Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 149
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Lastly for today...when someone complains about my use of Yiddish, they usually are admitting that they are losing a debate. To paraphrase an American patriot (with lots of love and a little literary room): 'Complaining about the grammar or spelling of your nemesis is the last refuge of a debate loser.' Of course, if you think you know Yiddish better than I do, well, we could write each other in Yiddish. I could do it. Just let me know. It'd be fun. I have to admit that my Hebrew is much much better, though. My Arabic isn't bad, either. And my Polish is understandable. But that's a harder language to read.
    I don't think I know Yiddish better than you. I was just pointing out how absurd it is for you to speak so arrogantly and assume that I am ignorant when in fact you know nothing of me. You have repeatedly made false and ignorant ad hominem assertions about my "knowledge." This is the true mark of a man who is "losing a debate." You have not even addressed any of the actual points I have made. I quote specific statements in the Bible that support my case, and you quote general statements of scholars while carefully avoiding what the Bible actually states. And you pepper it all with ignorant and fallacious ad hominems! The "winner" and "loser" of this debate is self-evident to any competent reader.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  2. #22
    My point was concerning the rejection and replacement of Paul's Biblical name to "Shaul." Well, you better talk to him about it, pal. It is he who remained a Pharisee, and there ain't no Pharisee I'm aware of who had the name Paulos.

    The "winner" and "loser" of this debate is self-evident to any competent reader. (Yes, and the winner isn't you!)

    "you reject the Biblical text!" (Actually...I don't. Someday you'll have to answer for slander,my friend because your statement isn't true. Better watch out re: what you say. You're responsible for your false accusations re: others, you know). And once again, I'll bring out that it is a debate loser who resorts to such personal attack statements, especially when they are obviously false.

    "I don't think I know Yiddish better than you." That's wise.

    BTW, like I said, Stern, Safrai, Schiffman, Clem, Bivin, Lindsey, Frankovic and Buth all see the name issue the way that I do. But you can oppose all these men's opinions if you'd like, even though they include Bible believers (Bivin, Lindsey, Frankovic and Booth) and some of the world's greatest Jewish scholars (Stern, Safrai, Schiffman and Clem).

    'I've read most of the Tanakh in Hebrew."--So have I!!! Wow! (In fact, that is what I read the Bible from, the Hebrew and Greek.)

    "...(do) believers change names when they get saved, and (you)answered in the negative. Really now? Did you change yours? Doesn't seem like it. I didn't change mine. Right there you're 0 for 2, pal (batting average=.000). Re: what the book of Revelation states...I do believe that refers to a future time period. Of course the way you're going, maybe you don't!

    "You should be ashamed of yourself." (And you're not ashamed of yourself for slandering me? Wow, dude, that's like hypocritical, no?)="spit on the actual written text of the Bible." Buddy, my ancestors shed blood so that your ancestors could believe in the One God of Israel, and you have the audacity to say what you did. That is shameless, and close to being anti-Semitic.

    "As for the name "James" - I agree that is a lousy way to "translate" Yacov, but it has nothing to do with the issue at hand because it is not an attempt to falsify the Bible as when using "Shaul" when the BIBLE uses "Paul."--Same exact thing. Quit playing with semantics here, pal. If you think Shaul is a bad and evil name ('one asked for from God', what a nice Hebrew meaning!), then James should be, too. Wasn't the rabbi's name.

    They were fun to shoot.--Well, too bad you missed!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Here are some things for you to read. But I'll use your own words again (talk about not being nice?)--'I doubt you'll learn anything from it'. Boy I hate writing those words. They're too mean. Too bad, because I think you can learn, if you want to...just look at your own quote at the bottom of your blog pages.
    Ah, my test worked exactly as predicted! I was responding to your arrogance Larry. You suggested that I should read "Irony in Galatians" (which was very helpful, thanks) but then followed that helpful suggestion with the arrogant and rude admonition: "Just try it. Who knows, maybe you'll learn something." You did this in the same post where you had ignorantly and arrogantly commanded me to "Go learn some Yiddish." So I used your style and talked down to you like you do to me. And look what happened. You keep saying how much you "hate writing those words" when in fact they are your true love! I used no ad hominem in my post reviewing Friedman's book, and I used no ad hominem in my first post to you. But your posts have been filled with ad hominem attacks, so I knew if I served it back to you in the same context and style as I received it your head would explode and you would spew ten thousand new ad hominems. That's who and what you are Larry. I'm only giving you the opportunity to reveal what is in your heart to everyone on this forum. I'm rather surprised how you failed to see what I was doing, since I quoted to your the relevant verse (Rom 2:1). My strategy could not have been more obvious if I had written it in the sky with neon signs. But you couldn't see that because the arrogant can't see their own arrogance, no matter how clearly it is presented to them.

