Ask a Jew, what do we do?

The purpose of these types of threads is to provide people a thread to ask questions about one's faith. I did the same with Islam, yet never claimed to represent all Muslims. Moishe did not claim to represent all Jews, on this forum he happens to be one of the most educated Jews here, so who better to explain the Jewish faith than a follower of it? Same goes with any faith.

 

That's just not true.

We believe the Torah was delivered to Moses (pbuh) from God. Furthermore, Sharia is supposed to permit Jews follow their own laws with their own courts, in an Islamic state.

 

Uhhh, I appreciate your appreciation for the Torah and I most definitely do not want to detract from that appreciation but - I'm pretty darned sure that your opinion is at odds with most Islamic scholars of the last 1,500 years.
According to Sharia, the Torah that we Jews hold sacred is NOT the Torah that Moshe Rabbeinu received on Mt. Sinai. According to Islam, the Jews lied about our Torah and made up and changed that parts that disagree with Islam.
One major specific example would be the story of Avraham and Yitzchak called the Akeida where G-d asks Avraham Avinu to sacrifice his son Yitzchak.
Islam clearly defines this as false and puts Yishmael and Avraham together, later to go on to establish the Kaaba in Mecca....

Nonetheless, if you disagree with this, I can only commend you.
Islam, as do all religions, including Judaism, has many different schools of thought and, if your belief does not deny the Torah as coming from G-d, I am very grateful and wish you well...

 

The Quran doesn't deny it came from God, and no Muslim cannot deny it came from God, however it does say it has been changed. I do believe that.

However, that does not mean that Jews (and Christians) are forbidden from practicing their laws under Sharia.

But to say Islam has no connection to the Torah or denies its divinity is an exaggeration of what we believe.

 

I'm sure all the Jews and the Christians are grateful for you allowing them to practice their laws.

 

shalom, I have a jewish friend and she has told me that jews believe that life ends at death. The soul does not carry on to the hereafter. I was shocked to hear this because I thought all 3 monotheistic faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam believe in heaven and hell / heareafter. Can you explain? Thanks.

 

In the New testament the Jewish Pharisee sect believed in ghosts, angels, demons, spirits, and resurrection. The Jewish Sadducees said that stuff like that was looney.

Acts 23:8 (NKJV) =

"For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.​

"

The Pharisees got their beliefs from the Babylonians during the captivity period. Jesus, Paul, and all of the Apostles were Pharisees.

 

I have heard some say they believe, so that makes sense. Some do and some don't.

 

Your Jewish friend is neither a religious or Torah observant Jew. She does not practice the religion of Judaism. She may simply be Jewish because she had a Jewish mother.
I'm sure there are also many apostate or even "non-believing" Muslims whose families are religious but who personally have no connection with the religion of Islam.
There are varying degrees of that kind of belief in all religions. People may call themselves Christian solely because their family is Christian even though they know nothing about Christianity and do not attend a church.
That's life.

 

The woman asked why would a person that she considers jewish, would state that 'life ends at death'?

if you cannot answer that question, then I will state that you are neither jewish, nor torah observant.

ill answer the question: We each practice death every nite that we sleep; the consciousness is out. No different from death. That means, she is right with such the simple claim as no one is waking up in some special place called heaven, after perishing.

But if the concept is asking, if our lives are dead upon death, then I will say 'no it ain't' and the method of comprehending that is 'darwin, won!'. Meaning that what he left is still here and alive in most all of us, alive today. He lives in what he did, same as you will.


ie.. good: support life to continue

bad: loss to the common

The lying preachers, fade with the lie. The good teachers, live forever!

 

Ritualistic trifling IMO.

Mohammed utilized this call to prayer five times a day as a tool to block the Christians from proselytizing in Arabia.
He simple hit at their Achilles heel, Trinity.

Those men had no simple reasonable ay to explain how 3 sums to one.

 

I'm not sure if you can even think in these terms but maybe some here can.
Does the style of writing in the passages found in the Hebrew Bible but not in the Christian Old Testament meet with the other passages in such a way as to suggest they had the same author, or is it in some way incongruous?
Bible critics claim JEPQ are the aithors and that somenone spliced the four distinct books together, so they deny unity even in the Christian Bible, but have they tackled the Hebrew version with the same enthusiasm?

 

hmm, I'm not sure about that. She married a Jewish man, they raise their kids in the faith and keep the traditions with the holidays and everything. Not sure really.

 

Well, with your name, I am going to presume that you are a Muslim.
Would you consider someone who went to mosque on Fridays but did not pray 5 times daily; acknowledged Ramadan, but did not strictly fast during the day - an "observant" Muslim?
If they raised their kids this way, kept the traditions perhaps in manner of dress, with observing the holidays in that kind of fashion.... Are they practicing the religion of Islam?

 

I am not entirely knowledgeable about biblical Criticism but, yes - I am pretty sure they are mostly discussing the Torah; the first five books of the bible, when they are breaking in down into "J" "E" etcetera.

 

Of course the Bible has has the same author(s). John Wycliffe wrote it in 1382-1395.

William Tyndale wrote it (the New Testament) in 1525-1526. He did half of the Old Testament.

