Sue Love Run With It@wordpress.com His Plans for Us

Greetings Sue.

Your blog quotes: Jeremiah 29:10-11 For thus says the Lord: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place. For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.

First order of business, the Hebrew T’NaCH Books do not employ chapters and verses. The Xtian biblical translators they chose upon their own authority to add chapters and verses; to make reading and quoting scripture nifty and so much easier. But in the process the church threw out the baby with the bathwater. It requires logic to interpret the meaning of what a person reads. The church denies Oral Torah logic – the revelation of Horev (שמות ל”ד-ו’ ז). Logic fundamentally requires Order, comparable to: “Humans need air to breath”. The choice to arbitrarily impose chapters and verses upon the Hebrew T’NaCH came at a huge expense. The church biblical translators expunged from the Torah the Order of sugiot, which the Framers of the T’NaCH originally established. The Order of sugiot, they compare to the rules of grammar unique to each and every language.

T’NaCH which lacks sugiot, in effect becomes castrated; impossible to learn any T’NaCH Book through the 13 tohor middot logic format. This logic system, revealed through the revelation of the Oral Torah, does not compare to the philosophies of logic the ancient Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle developed.

Invalid biblical scholarship cherry picks p’sukim\biblical verses. Effectively this invalid method of scholarship, it “robs” the meaning of these up-rooted verses of their original k’vanna, as learned within, as part of its larger sugia contexts. Cherry picking p’sukim effectively “steals”, p’sukim – like a thief in the night. Mitzvot do not come by way of transgression. A man does not beat and rape a woman, with the k’vanna to raise children born through such a criminal union, as a married couple who live together in shalom.

Talmudic common law, this format follows the precedent which the T’NaCH Books themselves established. Often, a T’NaCH sugia contains primary and secondary parts within the same sugia. The purpose of all sugiot within the T’NaCH — to instruct mussar to all generations. This mussar, it discerns and defines the distinction of what merits primary as opposed to secondary importance\priority.

For example a sugia in Book of Israiah tells a vision, of a young woman. That she shall give birth as a sign of HaShem. That same sugia concludes with the most bitter of warnings. The invasion and ensuing destruction of Israel and the siege of Jerusalem, by the Assyrian empire. Why the two subjects? Primary\secondary: the sugia makes reference to a woman conceiving and birthing a child, a period of about 9 months, this time reference term serves as the Gate of Warning unto the invasion of the kingdom of Israel – by the Assyrian empire. The Gospel writers perverted the primary\secondary relationship and foisted the “virgin birth” rhetoric propaganda, because it served the interests of their theology religious rhetoric.

Torah prophets do not fore-tell the future; they do not serve as soothsayers. The Torah strictly forbids this tumah through the negative commandment which prohibits the practice of witchcraft. The negative commandment of witchcraft qualifies as a Capital Crimes Torah transgression. Mitzvot do not come by way of transgressions.

All T’NaCH prophets command mussar. Mussar defines the meaning of the word “prophesy”. Extolling T’NaCH prophets without knowledge of how the Torah defines “prophet”, qualifies as hanging a mountain by a hair. The “hair”, that key undefined term, in this case: “prophet”, upon which everything else hangs upon. The ancient Greeks referred to this “hair” as ‘the art of rhetoric‘ whereby the ruling elite control and govern the ignorant masses.

The Order and organization of the T’NaCH Books into sugiot serves as the basis by which all later generations have the equal opportunity to employ the ‘comparison contrast’ Oral Torah logic system to interpret the k’vanna of T’NaCH and Talmudic mussar -as learned from Aggaditah.

This discipline of learning, known as: ‘stand the Torah upon the feet of precedents‘. Both the T’NaCH and the Talmud learn through this identical precedents sh’itta\methodology. This rule of learning by way of precedents permits students of the T’NaCH to learn prophetic mussar. Learning by way of precedents compares sugiot against similar or contrasting sugiot. Something like how a person needs both eyes in order for the mind to see in 3 dimensions.

Precedents permit later scholars to make a depth analysis of a prophet sugia; by folding the prophetic sugia upon other sugiot contained within the same Book; or by also comparing similar or contrasting sugiot located in other prophetic Books. The Gemarah brings precedents from all 6 Orders of the Mishna in order to understand the k’vanna of a singular and specific Mishna. This style of learning follows a difficulty\answer format whereby the sages determine if the precedent merits approval or they dismiss that precedent as to far removed from the Case within the Mishna, which the Gemarah currently studies. Herein defines a succinct summation of how to correctly learn both the T’NaCH literature, and the Talmud through its Midrashim commentaries. This sh’itta of kabbalah, first taught by rabbi Akiva goes by the title פרדס, my Rav Aaron Nemuraskii taught this sh’itta of learning to me.

The sugia of the prophet which holds your cherry picked p’sukim ירמיה כט:י- טו. A precedent sugia ירמיה א:ד-י. This second sugia closely resembles the aggaditah of Moshe at the burning bush. HaShem chooses prophets. A persons just do not up and decide one day to make themselves prophets. Both sugiot thus compared share a common denominator of ‘command & response’. Even Bil’am traveled to Moav – at the commandment of HaShem – and not by his own egotistical whim or desire. Weaving NaCH mussar together with Torah commandments, a unique Torah wisdom, which fundamentally defines Oral Torah based T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship.

Cross reference your sugia with the comparative sugia ישעיה ט:ז-י:כב. Both g’lut & geulah HaShem determines. Neturei Karta condemns Zionism. They claim that HaShem, not Man determines when and how the Jewish g’lut ends. Zionist like myself respond: ”the Shoah revealed the curse of g’lut comparable to the spies and the decree of g’lut in the days of Moshe. HaShem, not Man opens the eyes, ears, and other senses of awareness by which Man perceives Divine revelations. The victory by Israel who fought and prevailed in two Wars of national independence – 1948 & 1967 – exposes the revelation of the finger of HaShem in this world!

