brunson@usfbobo.UUCP (David Brunson) (10/28/84)
[] The only valid net.religion discussion appears to be stalled. Let me just go ahead and give my current understanding of correct religion and invite comments. First a little background info is necessary so that subsequent statements aren't misinterpreted in the usual way. With respect to God's covenants there are two kinds of people: Jews and non-Jews (henceforth called "Goys"). All people are covered under Noah's covenant (Gen. 9). As with all covenant relationships, the covenantees are required to keep certain commandments or mitzvot. The rabbis have deduced seven such mitzvot from Genesis 9 that are binding upon all people. Later on Abraham and his PHYSICAL descendants were singled out for an extra covenant. The relevant mitzvah was circumcision. This covenant was ratified under Moshe and the duties of Israel's descendants were extended to the full 613 commandments which are binding upon all Jews today. So Goys have to keep seven and Jews 613. This is Torah. It cannot be abrogated until heaven and earth pass away and if certain Yahoos come along saying otherwise, then they can be safely ignored. Then correct religion MUST involve the keeping of the commandments. No ifs, ands, or buts!! And if you think the N'tzarim writings say otherwise, even in their possibly corrupted present form, then you are misreading them. Now consider the following snatch of dialogue between David Brunson, Goy Extraordinaire, and Shlomo Sowolowsky (sp?), Lubavitcher Rabbi: DB: "... then if a Jew consults a rabbi to learn how to keep the 613 commandments, is it also valid for a Goy to consult a rabbi to learn how to keep the seven?" SS: "Of course! Who else would know?" A valid form of religious expression for the goyim, then, would involve hanging around a synagogue to learn the mitzvot according to those "who sit in Moshe's seat". This is true regardless of what you think the redactors did or didn't do to the N'tzarim writings, and especially true since the translations of the relevant sayings of Y'shua (Matt. 5:17-20 and Matt. 23:2,3) aren't being disputed. Does anyone see any problems with this so far? -- David Brunson "Which of you convicts me of sin?"
yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) (10/28/84)
Perhaps I'm wrong, but this seems like it would be more appropriate on net.religion.jewish. For me to answer on net.religion would be to set forth Jewish apologies for which no polemics had been made. Your questions seem sincere and straightforward but more oriented toward net.religion.jewish than to net.religion where not everyone is interested in either Jewish or Christian points of view. At any rate, I prefer to defer this to net.religion.jewish rather than start up another round of controversy on net.religion. My aim has been to demonstrate that polemics against Judaism, or assumptions favoring Christianity over Judaism, were indefensible and without factual or historical basis. It's pretty safe to say I've done that. On the other hand, I've no interest in simply attacking Christianity. If Christians want to learn they can come to me. I don't want to impose Judaic teachings on them any more than I want them imposing their Christian missionary teachings on me. I encourage you to continue such studies, but I cannot encourage an overzealous approach to making people learn unless they attack first. Hope to see you on net.religion.jewish.