SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum

It irritates me when people play the "race card" or "anti-semitism" card.

Recently in our community we have had rocks thrown at one Jew, two
attacked and beaten, one robbed at gun point, two had garbage thrown
at them, and a woman verbally assaulted with obscene yelling.

Now THAT is anti-semitism.

(02-22-2011 04:27 PM)SheitlQueen Wrote: [ -> ]It irritates me when people play the "race card" or "anti-semitism" card.

Recently in our community we have had rocks thrown at one Jew, two
attacked and beaten, one robbed at gun point, two had garbage thrown
at them, and a woman verbally assaulted with obscene yelling.

Now THAT is anti-semitism.

Absolutely. And it cuts to the heart to watch the news reports of these things.

For some reason, HR seems to promote that anything stated against how "they" view "Jewishness" aka a "Hebraic mind-set" is anti-Semitism. I do wonder if those who make these kinds of associations ever read the news about what is going in and around Israel to the Jewish people. Or have they forgotten the Holocaust? To me, that is anti-Semitism - when people's hatred of the Jews desires their annihilation and promotes persecution of them.

The funny thing is the Messianics view of "Jewishness" is so far off the mark, it's pathetic.
And they would be the first to drop any phony "Jewishness" they might have and run
for the hills at the first real sign of anti-semitism.

The Messies are now actively doing missionary work towards non-Messisanic Christians..
and calling them pagans for celebrating things like Easter, Sunday sabbath, and Christmas.
Are they going to cry "anti-semitism" when the non-Messy Christians (rightly so) start pushing back?

Well, that's a bit ironic. 95% of the Messies are not Jews, so how can those who disagree with the beliefs of
Messies be "anti-semitic"?

The few Jews who are involved in it, are do not believe in or practice Judaism, but some made up hybrid faith
called "Hebrew Roots" or "Messianic". It's not Judaism....so again, how can disagreeing with it be considered
"anti-semitic"?

(02-22-2011 06:46 PM)SheitlQueen Wrote: [ -> ]Well, that's a bit ironic. 95% of the Messies are not Jews, so how can those who disagree with the beliefs of
Messies be "anti-semitic"?

The few Jews who are involved in it, are do not believe in or practice Judaism, but some made up hybrid faith
called "Hebrew Roots" or "Messianic". It's not Judaism....so again, how can disagreeing with it be considered
"anti-semitic"?

Because those in Hebrew Roots perceive themselves to be Jewish, and because they perceive their doctrines and beliefs to be accepted by the Jews, that makes them equal to the Jews. I have also witnessed/heard/read that the Messianics aka Hebrew Roots believe that they have the "true" Hebraic understanding and are in fact "teaching" the Jews how to be more Jewish, in the "right" way of course So when someone disagrees with how they view Jewish practices or proves them wrong, it becomes to them, anti-Semitism. I know it really sounds contrived, and it is

(02-22-2011 04:27 PM)SheitlQueen Wrote: [ -> ]It irritates me when people play the "race card" or "anti-semitism" card.

Recently in our community we have had rocks thrown at one Jew, two
attacked and beaten, one robbed at gun point, two had garbage thrown
at them, and a woman verbally assaulted with obscene yelling.

Now THAT is anti-semitism.

Anti-semitism is satanic. Satan hates Jews because God chose them as His own, because He used them to transcribe and propagate His Word, because God chose Judah for the Messianic line, et cetera. No real Christian who worships Jesus as God can possibly be anti-semitic, because Jesus was Jewish and He says John 4:22 "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews". Any anti-semite who claims "Christianity" is either lying or following a false christ.

(02-12-2011 11:46 PM)uncledawg Wrote: [ -> ]I stumbled onto your blog but I frankly fail to see your point.

Dallas Seminary Professor Darrel Boch’s doctoral thesis indeed maintains that prophecy is pattern (Dr. Boch is Jewish). Dr. Michael Rydelnik (also a Jewish Christian) professor of Jewish Studies at Moody Bible Institute teaches that the church should read the scripture as Jesus and The apostles did. A litany of conservative Evangelical scholars including Dr. R.N. Longenecker, Dr. T.S. Dockerty, Dr. EE. Ellis (also Jewish), Bilderbeck & Strauss likewise maintain that the New Testament interprets The Old Testament along midrashic lines (similar to the Dead Sea scrolls) and it is how a growing number of saved theologians refute the assertions liberal higher criticism and of unbelieving rabbis that The New Testament distorts The Old Testament out of context.