Man does not operate independent from the Will of HaShem. Man lives life expressed by either blessing or curse. Justice Justice pursue. Failure to rule the land (through righteous courtrooms which either establish or fail to comply with the fixed Torah obligation to rule the people with justice), with just governance, results in the curse of g’lut. The mussar of this sugia learns from the arrogance of the king of Assyria. That king assumed that by his might and power alone, nations collapsed and surrendered before his conquering Will. Yet at the end of the day, all the armies of Assyria died besieging the walls of Jerusalem, the Assyrian king fled, and his own children later assassinated him.

Another precedent cross reference שמואל א יג:א-יד, this sugia resembles the impatience of the nation waiting for Moshe to return from mount Sinai. The rejected king moshiach, he feared the Philistine armies more than he feared the prophet Shmuel. Therefore ואתאפק ואעלה העלה translated “I could nor restrain myself from offering a sacrifice”.

This statement defines in a negative manner, the mitzva of Moshiach. (The people originally demanded from the prophet that he anoint a king as the moshiach, so that this anointed would lead and fight the wars fought against foreign nations). The anointing of Moshiach: prioritizes obedience to obey prophetic mussar commandments over dedicating sacrifices upon an altar.

The church by stark contrast, prioritizes the tumah murder of JeZeus on the cross, murdered through the tumah of an evil eye, and totally corrupt courtroom justice. Church theology prioritizes this “sacrifice” above obedience to prophetic commandments, specifically not to dedicate upon the altar of HaShem a bruised or deformed animal as a korban. The apostle Paul preached in Damascus, another example, that brit melah no longer qualified as a Torah commandment that merited obedience.

The moshiach דאורייתא of the house of Aaron, likewise dedicated holy to HaShem, upon the יסוד\foundation that Aaron obey the mussar commandments of Moshe the prophet. Something like the famous ‘chicken and egg argument’ – of which came first. First obey the mussar commandments of the prophets and only then thereafter compel your Yatzir to offer oath sworn sacrifices. At the golden calf, Aaron feared the mob of the people like Shaul feared the Philistine army. Later prophetic mussar commandments always (comparable to the golden rule) spring from the Torah יסוד/foundation commandments.

This hard fast prophetic mussar, exists as the kingdom of heaven yoke of faith. The mitzva of kre’a shma Yidden in all ensuing generations accept this sworn oath obligation equally upon ourselves and the lives of our children. By stark contrast, the religion of Xtianity has determined that its יסוד\foundation of faith, so to speak, stands upon the 10th floor of a multi storey high rise apartment. (משל\נמשל) the new testament has replaced the old testament, as the foundation of faith upon which the hopes of church Creeds, theology and dogmatism stands. The church trusts these theories of faith, developed during the early Dark Ages over and above the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

23 thoughts on “Sue Love Run With It@wordpress.com His Plans for Us

  1. Your blogs emphasize my need for personal relationship with God. You wrote, “Man does not operate independent from the Will of HaShem.” Do you know his will for you? I believe God requires me personally to love and fear him.

    Like

    1. Pam Lason. Knowing God through His Word … Day by Day@wordpress.com December 18 Habakkuk 1-3

      The problem with your approach Pam, what people can’t read an English translation of the Bible? Honestly it requires the skill of a 9 year old to read an English translation of the Bible. This early 2nd Temple period prophet, what nevuah does he add to the prophets who lived before the Babylonian exile? Honestly amazes me of the gullibility of Goyim. (Goyim a term of respect. Xtians refer to folk not “inside” their theology belief system as pagans and heathens). Not till 1948 did stateless refugee Jewish populations merit the term “Goy”\Nation. The gullibility of Goyim though never ceases to amaze me. How they can buy this religious crap and never ask basic fundamental questions. Like for example: How does the Torah define the term “prophet”? The rhetoric propaganda of the new testament writers relied upon the “fuzzy logic” of ignorant Goyim to assume they knew the definition of the term “prophet”. Sorry, can not rely on Webster’s dictionary to define a term employed by a culture and people that you know virtually nothing about.

      The outright religious arrogance of Xtians (does not matter what denomination – all pathetic), makes me wonder why no Xtian never developed “the balls” to question the BS of theology and dogmatism which church idiots continually vomit. 2000+ years Xtianity has struggled with its heretical movements, hundreds of popular mass movements which the church denounced and then destroyed. In all that time, no Xtian has possessed the courage to ask basic fundamental questions concerning how the Torah defines certain essential base line terms. Brit does not mean covenant. Prophets do not foretell the future. Prayer not the same as Jewish tefillah, not even in the same ball park…not even in the same galaxy!

      The historic oppression, corruption, and wickedness of the church … and no one challenges church dogmatism on how to define the key T’NaCH terms upon which hangs all matters of faith, hope, and love. Never seen a single Xtian person struggle to determine how the Torah defines these terms? This basic error, its so obvious and fundamental. It defines a person that can’t see his glasses because they rest upon his nose. Bunk upon remove the beam from your own eye none sense religious rhetoric noise. How do Xtians generation after generation exalt and worship their eternal ignorance of the basic terms from the T’NaCH upon which they hang faith, hope and love?

      Like

    2. Liam Thatcher@wordpress.com Sweat: A Biblical Theology in Three Acts
      My response:

      Greetings Liam,
      You have written on your blog:

      [[[“””The second verse that speaks of sweat is Ezekiel 44:18. It comes in the final main section of the book (40-48) where, having spoken about the exile and destruction of the Temple, Ezekiel prophecies about a new Temple, re-inhabited by God’s glory. It is a vast structure, full of order and life. Whilst this section of Ezekiel’s vision may be one of the most challenging passages of Scripture to interpret, it seems that he is prophesying about the New Creation, where the fall will be reversed, and God’s presence will finally dwell among His people in a renewed Eden-like Temple, that doesn’t simply occupy a tiny portion of the world, but stretches across the whole New Earth (cf. Isaiah 66:17).”””]]]

