where he sojourned, and come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which the LORD shall choose;

7 Then he shall minister in the name of the LORD his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before the LORD.
So far, kjf, do you agree? If not, pls explain why (no screaming pls).

1.2 The second part of Deuteronomy 18 was referring to the 'brethren' of the Israelites, the Arabs. The topic was on Israel as a group, and the brethren of Israel as another.

Hence, we have

Quote:
15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
and again

Quote:
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
kjf, so far, do you agree?

The word 'brethren' here has strong connection to Deuteronomy 2:4

Quote:
4 And command thou the people, saying, Ye are to pass through the coast of your brethren the children of Esau, which dwell in Seir; and they shall be afraid of you: take ye good heed unto yourselves therefore:
and

Quote:
8And when we passed by from our brethren the children of Esau, which dwelt in Seir, through the way of the plain from Elath, and from Eziongaber, we turned and passed by the way of the wilderness of Moab.
The brethren in Deut 18:15 & 18 was referring to a group of people, not the Israelites, but what the bible claimed to be their brethren.

2. We have seen an argument brought forward that the 'brethren' refers to the Israelites, and not Arabs, as some quoted the case of the bible telling the Jews to chose a king "from among your brethen", not a
foreigner" (Deut 17:15). Israel never chose a non-Jewish king.

Obviously, the issue here is not on the coming prophet, but on the choice of a king among the jewish brethren. It is a separate topic from the coming prophet we discuss above. In fact, the Jews never nominate a non-jewish king to rule over them. God, however, choose a non-Israelite to become a prophet.

kjf, do you agree? If not why?

Hope the above throws some light on the prophethood that might come from the brethren of israel, the Arabs, Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him.

so is the earlier part of Deuteronomy speaking of something different then the latter? do you have any refutations to this, or do you believe it's true?

also, could Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18:18 be talking about two different prophets? i ask because the wording seems a little different..

15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
and again

18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. - btw, who is their?

 

[rav]

Shalom Yeh,

What the blood of the passover lamb on the doorposts of the Jews houses in Egypt protected them from the wrath of the angel of death, why did the blood of the lamb save the Jews from death and destruction ??

There's a false premise in this question - that the blood of the lamb "saved the Jews from death". The blood of the lamb didn't save "the Jews" from death. Every house that had the lamb's blood on the door-post was spared the death of THE FIRSTBORNS who lived in it. It was not there for the remission of sins, it was there to protect the firstborns.

The blood was a sign. (mark it for a sign upon your doors).

The point being that the Jews had to have the guts to do it (just as they had to have the guts to slaughter the god of the Egyptians, the lamb).

It showed that they would follow G-d.

Keep in mind that the sacrificial lamb for Passover had nothing to do with sin or atonement of sin.

Shalom thirdwatch,

I am obviously a Christian, but on another forum i was talking with a muslim on the Deuteronomy 18:18 issue (the million year old issue lol.)

A proper refutation has already been posted on this issue.

Claim: The Torah Itself Predicts Mohammed as a Prophet

Many Muslims will claim that the Torah itself (apparently the "uncorrupted" part) predicts the coming of their so-called prophet some time after the giving of the Torah. All Bible translations are directly from the Hebrew, all of them literal.

Where Did They Get That Idea?

The relevant verse of the Torah is as follows:

Deuteronomy 18:18 A prophet I will raise up for them from amongst their brethren like you and I will give my words into his lips and he will speak about them all that I command him.​

We must ask the following: who is "I", who is "you", who is "them/their"? "I" is G-d, "you" is Moses, "them/their" refers to the Israelites.

So a paraphrase could be: G-d will raise up for the Israelites a prophet from the Israelites' brethren some time in the future that will be like Moses and speak the words of G-d.

Having established that, what's the connection?
The assertion is that "from amongst their brethren" refers to the Ishmaelites, and as Muslims assert many times, Mohammed is descended from Abraham through Ishmael.

In order to properly analyze this, I will not make a table comparing Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, as many do on both Christian and Muslim websites in order to pervert the meaning of this verse.

Instead, I will make a minor sidestep into the world of Jewish thought.
For those of us that do not have the presumption that the Torah is wrong and faulty, there is a list of thirteen basic rules on how to deduce meaning from the Torah. They are provided as the introduction to Sifre, and are recited in the preliminary portion of the daily morning prayers.