    And this arrogance, by the way, is a very common characteristic of the "Messianic Judaism" cult. They set themselves up as the "true believers" in Messiah better than all those ignorant "Gentile Christians" who don't even keep the seventh day sabbath! Some, like Monte Judah, even reject whole books of the Bible (e.g. Hebrews) because it contradicts their schismatic doctrines. That's why I wrote my review of Friedman's book. It was just another brick in that wall that needs to come down.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    My point was concerning the rejection and replacement of Paul's Biblical name to "Shaul." Well, you better talk to him about it, pal. It is he who remained a Pharisee, and there ain't no Pharisee I'm aware of who had the name Paulos.

    The "winner" and "loser" of this debate is self-evident to any competent reader. (Yes, and the winner isn't you!)
    That's absurd. I don't need to "talk to Paul" because I can read his writings. He called himself Paul. That's the name he uses for himself in the Bible and that's the name that Christ used for him. And that's the name that his Hebrew bother Peter used when writing to the twelve Hebrew tribes. There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that supports your assertions, and I'm guessing that's why you haven't been willing to touch the Bible with a ten foot pole. I have presented this evidence three times now and you have not yet even attempted a response. You have implicitly FORFEITED the whole debate by not addressing the Biblical evidence I have presented. It is pathetic that you vainly claim victory even as you lay in the mud of defeat.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "you reject the Biblical text!" (Actually...I don't. Someday you'll have to answer for slander,my friend because your statement isn't true. Better watch out re: what you say. You're responsible for your false accusations re: others, you know). And once again, I'll bring out that it is a debate loser who resorts to such personal attack statements, especially when they are obviously false.
    Ha! That's quite a lecture from a man who asserted that I "never learned Hebrew" when in fact I have read most of the Tanakh in Hebrew. You are a case study in Romans 2:1 dude.

    There is no "slander" if my statement is true. I have proof that Friedman changed the actual words written in the Bible from "Paul" to "Shaul" in Acts 23:11 on page 49 of his book. You have shown full support of Friedman and his book, so I have no reason to believe that you would disagree with him on this point. And besides that, it is a common practice amongst Messianic Jews. So if my statement concerning you specifically is wrong, I would be happy to correct it as soon as you make your position clear. But you didn't do that even as you complained that my statement was false. So now the burden is no you. You need to answer this question: Was Friedman wrong to change the written word from Paul to Shaul in Acts 23:11? Is it wrong to change the words of the Bible to make it say something it does not say?

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    BTW, like I said, Stern, Safrai, Schiffman, Clem, Bivin, Lindsey, Frankovic and Buth all see the name issue the way that I do. But you can oppose all these men's opinions if you'd like, even though they include Bible believers (Bivin, Lindsey, Frankovic and Booth) and some of the world's greatest Jewish scholars (Stern, Safrai, Schiffman and Clem).
    Oh my ... that's a hard one. I can oppose the facts concerning what the Bible actually states, or I can agree with the biased non-biblical opinions of some men. Let me think about that for a while ....

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    'I've read most of the Tanakh in Hebrew."--So have I!!! Wow! (In fact, that is what I read the Bible from, the Hebrew and Greek.)
    Fascinating. You falsely asserted that I hadn't studied Hebrew. You lecture me on how I will be held "responsible for your false accusations." But when your error is exposed, you skip on past it whistling as if nothing happened. No need to apologize. No need to even acknowledge your error. Nothing. Zilch. Fascinating "character" you have developed. It must have taken years to perfect such blind hypocrisy.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "You should be ashamed of yourself." (And you're not ashamed of yourself for slandering me? Wow, dude, that's like hypocritical, no?)="spit on the actual written text of the Bible." Buddy, my ancestors shed blood so that your ancestors could believe in the One God of Israel, and you have the audacity to say what you did. That is shameless, and close to being anti-Semitic.
    Ha! Now you are lecturing me on "hypocrisy" again, even after you failed to acknowledge your own false assertion about my ability to read Hebrew. You are now Dr. "Romans 2:1" Sabra to me dude.