      First order of business. Ezra and the Men of the Great Assembly sealed the Cannon of the Hebrew T’NaCH. The later new testament Greek manuscripts in no manner or form compare to the authority of the T’NaCH. Xtian propaganda foists the false notion of Old and New Testaments, as if they shared parity as equals. The latter in no way shape manner or form shares authority with the T’NaCH, because it worships avoda zarah alien foreign Gods.

      Church priests and pastors of avodah zarah, they reject the revelations of HaShem made at Sinai and Horev respectively. Likewise the alien Arabs who preach the Koran avodah zarah, they too, like the church abomination, reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Oral Torah at Horev. Both Bible and Koran fail to obey the 1st Commandment of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and ispo fact, by that inevitable result they both worship other Gods; both religions of avodah zarah make flagrant violations of the 2nd Commandment of the Torah revelation at Sinai. Therefore in no manner shape or form does the new testament avodah zarah compare to the literature of the 66 Books that comprise the sealed cannon of the T’NaCH.

      The interpretation of both T’NaCH sources and much later Talmudic legalism both this and that learn by way of precedents as expressed through Common Law courtrooms. The basis of blessing or curse … life or death centers upon the Divine Judgment of — Justice Justice Pursue (דברים טז:יא). Justice defined as — court imposed judicial compensation for damages inflicted, either intentionally or by accident, upon others. Neither the new testament nor koran theology addresses the Torah chief cornerstone of faith – justice. HaShem took Israel out from the oppression of Egyptian bondage to accomplish the oath alliance mutually sworn by both HaShem and Avraham, that the chosen cohen seed of Avraham would rule the oath sworn lands of Canaan with justice.

      The new testament theology which preaches “the messiah saves Man from sin” and the koran theology that preaches that “belief in Allah as the one God and Mohammad as the prophet of the One God” makes any Man who accepts this theology into a Muslim, neither theology emphasizes justice as does the Torah oath brit alliance faith.

      As previously mentioned, both T’NaCH and Talmudic literature learn and interpret by means of prior precedents. The Xtian bible translations, one and all, evil. The Church unilateral decision to impose chapters and verses upon the Hebrew T’NaCH perverts the T’NaCH unto avodah zarah, comparable to Man making love with other homosexual male partners – an abomination. It requires no great skill to read English translations of the T’NaCH. The false Roman new testament writers, their theology cherry picked T’NaCH p’sukim\verses – stolen from their sugia contexts; their speculation perverted these stolen p’sukim\verse comparable to a woman laying with an animal – an abomination.

      The study of T’NaCH and Talmudic Primary Sources, as mentioned above, learns by means of comparing precedent Case\Din/Rule studies. The latter style defines Jewish common law. The arbitrary expunging of sugiot from the T’NaCH followed by the replacement “order” of chapters and verses (which defines every Xtian biblical translation of abomination), this error supported the Church preference of belief in theologies, creeds, and dogmatism above the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev, whereby Moshe the prophet received and accepted the Oral Torah revelation, wherein he thereafter commanded 611 additional commandments which serve as the primary commentary to the revelation of the opening first two commandments, which all Israel accepted at Sinai, and which all Goyim to this very day reject.

      The verses which your blog cherry picked, followed by your reactionary 2 dimensional speculations, they sit within 2 separate sugiot. T’NaCH does not follow the Xtian organization of chapters and verses. But for clarity, since you do not read Hebrew, shall likewise employ them to designate a sugia. יחזקאל מד:א-ח,,,מד:טו-לא. The logic of Oral Torah as opposed to halachic laws codified within the pages of the Talmud (((The Church confuses the latter with the former, in their denunciation of the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah; Oral Torah logic sharply contrasts and differentiates itself from ancient Greek Philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle who developed Greek logic formats. Oral Torah, this unique logic format, this discipline of rational thinking, the Sages throughout the generations, (stars in the sky the promised future born seed of Avram), they derive halachic laws, just as and similar to Moshe the prophet used this exact same Oral Torah logic to derive 611 Torah commandments as his commentary to the revelation of the opening first two commandments of the Sinai revelation of the Torah.

      A distinct, basic, and fundamental distinction which forever separates Oral Torah “logic” from the codification of Jewish halachic laws. T’NaCH “common law” learns by comparing sugiot precedents (((with other similar or contrasting sugiot))) within both the same Book of a Prophet or by comparing similar\contrasting sugiot of other T’NaCH Books. In like as similar fashion the Gemara commentary upon the Mishna brings precedents collected from any of the 6 Orders of the Mishna whereby the Gemara compares the Case\Rule of a specific Mishna to other Mishnaic precedents scattered throughout the whole of the 20 volume Talmud Bavli.

      A sugia precedent comparison ישעיה כט:ט-ל:יח. T’NaCH prophets command mussar NOT speculation which so defines new testament preaching and vain empty noise. Compare the mussar of Isaiah to יחזקאל ו:א-יד. As HaShem, no JeZeus mamzer son of Mary, brought Israel out of the oppression and slavery of Egypt and revealed the revelation of the Torah at both Sinai and Horev, so too
      יחזקאל מד:ג : את הנשיא השיא הוא ישב בו לאכול לחם לפני ה’ מדרך אולם השער יבוא ומדרכו יצא
      Which “prince” does the navi refer? To the baali t’shuva of all and every generation who return to obey the Torah לשמה. The opening Mishna of גיטין teaches that g’lut Jewry lost the ability to do and keep mitzvot commandments לשמה; similar to all the Xtian biblical evil translations which never even once bring the Name of HaShem. Your speculation confuses JeZeus son of Zeus with the generations of faithful bnai brit Israel who do mitzvot commandments לשמה.