Just as in the Torah where there are laws that are obviously "just" and those that we cannot comprehend, a parallel applies here. Some rules make sense, and others are assertions of rules. I will make use of two rules that make a good deal of sense.

Rule number 2 states quite simply "mig'zerah shavah" which means "From a decree of equality".

Rule number 12 is that "davar halamed m'inyano, v'davar halamed m'sofo" which is often translated like "An item is taught/clarified from it's context, or from nearby verses."

Why these two rules? Rule number 2 tells us that if we have a word in one location that is vague, and the same word elsewhere more clear, we can use one to clarify the other. The reason for the second rule will be evident shortly.

The Rebuttal

Just a chapter back, in Deuteronomy 17, we find a similar phrase, but the voice is different. This time Moses is delivering a message from G-d directly to the Israelites, speaking to the Israelites as a single group, instead of us hearing what G-d says to Moses.

Deuteronomy 17:15 You shall put (appoint) upon yourself a king that G-d will pick him; from amongst your brethren you shall appoint a king; you will not be able to give upon yourself a foreign man that is not your brother.​

This verse, just a chapter behind the verse about the prophet is quite explicit. It uses the phrase "amongst (their/your) brethren" and then clarifies that a foreigner, which is definitely a non-Israelite, is not the Israelite's brother.

For further explicitness of the term foreigner, let's turn to Exodus 12.

Exodus 12:43 And G-d said to Moses and Aaron: This is the ordinance of the Passover offering, every son of a foreigner shall not eat of it.​

Conclusion

Since we can now see that a foreigner does not take part of something as central as the Passover celebration, which is incumbent on all Israelite males when the Temple stands, we can see that a foreigner is simply a non-Israelite, and it doesn't matter their genealogy.

That being said, we have also shown that a foreigner is someone who is not from "amongst the brethren" of the Israelites.

 

[Idris]

I aways wanted to know.. Why do Jewish men dress like this?

 

[rav]

Shalom Idris,

There are many reasons why Jews dress in distinct ways. I will outline a few reasons and then go into depth on each one.

1. Modesty – Wearing white shirts and black pants with a black jacket are very modest colors. Although navy blue and other colors can be worn, among traditionalist or more right wing Orthodox Jews, black and white are the two best colors to wear.

2. History & pride – Jewish clothing was many times distinctive from the clothing of the rest of society, the non-Jewish world took notice of this mode of dress. In the Middle Ages the Church forced the Jews to wear certain colors (black, mainly) and prohibited their wearing bright colored clothing. The Church also forced male Jews to wear ludicrous Jew hats, dunce caps and the like, which were meant to bring ridicule and scorn upon the wearers. Jews were also made to wear cloth patches on their clothes to identify themselves as Jews. Though these were meant to be badges of shame, Jews turned this ban, with the patches and the funny hats, into matters of Jewish pride. In many cases, even when the clothing decrees were no longer rigorously enforced, Jews continued to wear their Jewish clothing with pride and as a sign of their blessed stubbornness.

However, Sephardic (Spanish or Arab) Jews do not wear what the Ashkenazim (European Jews) wear in many cases. But the Arab Jewish population in Israel is over 50% so that is why many Jews in Israel wear them, but more in America, where a lot more of the eastern European Jewish community settled.

3. Jewish law – According to some interpretations of Jewish law, Jews whenever praying must dress like they are in front of the most powerful king (since G-d is infinitely higher than the highest of kings) so you should wear your best clothes.

Also, the hat is a sign of separation from the non-Jewish society. Judaism teaches that Jews should separate ourselves from the influences of the non-Jewish nations because of the idolatry influence etc.

A few examples of Jewish dress from different traditions of modesty and separation:

European Jews (Ashkenazi) – (taken from their homes in Israel and shipped off as slaves to Europe, the Ashkenazi Jews bore the brunt of the Holocaust and Christian anti-semitism) These are very famous Rabbi’s of this generation, who are some of the wisest most knowledgable in humanity in my belief.

Here are some of the Sephardic Jews - (Arab and Spanish Jews that remained in Babylon or the Middle East after the Israel was conquered or moved to spain or some parts of Africa) they dress a bit different, but are also distinctive:

_______________________


In reality however, the majority of Jews today who are Orthodox will not dress exactly like this, however, wearing a hat has become almost like a "fashion" statement, since many Orthodox Jews still hold that a thing like a hat is needed to seperate yourself from non-Jewish society.