Everyone knows The New Testament was authored by Jews, everyone knows that The New Testament teaches that to The Jews belongs the oracles of God , and everyone knows that The New Testament deals with The Old Testament with methods of interpretation that are not purely in the grammatical-historical vain of the Western church; just look at Galatians 4 or Jude’s epistle. Others besides Jacob Prasch have cited Pesher interpretations in the gospels, the use of Levitical typology in The New Testament, and whether anyone approves or not the term Midrash is found in scripture even though some KJV Only fanatics wrongly tried to deny it because it is not translated as such in their KJV. None of you seem to have an academic background or grasp of biblical languages yet you put yourself forward as having an expertise where you do not.

It was the Puritan theologian John Lightfoot who first wrote a commentary series in the 17th century arguing that The New Testament uses Midrash as a hermeneutic, not Jacob Prasch. The Puritans by the way refused to use the KJV but preferred The Geneva Bible because they considered the 1611 KJV to be too Roman Catholic with its lists of Roman Catholic feasts of Mary and inclusion of the apocrypha by King James who persecuted Born again Christians forcing them to flee to Holland and to America on The Mayflower.

As the son of the very Roman Catholic Mary Queen of Scots his Catholic leanings were obvious and most British historians consider him to have been a homosexual, so the Puritans rejected him.

A visit to Jacob Prasch’s website (Moriel.org) will confirm that in addition to opposing the word-faith money preachers, the ecumenical movement and unity with Roman Catholicism, the Purpose Driven agenda, inclusivist bible translations such as ‘The Message’, and the Emergent church etc. Jacob Prasch has also warned of the extreme axis of the modern Messianic movement and denounced basing doctrine on symbolism as Gnostic. Jacob Prasch openly denounces Talmudic Judaism as a false religion and calls kaballah ‘occultic’. Are we speaking about the same Jacob Prasch ?

When I go to his website and read for myself what he actually believes and read what is said about him by a seemingly very small group of people on this blog spot it appears that unless you are deliberately lying you are just plain ignorant .You do not even seem to know the difference between midrash as hermeneutics (which many Christian scholars accept) and the later rabbinic writing called midrash which Jacob Prasch does not accept.

I think you are being rather silly and some would say dishonest or maybe anti Semitic.

Cheers

I know this was posted a while ago, and there have been a lot of responses since, but as this arose because I analysed and critiqued Jacob Prasch's article of a so called biblical defense of the use of midrash I thought I would "weigh in".

Jacob Prasch and his followers make a big thing about scholarship and being learned, as if only those people who are such can know God. (please refer to Vic's response to you in this regard for a biblical refutation of that idea). One of the reasons I did the critical analysis of Prasch's article was because I wanted to take this scholarly approach and apply it and see what came out the other side... yes I confess I am an accredited scholar, and there is no reputable academic institution in the world that would refute that. Amongst a number of tertiary level qualifications I have 2 honours degrees and a masters degree, all of which at the very least trained and enabled me to make such a critical analysis. When I started the critique I had high hopes about being wrong about JP , but unfortunately things started to crumble very quickly when it was immediately apparent that he made a lot of grammatical errors and spelling errors! At the very least I expected such a renowned scholar to be able to write and spell correctly.

The next problem that arose was the spelling of Prof Bock's name and the quoting of this "prophecy is pattern idea"... as I had just read a book by Prof Bock, I picked up on it straight away. I wrote to Prof Bock, and please note, it is he and not I who refuted what JP quoted. Prof Bock's idea on Prophecy And Pattern is different from JP's. The "scholarly article" by JP just went downhill from there.

I sent JP my critique and he quickly changed some of his most glaring errors and then acted like they had never been there. A scholar should have integrity and be always prepared to respond to peer review. Other than to send an obsequious email to Prof Bock's blog (which last time I checked the Prof had not responded to) JP obliquely referred to me as someone he will ignore because I am a "KJV only cultist" . This was a very odd remark because anyone who reads my critique will see that I used the NASB (JP's preference) and at least 10 other versions besides the KJV to refute his "scholarly article".

Lastly, all scholars know that no article is scholarly unless it is referenced according to International standards of referencing. Even first year students at university will not get credits if they do not reference correctly no matter how good their work is. JP had no references at all, and his theme of "midrash must be right because other clever scholars say so" is not actually a scholarly (or even intelligent) argument.

1 Corinthians 10 vs 12
Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

(02-23-2011 07:12 PM)Mary Wrote: [ -> ]I know this was posted a while ago, and there have been a lot of responses since, but as this arose because I analysed and critiqued Jacob Prasch's article of a so called biblical defense of the use of midrash I thought I would "weigh in".