      Your blog then proceeds to speculate on יחשקאל מד:טו-לא. Compare this sugia with ישעיה א:י- יז. Contrast the strong mussar of Isaiah. An abomination those who offer sacrifices comparable to a buffet barbeque made unto Heaven. On par with evil men who keep and observe the halachah established by Talmudic codifications of law, made by famous Reshon scholars, as if halachah has any connection with Torah commandments without prophetic mussar woven into the fabric of halachic observances. Religious worship of forms of faith which lacks the substance of prophetic mussar defines keeping and doing the commandments לא לשמה. The Torah does not breath the Spirit of HaShem without mussar. All the Priests and Pastors for 2000+ years, not one of these evil men knew that all T’NaCH prophets command mussar as the definition of their prophesy. A person does not “believe” the mussar which the prophets command. Rather the generations of bnai brit Israel have the Torah obligation to “own” the mussar which the T’NaCH prophets command.

      The Talmud teaches that the Sages did not know how to teach mussar. Why? Preaching ‘fire and brimstone’ can go into one ear and out the other ear of the preached at congregation. Not so mussar. Mussar compares to a seed planted within the heart, and from this soil does that mussar spout from within the heart of Man himself. Mussar does not exist as an foreign idea preached at by others, but rather a native idea which sprouts from within the heart of that individual Man himself, as his own an internal original idea\chiddush – known to no one else other than that Man alone.

      Mussar does not attempt to inform or tell people what theology or creed or dogma that they should believe. All belief systems worship the tumah of avodah zarah. T’NaCH mussar learns by comparing a sugia of the T’NaCH with similar or contrasting sugiot from the T’NaCH. This way of learning goes by the Hebrew term sh’itta\method of learning profound wisdom.

      Compare that sugia of Isaiah with יחזקאל יז:יא-יח. The Torah stands upon the oath brit. Brit cannot mean “covenant” as found in the pathetic Xtian translations of their bibles. To swear a Torah oath לשמה requires the Name of HaShem, and the Name of HaShem no where found on any page of any Xtian bible abominations of avodah zarah which worships foreign alien gods like JeZeus the mamzer son of Mary.

      Like

      1. Moses broke the Law, he didn’t even make it to the foot of Sinai. The whole point of Torah is to show me my inabilities to do his commandments, to reveal my selfish demand that life go my way.

        I am separated from God because he is holy and I’m not. That is God, holy, separate, unapproachable. Therefore Christ, come in the flesh, to give his life, his Spirit, his disposition to me. He is the ‘seed planted within my heart.’

        Like

      2. Talmud teaches Law. Torah commands commandments. Big difference. Commandment command mussar. The Aggaditah within the Talmud teaches mussar as learn from the T’NaCH.

        Your bible abomination translations one and all violate the first and second commandments of Sinai. Therefore impossible for Goyim to keep the commandments because all other Torah commandments learn from the opening first two commandments revealed at Sinai.

        You can not use the word “holy” because you do not know how the Torah defines this word. Have no problem with your whoreship of JeZeus the mamzer son of Mary.

        Like

      3. LOL that’s funny. Of the 613 commandments, the Torah breaks these commandments down into 3 basic catagories. What are they? Pray to JeZeus – alas he does not know.

        Like

      4. nicholasv56 Averagechristiannet@wordpress.com God’s View of our Work – Isaiah https://www.theologyofwork.org/old-testament/isaiah/gods-view-of-our-work-isaiah/worship-and-work-isaiah-1ff

        [[[“””The integral connection of our work and the practical application of our worship also show up in the stories of two kings the prophet used to highlight the place of trusting God in the workplace. Both Ahaz and Hezekiah had leadership responsibilities in Judah as monarchs. Both faced terrifying enemies bent on the destruction of their nation and the city of Jerusalem. Both had the opportunity to believe God’s word through the prophet Isaiah that God would not allow the nation to fall to the enemy. In fact, God’s word to Ahaz was that what the terrified king most feared would not take place, but “if you do not stand firm in faith, you shall not stand at all” (Is. 7:9). Ahaz refused to trust God for deliverance, turning instead to an imprudent alliance with Assyria.”””]]].

        My response to this cherry picking narishkeit. The name given to the 5th Book of the Torah\דברים, this closing Book of Torat Moshe has a second famous name among the Jewish People – משנה תורה\Mishna Torah. Rabbi Yechudah the Prince, his famous codification of Jewish common law takes the name Mishna. Much later the Reshon, who has the acronym of Rambam, named his infamous code & Hebrew translation of Jewish law — Mishna Torah — making Talmudic Aramaic similar to Mishnaic Hebrew. Why infamous code? Publication of this code of halachah radically changed the pre-existent Talmudic definition for the term “Halachah”. This radical code of halachah – it moved the Goal Posts of Torah learning.

        The Talmud stands upon the יסוד\foundation of kabbalah which Rabbi Akiva introduced, known as פרדס chariot mysticism. All the Rabbis within the sealed masoret\tradition of the Talmud/”owned”, “followed”, and “obeyed”, the teachings of Rabbi Akiva. These sages became Rabbi Akiva’s talmidim\students. Rabbi Akiva – the father of the Talmud – Yerushalmi and Bavli. That רשע, ignobly remembered by the generations as the Rambam, his code of halachah which his chutzpah named “Mishna Torah”, that famous Reshon scholar did not know, much less understand the פרדס chariot mysticism taught by Rabbi Akiva and every Rabbi within the pages of the Talmud. He divorced the married couple: Aggaditah and Halachah, and he refused to give Aggaditah her ‘get’. The Rambam code of halachah likewise divorced the common law way of learning the T’NaCH Primary Sources as equally applicable to the masoret of learning the Sha’s Mishna and Gemarah – the Talmud.

        Learning the T’NaCH by comparing or contrasting sugiot defines the sh’itta of learning this Primary Source of the sealed masoret. Rabbi Yechudah the Prince based his codification of Oral Torah Mishna – upon the יסוד which the T’NaCH Books learn. The discipline of Common Law, compares sugiot to similar sugiot precedents. The T’NaCH preceded the Talmud by centuries. The post 2nd Temple Talmud follows the precedent of learning which the T’NaCH 1st Temple established.