 

[thirdwatch512]

thanks for the response.

might i ask one last thing.

is Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18:18 speaking of the same person, or different? i ask because...

Deu 18:15 Jehovah your God will raise up to you a Prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers, One like me. To Him you shall listen,

Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brothers, one like you, and will put My words in His mouth. And He shall speak to them all that I shall command Him.

 

[- Qatada -]

thanks for the response.

might i ask one last thing.

is Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18:18 speaking of the same person, or different? i ask because...

Deu 18:15 Jehovah your God will raise up to you a Prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers, One like me. To Him you shall listen,

Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brothers, one like you, and will put My words in His mouth. And He shall speak to them all that I shall command Him.

You might find this thread relevant:

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/9344-sign-muhammad-deuteronomy.html

 

[rav]

First thirdwatch, do not utter the actual name of G-d on this thread, it is disrespectful. Second, the reason verse 15 and 18 are different, are simply because in verse 17 it says: "G-d then said to me, 'They have spoken well." meaning that G-d is now speaking in the first person.

Deuteronomy 17:15 says: Appoint are you to appoint over yourself a king whom Ad-noy, your G-d, will choose. From among your brethren are you to appoint over yourself a king; you may not place over yourself a foreigner; who is not your brethren.

It is not a logical loop as the poster in the other thread which Fi_Sib's linke suggested, but is actualy very simple. This verse, just a chapter behind the verse about the prophet is quite explicit. It uses the phrase "amongst (their/your) brethren" and then clarifies that a foreigner, which is definitely a non-Israelite, is not the Israelite's brother. Deut 17:15 says: "lo tookhal latetalekha eesh nakhree sher lo akheekha hoo"

The Torah is telling us that the King selected must be of your "brethren", and therefore cannot be a foreigner because foreigners are not brethren. All of the Islamic refutations to the Jewish rebuttal attempt to play on the english words too much when in reality it is very simple in the hebrew, and the variety of Christian translations of the Torah which are faulty give life to arguments which should be dead. His argument is that Ishmael could be considered part of that "brethren" however, this is not the case because the Torah (17:15) states that Foreigners cannot be Brethren. The Torah than in Exodus classifies all foreigners as people who cannot eat the Passover offering. Israelites are required to do this, so the Torah clearly makes the distinction between brethren who are Israelites and foreigners who are not Israelites.

Shabbat is coming.

Have a great weekend, all of you.

 

[thirdwatch512]

First thirdwatch, do not utter the actual name of G-d on this thread, it is disrespectful. Second, the reason verse 15 and 18 are different, are simply because in verse 17 it says: "G-d then said to me, 'They have spoken well." meaning that G-d is now speaking in the first person.

Deuteronomy 17:15 says: Appoint are you to appoint over yourself a king whom Ad-noy, your G-d, will choose. From among your brethren are you to appoint over yourself a king; you may not place over yourself a foreigner; who is not your brethren.

It is not a logical loop as the poster in the other thread which Fi_Sib's linke suggested, but is actualy very simple. This verse, just a chapter behind the verse about the prophet is quite explicit. It uses the phrase "amongst (their/your) brethren" and then clarifies that a foreigner, which is definitely a non-Israelite, is not the Israelite's brother. Deut 17:15 says: "lo tookhal latetalekha eesh nakhree sher lo akheekha hoo"

The Torah is telling us that the King selected must be of your "brethren", and therefore cannot be a foreigner because foreigners are not brethren. All of the Islamic refutations to the Jewish rebuttal attempt to play on the english words too much when in reality it is very simple in the hebrew, and the variety of Christian translations of the Torah which are faulty give life to arguments which should be dead. His argument is that Ishmael could be considered part of that "brethren" however, this is not the case because the Torah (17:15) states that Foreigners cannot be Brethren. The Torah than in Exodus classifies all foreigners as people who cannot eat the Passover offering. Israelites are required to do this, so the Torah clearly makes the distinction between brethren who are Israelites and foreigners who are not Israelites.

Shabbat is coming.

Have a great weekend, all of you.

thank you, and i am sorry for spelling out the L-rds name!

and yeah, shortly before you answered, i re read verse 15 and 18 and was like "oh, i'm so stupid!" lol i guess i just didn't realize at first.

thanks a lot for responding, and have a great shabbat!