Jacob Prasch and his followers make a big thing about scholarship and being learned, as if only those people who are such can know God. (please refer to Vic's response to you in this regard for a biblical refutation of that idea). One of the reasons I did the critical analysis of Prasch's article was because I wanted to take this scholarly approach and apply it and see what came out the other side... yes I confess I am an accredited scholar, and there is no reputable academic institution in the world that would refute that. Amongst a number of tertiary level qualifications I have 2 honours degrees and a masters degree, all of which at the very least trained and enabled me to make such a critical analysis. When I started the critique I had high hopes about being wrong about JP , but unfortunately things started to crumble very quickly when it was immediately apparent that he made a lot of grammatical errors and spelling errors! At the very least I expected such a renowned scholar to be able to write and spell correctly.

The next problem that arose was the spelling of Prof Bock's name and the quoting of this "prophecy is pattern idea"... as I had just read a book by Prof Bock, I picked up on it straight away. I wrote to Prof Bock, and please note, it is he and not I who refuted what JP quoted. Prof Bock's idea on Prophecy And Pattern is different from JP's. The "scholarly article" by JP just went downhill from there.

I sent JP my critique and he quickly changed some of his most glaring errors and then acted like they had never been there. A scholar should have integrity and be always prepared to respond to peer review. Other than to send an obsequious email to Prof Bock's blog (which last time I checked the Prof had not responded to) JP obliquely referred to me as someone he will ignore because I am a "KJV only cultist" . This was a very odd remark because anyone who reads my critique will see that I used the NASB (JP's preference) and at least 10 other versions besides the KJV to refute his "scholarly article".

Lastly, all scholars know that no article is scholarly unless it is referenced according to International standards of referencing. Even first year students at university will not get credits if they do not reference correctly no matter how good their work is. JP had no references at all, and his theme of "midrash must be right because other clever scholars say so" is not actually a scholarly (or even intelligent) argument.

1 Corinthians 10 vs 12
Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Mary, Thank you so much for clarifying things. The whole academic claims and accusations to refute, ie must be you are a cult , ruckmanite, etc, were some of Prasch's initial false accusations to any and all who followed the posting of my initial To Embrace Hebrew Roots series. It was released over a period of a few months and each release brought I tirade and more false accusations. As people like Richard Engstrom, who knew Prasch personally, responded, the false accusations were continued. That was his only defense. Zero documentation from him, because to present his 'proofs' would merely have validated what I had presented with full documentation concerning the midrash and other things he was actually promoting.

It was during that time that Peter Michas, another person I had researched, also went quite ballistic and falsely accused a bunch of people of working with me who weren't, but his threats included being, that I was a nazi and for all to remember the holocaust and he was going to sue for antisemitism and defamation and on and on. IN fact there pretty much was a public negative response from many I researched.

It was because of Michas I believe, that the ADL sent a rep to read my articles, because by then I had my website up. The first email I got from Fred, a reformed Jew who was a practicing lawyer, was his saying that after reading my series he saw no anti-semitism in the writings or on my website. Which wasn't a surprise to me. But, I was a little confused as to why someone would write me like that, and then realised who he was connected with through our conversations.

We spent quite a bit of time dialoguing via email, and actually became friends. We talked about our beliefs, and we challenged each other. I realised later, he views me as a righteous Gentile and suggested I should convert to Judaism. He ended up taking my series to Israel to some Rabbi's. They told him not to dialogue with a fundamentalist Christian. He told me when he got back from Israel, he chose to ignore that, and he invited me to New York and he would take me to lunch---he stressed non -kosher, but it's a non-issue for me. I don't announce it because I prefer those who like to call me/Christians pagan etc, to view me as such, but out of respect for practicing Jews and Messianics, God layed it on my heart to be Biblically kosher, because it matters to them. Although if we go to someone's house and they serve something that falls outside that category, I don't make an issue about it. Paul wrote to not destroy God's work or our witness over meat/food. [Romans 14]

I lost touch with Fred for awhile and then when 9/11 happened I contacted him, because that's where he was from and his family, and I was really concerned he was alright. He said he was on a bus on the way into where he worked and they saw the towers and smoke from there. His family was safe. He seemed to really appreciate that I cared enough to contact him.

Anyway, even a few members from the counter missionary Jews for Judaism have read my articles. One said 'so what' to some info, but never once accused me or my site of being anti semitic. And one defended me on another forum against Trimm's false accusations of lashon hara etc. Which seemed so odd at the time.

These leadership are so afraid to be evaluated and proven, that they will do anything and say anything against any that do. It doesn't matter how false their doctrine, as long as they can appear to be righteous to the one's who would follow them. And it never fails to amaze me, how easily people will prefer someone's statements as true, just because the person claims to be leadership or holds some 'credentials'.

Jesus and the apostles were never schooled. And look who they are