        Why does the Book of דברים likewise have the name משנה תורה? The Sages of Israel teach that the revelation of the Written Torah at Sinai encompasses תרי”ג commandments. The Sages of Israel likewise teach, that following the revelation of the opening first two Commandments at Sinai, the People whom HaShem and Moshe brought out of Egypt, cried out in absolute dread, that if they heard another Commandment from the voice of HaShem – that they would surely die as a nation, there on the spot at the foot of Mt. Sinai.

        The Sages of Israel teach 3 Basic Divisions which separate and distinguish the תרי”ג commandments: קום ועשה, שב ולא תעשה, וקום ועשה זמן גרמא… positive, negative, and positive time oriented commandments. The רשע, in his Book of Commandments divides the תרי”ג commandments only into positive and negative Commandments. A fundamental error, that other great Torah sages, like the B’hag – (a late Gaonim\”the magnificent”/, a period in Jewish history from 500 to 1038 C.E marked by intense scholarship at the Babylonian academies by scholars who studied and interpreted the Talmud), also regretfully made.

        This 3rd category of Torah commandments, unlike קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה, requires “k’vannah”. Furthermore, the Mishna of ברכות teaches that this type of Torah commandment – an obligation only upon Men. The simple explanation for the exclusion of women from the obligation to keep positive time oriented commandments, to achieve “k’vannah” requires Talmud; the study of Talmud … a positive time oriented Torah commandment. Learning how to learn takes years of intense study, and even then – based upon the ignorance of the Rambam – few grasp the depths of kabbalah taught by Rabbi Akiva and his 5 surviving talmidim, whom the Romans failed to murder. Rabbi Akiva himself and 20,000 of his talmidim did not survive the 2nd attempt to throw off the oppressive yoke of Roman rule. The Romans delighted and perfected the malignant narcissism of torturing captured prisoners – a war crime against humanity, both then and today.

        A translation for משנה תורה – ‘Legislative Review’. Kings, Parliaments, Congress, Legislators – one and all resent and oppose Courts, within any given country, who possess the mandate that enables these Courts to annul laws passed by the Government. משנה תורה goes beyond the parameters of negating laws imposed by ruling governments. משנה תורה gives the Great Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms the power to re-write laws imposed by governments, such that these re-written laws comply with the Written Torah – the Constitution of the chosen Cohen Republic of States. But how do lateral Sanhedrin courtrooms achieve what virtually all governments throughout history reject?

        The answer to this question most most essentially defines the kabbalah of Talmudic learning. This kabbalah, originally taught by Rabbi Akiva, that רשע Reshon clearly did not know. That halachic codification, made during the early Middle Ages, it redefined halacha — by shearing this fundamental branch of Talmudic scholarship away from קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות.

        Halachah as codified within that Reshon codification limited the scope of Halachah to rabbinic positive and negative commandments. This gross error of judgment, it profaned the commandment not to add or subtract from the Torah. Neither the Rambam nor the B’hag defined the mitza of k’vanna which tefillah most fundamentally requires. This fundamental lack of clarity by virtually all Reshonim scholarship, promoted in later generations, blind ignorance on the Siddur. “Scholars” today falsely teach, that a person to da’aven requires only a simple understanding of the words which his lips pronounce! רשעים have no shame.

        The Rambam’s code failed to link t’shuva by both the Yatzir Ha’Rah AND the Yatzir Ha’Tov. Two fundamentally distinct and separate sets of social memory interaction-relationships among among and between the Jewish people. His halachot on kre’a shma likewise failed to teach the k’vanna which distinguishes the purpose of saying the evening kre’a shma from saying the morning kre’a shma. Tefillah and kre’a shma, two examples of קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות. Both he and his predecessor the B’had acknowledged tefillah as a mitzva from the Torah, yet both failed to distinguishes this type of Torah commandment from positive commandments – which do not require k’vanna. A basic and fundamental error. But the B’hag did not up-root the halachah from the dof of the Gemarah like Xtianity cherry picks p’sukim and thereby perverts both meaning and intent designed to instruct mussar.

        What k’vanna do קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות require? משנה תורה, meaning legislative review! Have come full circle to the above addressed topic. The פרדס kabbalah taught by Rabbi Akiva and by centuries of his talmidim, halachah functions as the form or shape of Torah commandments. The k’vanna of קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות possesses the power to elevate all Torah commandments both דאורייתא ודרבנן, (positive, negative commandments together with rabbinic halachot), unto this third catagory of Torah commandments.

        This פרדס kabbalah breaks up into דרוש\פשט and רמז\סוד partnerships. The warp\weft relationship unites and weaves into a unified fabric both the Aggaditah and Halachah within the Shas Talmud. Even more, the warp/weft kabbalot of פרדס and מעשה בראשית, likewise weave a fabric of faith. The latter affixes itself to defining the k’vanna of the Siddur in general and da’avening unto HaShem in particular. Weaving these two contrasting kabbalot permits a חכם to affix Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot directly to blessings within the Shemone Esrei; whereby a חכם dedicates the t’shuvah made by the two opposing Yatzirot memories, that recall social interactions – both evil & good – as קדוש unto HaShem.

        T’shuvah rejects the guilt and sin bondage, which so defines the tumah of Xtian avodah zarah. The Xtian notions of repentance – an anathema to the Torah faith. The mitzva of Moshiach shares no portion with this tumah guilt trip theology, doctrine, creed, and dogma made famous by the apostle Paul. His ‘original sin’ tumah perversion of the Torah curse concept of g’lut does not merit any Torah respect. The mitzva of love requires “owning” the blessings and curses of the Torah. For this very reason the Siddur establishes da’avening the kre’a shma both in the evening and morning. The chosen Cohen nation “owns” this mussar by pulling responsibility into their hearts for both life and death\blessed and cursed. The k’vanna of tefillah stands upon the יסוד of separating t’shuva memories associated with tumah and tohor middot social interactions with the bnai brit people.

