Eclectic Topics in no Particular Order
Various Topics Discussed
/>
Worshiping anyone other than G-d is absolutely idolatry for a Jew.
This includes adding any intermediary or “part” of G-d (holy ghost / spirit, Jesus). G-d has no parts. He is אֶחָד / eḥad -- one. He is a simple “one.” Many missionaries will claim that G-d is a compound unity – (as in “one forest” which has many things in it). False. G-d is one as in an “absolute one” not a compound unity. B'reshit / Genesis 1:26 begins “and G-d (SINGULAR) said”. Absolute. Singular. One. Idolatry in Judaism is עבודה זרה / avodah zarah -- literally "strange worship.” Any G-d we did not know at Sinai is a false god. No one at Sinai ever heard of Jesus or the so-called “holy ghost.” As is so typical with missionaries they are misusing and twisting Jewish sources to try to support the unsupportable. Some say that while Christianity is considered idolatry for Jews that some leading Jewish sources have declared that it is not idolatry for a gentile. How they can say this when G-d’s commandment against idolatry is given to all humans -- not just to Jews, (see B'reshit / Genesis 4:26) seems to be missionary wishful thinking. Do not profane / הוּחַל the name of G-d -- B'reshit / Genesis 4:26. Recently some missionaries are misusing Jewish sources to try to say that Christianity is not idolatry for them. They grab a Jewish concept called שִׁתּוּף / shituf which means “association” or “partnership” and declare that for a Christian this is acceptable: they “associate” or “partner” Jesus and the holy ghost / spirit with G-d and this (they declare) is not idolatry for them. They will reference numerous Jewish sources they claim support their claim. One is Yaakov ben Meir, known as Rabbeinu Tam / רבינו תם. He lived in the 12th century and was the grandson of the great Rashi, and an expert on Jewish law / halacha in his own right. His yeshiva (school) boasted many great scholars as well… Did he say, as the missionaries claim, that non-Jews can partner Jesus (or anything else -- an angel, a star, a rock) with G-d? Of course not. This insult is more disgusting when one considers the fact that he lived during the Second Crusade -- and was nearly killed by the Christians. On May 8, 1146 (the holiday of Shavuot), a Christian mob dragged him out of the synagogue to crucify him. He was stabbed five times! The mob shouted “If you’re the leader of the Jewish people in France, it’s no more than right that vengeance should be taken upon you for what the Jews did to our lord.” He was only saved by the arrival of a nobleman who the rav had helped financially in the past. The nobleman realized the crowd was out for blood -- but he told them “let me take him -- I promise to convert him to Christianity within two days. If I fail I’ll turn him back over to you and you can crucify him then.” The crowd agreed and instead the nobleman helped R’ Tam escape -- leaving behind his wealth, his home and all his belongings… So how do the missionaries distort this great man’s teachings? This man who was nearly killed rather than convert to Christianity??? They claim that R’ Tam stated that the trinity is not idolatry for Christians -- it is שִׁתּוּף / shituf and permissible. This is not what this revered man taught. He was writing specifically about Jews who did business with Christians, and if said Christian swore an oath in a court of law that would impact the Jew’s property then it was permissible to let the gentile say the oath in order to testify. In Tosafot (Bechorot 2b) Samuel ben Meir , the Rashbam (older brother to R’ Tam), had stated that if a Jew partners with a Christian -- and if the Christian felt obligated to swear under oath in a court of law regarding a legal case involving the Jew, the Jew should not accept the testimony because the Christian was sworn in not swearing to G-d but to false gods. If the court would allow the gentile to forgo the oath his testimony in a court of law would be acceptable said the Rashbam... His brother R’ Tam disagreed and said if the Christian is already a partner with a Jew then the Jew can accept the gentile’s oath to testify in a court of law if the legal case would save property. This Tosafot where both opinions were given was commenting on an entry in the Talmud regarding the same topic: a gentile testifying in a court of law who swears under oath to false gods. That is “it.” Nowhere did R’ Tam say that Christianity was acceptable for gentiles. He simply said that when a Christian “swore” in the name of their god(s) in a court of law as part of doing business with a Jew that oath was permissible.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
|