The Protestants wrote the Geneva Bible in 1560.

King James hired a committee to write the Bible and they finished it in 1611.

The Hebrew Bible is a German invention so the writing style is different from the English versions.

 

Biggest joke of the year.

How do you account for the earlier Bibles in existence. Over 5000 parts of the Bible from 150CE and a virtually complete ones from 4th century - (Codex Sinaiticus) in the British Library. Codex Vaticanus (Vatican Library).

 

Thanks for the information. No one ever discusses those books so their existence is not commonly known. So when were they written and why aren't they readily available for examination?

I've seen pictures of ancient manuscripts and their pages are in very poor condition. As you can see, when large sections are missing the translator can add his own verbiage. http://www.npr.org/2012/12/29/168223286/virtually-anyone-can-see-the-dead-sea-scrolls-now

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...le-google-israel-religion-digitized-pictures/

 

You've answered part of your own questions, They aren't readily available because of their fragile condition, but some are available if you look on the Interent or visit the particular museum etc.
The reason few know about them is simple. No-one is really bothered to ask unless they research the Bible, its history etc.

And of course people can add their own translation. However there are plenty big enough to be in no doubt what they are.

 

and to read up on the scrolls, find that aramaic is the primary language. It aint hebrew or by any god.

Hebrew is not aramaic, even when people like to claim that the version(s) of aramaic are hebrew.

Try bible: 26 And Eliakim son of Hilkiah saith -- and Shebna, and Joah -- to the chief of the butlers, `Speak, we pray thee, unto thy servants [in] Aramaean, for we are understanding, and do not speak with us [in] Jewish, in the ears of the people who [are] on the wall.

they are old works and the majority are in aramaic, which is based on the old akkadian and zoroaster based language. Most anyone can observe even older documentation in Akkadian by the Amarna tablets. Akkadian is the parent language of Aramaic and that is most definitely zoroaster - egyptian. Hebrew is not the focal language of the dead sea scrolls, which if anything proves that 'judaism' is not the original foundation to any of the stories. They are egyptian - zoroaster - assyrian - ahura.

just in case anyone likes the HISTORY of the babble, keep in mind that the majority of the works are egyptian based combined with zoroasterism (Ashur)

Ask a 'jew' what we do.

(enable truth)

 

True that I don't know what is in her mind / heart. But she is one of the purest souls I've ever come across!

 

This is good.
However, you wrote: "she has told me that jews believe that life ends at death. The soul does not carry on to the hereafter."
There is nothing in Judaism that teaches that life ends at death.
The Torah teaches us that The World of Truth; the "Real" World; The World to Come; Paradise, BEGINS at death.
In other words, she doesn't know much about Judaism.
It is good that she is a pure soul. However, she is also very wrong and misinformed about what it means to be Jewish.

 

About this partÑ

"The Children of Noah are the Gentiles"

Children of Noah as gentiles is a not a contradiction but a common assumption. According to the Torah, the word "gentiles" applies to the sons of Japhet, not so to the sons of Shem, neither to the sons of Ham. In this part of the book of Genesis, where the descendants of Noah are described, only the sons of Japhet are the ones called "gentiles"

Genesis 10:15

Me-éle nif-re-du i-yey ha-go-yím be-ar-tso-tám ish lil-sho-no le-mish-pejo-tám be-go-ye-hém

The status of "Gentiles" is applied later on to the rest of nations to identify the other races because they adopted the different customs and worship of other gods.

 

I would like to check things in order.

When we are born we don't have the priviledge of will to decide our actions. When we are circumcised at that early age, the ones who fulfill the covenat are our parents.

A covenant is an agreement between two parties where "two promises" are in play.

Abraham received the promises before circumsicion, and the promises came from God.

Abraham conceding and doing circumsicion to himself was his promise to do his part in a covenant. Abraham circumcising his child was his (Abraham's) part of fulfilling the covenant.

Being circumsiced days after birth with ritual or without ritual, still is for the child solely a medical procedure, because at such early age, the child is not promising anything to anyone.

 

What is the medical procedure for, if not the 'ritual'?

And then the first lie, is contradicted by that last line of bs.

I hate liars.

Circumcision was to reduce STDs that came from the soldiers when they returned after taking the spoils of war (raping/taking the women of the foreign lands). Keep in mind, that in the old times, bathing was not as standard as it is today and the foreskin is a harbor for STDs. ie... nostradomus of over 3thousand years ahead of circumcision, practically saved europe from the plague but simply teaching people to stay clean and bath.

One of the items that made the Romans seem to be so civilized was bathing.

Circumcision was/is a medical procedure for health reasons and the only 'god' that ever required it, was a pharaoh (god to the people). Any claim that a magical god, made circumcision a covenant to save mankind, is a bonafide lie, that liars are too selfish to realize.

(per babble) Moses was born in egypt, raised in egypt and lived in pharoahs house. Abraham never wrote a word within torah, bible or any documentation that anyone has ever identified as by abraham. That means, any per se conversation, promise, covenant or otherwise, with 'god' that is claimed to have occurred with abraham is purely story telling.

Basic common sense