        The kabbalah of פרדס mysticism prioritizes learning and owning the mussar prophesies which T’NaCH prophets command. Owning prophetic mussar commandments, actively pulled within the heart by means of learning through precedents. Mussar depth analysis does not compare, nor resemble, in any shape fashion or form, “believing” in Gods, or the theologies, or doctrines, or creeds, or dogmas – which claim to know the Will of God. The “mystery” of the Trinity tumah serves as a fundamental example of such avodah zarah. Such arrogance does not define nor instruct upon the Torah vision of faith. The faiths of Xtianity and Islam, both worship other Gods, which never caused the hairs of my forefathers to stand in fear. The rhetoric deception of “sister religions”, comparable to blood libel slanders made throughout the history of pagan Europe unto this very day.

        The T’NaCH learns (Talmud means “learning”), by the sh’itta of comparing or contrasting precedents. The Mishna’s style of Case\Rule duplicates how the T’NaCH compares or contrasts sugiot within the Books of the T’NaCH. The Gemarah makes a דרוש throughout the 6 Orders of the Mishna in order to find close precedents by which to understand (discerning like from like) the k’vanna of the language of each specific Mishnaic Case\Rule halachah. Both T’NaCH literature and the Talmud learn through the exact same sh’itta – known as the “logic” of the Torah Sh’Baal Peh.

        As Moshe the prophet learned and commanded his 611 commandment commentary to the opening first two Commandments at Sinai, so too did Rabbi Akiva and all the centuries of his talmidim, they likewise learn and command the woven together קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות achieved through the fabric of Aggadic mussar p’shat, (the definition of the k’vanna learning the prophetic mussar learned from T’NaCH Primary sources) together with doing rabbinic ritual halachah, as codified in the pages of the Talmud. This fundamental and profound kabbalah which defines the meaning of halachah — the evil Rambam code perverted and destroyed. Halachah by the terms of the Rambam code existed only as קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה commandments – has as his Safer HaMitzvot incorrectly divided the תרי”ג commandments. A basic and fundamental day and night error.

        The Safer HaMitzvot, of the Rambam halachic code limits all the halachot learned from the Sha’s Talmud to positive and negative rabbinic commandments. His code fails to affix rabbinic halachot unto the יסוד of Torah commandments. The gravity of this gross error, sowed chaos and anarchy into the hearts of all generations of g’lut Jewry, which already had lost the wisdom to do mitzvot לשמה, (Jews cannot keep Torah mitzvot in g’lut). His code transformed Halachic ritual observances, it divorced ritual rabbinic halachah from its partner Aggadic mussar p’shat learned from the Prophets. Separating like from like requires development of an eye that can discern subtle distinctions.

        If the Rambam code made the divorce between the Torah mussar commandments and rabbinic halachot plainly obvious for all to see and discern, Israel would have stoned the רשע immediately. None the less, a strong minority of Reshonim authorities placed a נדוי ban upon the Rambam, which holds to this very day. After publication of the Rambam code, a rapid deterioration of Torah scholarship immediately resulted in the destruction of Jewish communities across Western Europe, the result of yet another Jewish war among brothers. The mussar curse which the prophet Natan imposed upon the House of David.

        The weaving of Aggaditah together with Halachah defines the requirements of all קום ועשה זמן גרמא מצות. These commandments- potentially include all the halachot which the Talmud codifies. The meaning and intent of משנה תורה\legislative review, an aliyah potential of all Torah and rabbinic commandments to that of קום ועשה זמן גרא מצות from the Torah; learning prophetic mussar as the p’shat of Aggaditah, Aggaditah therein establishes the k’vanna of keeping halachot in the whole of the Sha’s Talmud. The mandate of the משנה תורה itself establishes the authority of all Great Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms, to determine the k’vanna of all laws imposed by governments. Despite the fact that these governments have an open hostility to the משנה תורה mandate welded by Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms.

        With this required Preamble, shall now address the distinction of learning T’NaCH sugiot through the revelation of Oral Torah logic; contrast this discipline of learning with your cherry picking of p’sukim\verses – none sense.

        Ahaz at the age of twenty succeeded his father -Jotham – as king of Judea. He, like the kings of Israel rejected the Written Torah as the Constitution of the Cohen Republic. Ruling the land through justice meant little or nothing to this רשע. He murdered his son, forcing him to walk through the fires of Moloch. This assimilated king embraced the cultures & custom of the Phoenicians – who rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Hezekiah, a sibling son, assumed the crown after Ahaz. By the courage of his mother, she saved his life from a similar fate. Hezekiah rejected and abhorred his fathers assimilation to foreign cultures, the first face of avodah zarah.

        The pagan Xtian European barbarians burned Jews upon the altars of Moloch throughout the 2nd European Civil War. 2000+ years of preaching the Creeds, theologies, doctrines, and dogmatism by Xtian Preasts and Preachers produced the “fruits” of the Shoah. NEVER AGAIN shall Torah Jews assimilate and kiss the Moloch Xtian God as its theology of monotheism dictates. That cursed dead religion now itself rots in g’lut – waiting for the 2nd coming of JeZeus the mamzer son of Mary.

        The sugia which contains your rhetoric propaganda, that cherry picked p’suk\verse – ישעיה ז:ז-ט. Mussar does not compare to history. Failure to discern the distinction between the two – exposes a fundamental incapacity of understanding. Reading the T’NaCH as history of days long ago past, totally perverts T’NaCH spirituality. Each and every generation, each and every individual in every generation, has the burden to make a serious דרוש\search out/ the meaning of T’NaCH prophetic mussar spirituality. T’shuvah which differentiates the dedications made by the opposing Yatzirot to HaShem, no messiah possesses power or authority to do avodat HaShem for any other Man, woman, or child. The mitzvah of Moshiach, a commandment incumbent upon the whole house of Israel, to do and live. The absurd notion preached: belief in a foreign Greek\Roman messiah saves Man from sin and death – utter total rubbish.

        Learning Torah requires obedience to the WAY: the discipline of precedent based common law. Herein defines the function and purpose of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev שמות ל”ד-ו’ ז, which the church abomination has always denied. Confusion between logic and law a fundamentally obvious abuse and corruption. On par with removing the sugiot Order established by the Framers of the T’NaCH and arbitrarily replacing them with chapters and verses. Every generation struggles, just as did like Ahaz, with assimilation unto foreign cultures and customs of peoples and nations who never accepted the oath brit sworn at Sinai. The mussar which the Ahaz story commands applies equally to all Jews living today. Students who learn in Yeshiva, they rely primarily upon commentaries on the T’NaCH rather than learning how to learn by the Way of precedents.

        Compare: ישעיה יח:ד-ו. Torah instructs mussar by means of the sh’ittah of משל\נמשל. Both sugiot address the owned curse of g’lut. Cross reference this mussar with מלכים א ג:ג,ד. Did the young king Shlomo have a tohor or tumah faith? The error of building the Temple in Jerusalem, king Shlomo failed to establish the authority of the Sanhedrin lateral common law court system. The last mitzva which Moshe the prophet exerted his last life energy to achieve – Moshe strove to established the Federal small Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms in three of the six Cities of Refuge. Justice Justice pursue defines the meaning and purpose of Torah faith. Man cannot love God and tolerate injustice and oppression of his bnai brit chosen Cohen people. Therefore king Shlomo chose the halachic ritual forms of faith, rather than prioritize the k’vanna substance of faith. This choice places him in the exact same camp as king Ahaz.

        The kingdom of Shlomo, under his rule, witnessed unprecedented wealth and prosperity. Yet this did not prevent the explosion of Civil War which almost obliterated his kingdom only one generation later. The T’NaCH makes virtually no mention of the Sanhedrin Federal Court System. King Shlomo, like king Ahaz, rejected the Torah as the written Constitution of the Cohen Republic of Tribes. King Shlomo, like king Ahaz, rejected the משנה תורה mandate which Torat Moshe strove to establish the judicial authority of the Sanhedrin Federal Court system as his choice, last and final mitzva, in this world while he yet lived. Both kings despised the mussar commandment which Moshe the prophet commands all generations of the chosen Cohen nation to do and to live.

        Like

    1. Honestly your information of Avram, exceptionally limited. Torah have centers around the brit, NOT what this or that person believes or does not believe. The Torah teaches through aggaditah – mussar. These last two terms, most probably you have not the slightest clue what they mean. Bring them as evidence of the limited knowledge you personally have learned about Avram, the father of the Jewish people.

      Like

      1. That makes great sense … for a none Jewish person. The Arabs in the koran refer to Jews in a derogatory manner: they called up the ‘People of the Book’.

        Like

      2. I’m reverse-learning that the Book is perfect for physical and spiritual health. Yet, I practice the Law of Christ by ‘walking in the light’ of his eyes- I hold me up to his standard, Immanuel’s standard, “God with us”- ‘Be perfect.. be holy.. keep my commandments.. love your neighbor.’ So to me the Person outshines the Book. (Yet I still fall way short.)

        I have a high fascination towards the Jews partly because of the Abram-Isaac-Jacob narrative. Mostly though the connection is because I AM a Jew, in Christ. He’s in my spiritual blood. Everything I touch is from and towards him. And though I stumble and fall, I get up. He knows my thoughts and intents. And so we go, my relationship with God.

        Like

      3. No. You do not know how the Torah defines “holy”. Torah rejects all pick and choose which commandments to keep. Either you obey the Torah or you reject the Torah. All Goyim NEVER accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. You worship other Gods.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Liam Thatcher@wordpress.com Sweat: A Biblical Theology in Three Acts
        My response:

        Greetings Liam,
        You have written on your blog:

        [[[“””The second verse that speaks of sweat is Ezekiel 44:18. It comes in the final main section of the book (40-48) where, having spoken about the exile and destruction of the Temple, Ezekiel prophecies about a new Temple, re-inhabited by God’s glory. It is a vast structure, full of order and life. Whilst this section of Ezekiel’s vision may be one of the most challenging passages of Scripture to interpret, it seems that he is prophesying about the New Creation, where the fall will be reversed, and God’s presence will finally dwell among His people in a renewed Eden-like Temple, that doesn’t simply occupy a tiny portion of the world, but stretches across the whole New Earth (cf. Isaiah 66:17).”””]]]

        First order of business. Ezra and the Men of the Great Assembly sealed the Cannon of the Hebrew T’NaCH. The later new testament Greek manuscripts in no manner or form compare to the authority of the T’NaCH. Xtian propaganda foists the false notion of Old and New Testaments, as if they shared parity as equals. The latter in no way shape manner or form shares authority with the T’NaCH, because it worships avoda zarah alien foreign Gods.

        Church priests and pastors of avodah zarah, they reject the revelations of HaShem made at Sinai and Horev respectively. Likewise the alien Arabs who preach the Koran avodah zarah, they too, like the church abomination, reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Oral Torah at Horev. Both Bible and Koran fail to obey the 1st Commandment of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and ispo fact, by that inevitable result they both worship other Gods; both religions of avodah zarah make flagrant violations of the 2nd Commandment of the Torah revelation at Sinai. Therefore in no manner shape or form does the new testament avodah zarah compare to the literature of the 66 Books that comprise the sealed cannon of the T’NaCH.

        The interpretation of both T’NaCH sources and much later Talmudic legalism both this and that learn by way of precedents as expressed through Common Law courtrooms. The basis of blessing or curse … life or death centers upon the Divine Judgment of — Justice Justice Pursue (דברים טז:יא). Justice defined as — court imposed judicial compensation for damages inflicted, either intentionally or by accident, upon others. Neither the new testament nor koran theology addresses the Torah chief cornerstone of faith – justice. HaShem took Israel out from the oppression of Egyptian bondage to accomplish the oath alliance mutually sworn by both HaShem and Avraham, that the chosen cohen seed of Avraham would rule the oath sworn lands of Canaan with justice.

        The new testament theology which preaches “the messiah saves Man from sin” and the koran theology that preaches that “belief in Allah as the one God and Mohammad as the prophet of the One God” makes any Man who accepts this theology into a Muslim, neither theology emphasizes justice as does the Torah oath brit alliance faith.

        As previously mentioned, both T’NaCH and Talmudic literature learn and interpret by means of prior precedents. The Xtian bible translations, one and all, evil. The Church unilateral decision to impose chapters and verses upon the Hebrew T’NaCH perverts the T’NaCH unto avodah zarah, comparable to Man making love with other homosexual male partners – an abomination. It requires no great skill to read English translations of the T’NaCH. The false Roman new testament writers, their theology cherry picked T’NaCH p’sukim\verses – stolen from their sugia contexts; their speculation perverted these stolen p’sukim\verse comparable to a woman laying with an animal – an abomination.

        The study of T’NaCH and Talmudic Primary Sources, as mentioned above, learns by means of comparing precedent Case\Din/Rule studies. The latter style defines Jewish common law. The arbitrary expunging of sugiot from the T’NaCH followed by the replacement “order” of chapters and verses (which defines every Xtian biblical translation of abomination), this error supported the Church preference of belief in theologies, creeds, and dogmatism above the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev, whereby Moshe the prophet received and accepted the Oral Torah revelation, wherein he thereafter commanded 611 additional commandments which serve as the primary commentary to the revelation of the opening first two commandments, which all Israel accepted at Sinai, and which all Goyim to this very day reject.

        The verses which your blog cherry picked, followed by your reactionary 2 dimensional speculations, they sit within 2 separate sugiot. T’NaCH does not follow the Xtian organization of chapters and verses. But for clarity, since you do not read Hebrew, shall likewise employ them to designate a sugia. יחזקאל מד:א-ח,,,מד:טו-לא. The logic of Oral Torah as opposed to halachic laws codified within the pages of the Talmud (((The Church confuses the latter with the former, in their denunciation of the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah; Oral Torah logic sharply contrasts and differentiates itself from ancient Greek Philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle who developed Greek logic formats. Oral Torah, this unique logic format, this discipline of rational thinking, the Sages throughout the generations, (stars in the sky the promised future born seed of Avram), they derive halachic laws, just as and similar to Moshe the prophet used this exact same Oral Torah logic to derive 611 Torah commandments as his commentary to the revelation of the opening first two commandments of the Sinai revelation of the Torah.

        A distinct, basic, and fundamental distinction which forever separates Oral Torah “logic” from the codification of Jewish halachic laws. T’NaCH “common law” learns by comparing sugiot precedents (((with other similar or contrasting sugiot))) within both the same Book of a Prophet or by comparing similar\contrasting sugiot of other T’NaCH Books. In like as similar fashion the Gemara commentary upon the Mishna brings precedents collected from any of the 6 Orders of the Mishna whereby the Gemara compares the Case\Rule of a specific Mishna to other Mishnaic precedents scattered throughout the whole of the 20 volume Talmud Bavli.

        A sugia precedent comparison ישעיה כט:ט-ל:יח. T’NaCH prophets command mussar NOT speculation which so defines new testament preaching and vain empty noise. Compare the mussar of Isaiah to יחזקאל ו:א-יד. As HaShem, no JeZeus mamzer son of Mary, brought Israel out of the oppression and slavery of Egypt and revealed the revelation of the Torah at both Sinai and Horev, so too
        יחזקאל מד:ג : את הנשיא השיא הוא ישב בו לאכול לחם לפני ה’ מדרך אולם השער יבוא ומדרכו יצא
        Which “prince” does the navi refer? To the baali t’shuva of all and every generation who return to obey the Torah לשמה. The opening Mishna of גיטין teaches that g’lut Jewry lost the ability to do and keep mitzvot commandments לשמה; similar to all the Xtian biblical evil translations which never even once bring the Name of HaShem. Your speculation confuses JeZeus son of Zeus with the generations of faithful bnai brit Israel who do mitzvot commandments לשמה.

        Your blog then proceeds to speculate on יחשקאל מד:טו-לא. Compare this sugia with ישעיה א:י- יז. Contrast the strong mussar of Isaiah. An abomination those who offer sacrifices comparable to a buffet barbeque made unto Heaven. On par with evil men who keep and observe the halachah established by Talmudic codifications of law, made by famous Reshon scholars, as if halachah has any connection with Torah commandments without prophetic mussar woven into the fabric of halachic observances. Religious worship of forms of faith which lacks the substance of prophetic mussar defines keeping and doing the commandments לא לשמה. The Torah does not breath the Spirit of HaShem without mussar. All the Priests and Pastors for 2000+ years, not one of these evil men knew that all T’NaCH prophets command mussar as the definition of their prophesy. A person does not “believe” the mussar which the prophets command. Rather the generations of bnai brit Israel have the Torah obligation to “own” the mussar which the T’NaCH prophets command.

        The Talmud teaches that the Sages did not know how to teach mussar. Why? Preaching ‘fire and brimstone’ can go into one ear and out the other ear of the preached at congregation. Not so mussar. Mussar compares to a seed planted within the heart, and from this soil does that mussar spout from within the heart of Man himself. Mussar does not exist as an foreign idea preached at by others, but rather a native idea which sprouts from within the heart of that individual Man himself, as his own an internal original idea\chiddush – known to no one else other than that Man alone.

        Mussar does not attempt to inform or tell people what theology or creed or dogma that they should believe. All belief systems worship the tumah of avodah zarah. T’NaCH mussar learns by comparing a sugia of the T’NaCH with similar or contrasting sugiot from the T’NaCH. This way of learning goes by the Hebrew term sh’itta\method of learning profound wisdom.

        Compare that sugia of Isaiah with יחזקאל יז:יא-יח. The Torah stands upon the oath brit. Brit cannot mean “covenant” as found in the pathetic Xtian translations of their bibles. To swear a Torah oath לשמה requires the Name of HaShem, and the Name of HaShem no where found on any page of any Xtian bible abominations of avodah zarah which worships foreign alien gods like JeZeus the mamzer son of Mary.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s