    And the great glory of your fleshly arrogance is now out in full regalia. You think that the Jews are "special" and "better" because God used them to bring forth the Messiah? Amazing, absolutely amazing. I suspected this was in your heart, but I would have thought you could hide it better.

    I am as far from "anti-semitic" as anyone could be. Your constant SLANDER in that regard shows your soul is utterly corrupt and devoid of any desire for truth. You lecture me on the evils of slander and then repeat that sin many times. You really are Dr. "Romans 2:1" Sabra.

    Also, you have not dealt with any of what the Bible actually teaches on this matter. You have generated a shit-storm of ad hominem. Why don't you see you can't win a debate this way? You need to address the facts that I have presented. Merely calling names like "anti-semitic" is absurd beyond description. It makes you look like a fool.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  5. #25

    Mr Nasty

    Oh, my, temper, temper, Richard. And you do not hide your anti-Semitism very well. Calling Jews names, whether we are Messianic Jews, Orthodox, Conservative or Reformed, is not material at this point. On your own blog it is quite clear that you don't like Jews very much. Hmmm. Wonder what the Bible has to say about that, Richard.

    "..or I can agree with the biased non-biblical opinions of some men. Let me think about that for a while ...."--Again, ignorance comes out. Half of the men quoted are Christian believers; one is from the Assembly of God, two are Baptists, one is evangelical. Nice job judging them without ever reading anything they ever wrote!! The other half are Jewish scholars (and it seems like you have problems with Jews, right? Naw, that couldn't be)

    "I am as far from "anti-semitic" as anyone could be."--I've heard that one before, Richard. You just called a Jewish person some pretty nasty names on your blog. And it's up to Jewish people to assess if you're anti-Semitic, not up to you and your incredibly 'objective' perspective.

    "Messianic Judaism" cult.=anti-Semitic insinuation there. That's fairly clear!

    "So I used your style and talked down to you like you do to me."--what admirable behaviour, Richard. Wow. That'll shine your light real bright. You really are one brilliant dude, aren't you?

    "That's why I wrote my review of Friedman's book. It was just another brick in that wall that needs to come down."--Well, then you utterly failed. The great, great majority of feedback to his works are positive. Of course, you can be Judge and Jury and think everyone else is wrong. Because that's what you're doing. Try reading some feedback on his book. Does your Judge and Jury attitude smack of arrogance? Naw...couldn't be. (Oh, and Friedman happens to be Jewish, too! Hmm..anyone notice a pattern here?)

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Oh, my, temper, temper, Richard. And you do not hide your anti-Semitism very well. Calling Jews names, whether we are Messianic Jews, Orthodox, Conservative or Reformed, is not material at this point. On your own blog it is quite clear that you don't like Jews very much. Hmmm. Wonder what the Bible has to say about that, Richard.
    Well look at that. Not a single word of substance that has anything to do with the facts I have presented. How typical for someone who can't support his arguments.

    And what blog post are you talking about? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You seem utterly ignorant about the most basic elements of how to present a case. You need to present the facts that support your assertions dude! Merely saying that some unspecified statement on some unspecified blog post indicates I "don't like Jews very much" is utterly meaningless and moronic, not to mention false.

    And given that you titled your hypocritical post "Mr. Nasty" you are now christened Dr. Mr. Nasty Romans 2:1 Sabra. Congrats!

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "..or I can agree with the biased non-biblical opinions of some men. Let me think about that for a while ...."--Again, ignorance comes out. Half of the men quoted are Christian believers; one is from the Assembly of God, two are Baptists, one is evangelical. Nice job judging them without ever reading anything they ever wrote!! The other half are Jewish scholars (and it seems like you have problems with Jews, right? Naw, that couldn't be)
    If there was any "ignorance" it was in your post. You merely cited a bunch of names and claimed that they all proved your case. How absurd is that? Did you provide any actual quotes or evidence? Nope. And then you have the audacity to say "Nice job judging them without ever reading anything they ever wrote!!" when you did not provide any evidence that they supported your case! Man, you are one piece of work. And besides that, your appeal to their authority is a logical fallacy. You can't provide any real facts from the Bible to support your case, so you ignore what is written and you cite authorities without even bothering to provide any evidence that they really support your case. You are one of the weakest debaters I have ever seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "I am as far from "anti-semitic" as anyone could be."--I've heard that one before, Richard. You just called a Jewish person some pretty nasty names on your blog. And it's up to Jewish people to assess if you're anti-Semitic, not up to you and your incredibly 'objective' perspective.
    Again, you make an assertion without providing any evidence. I have no idea what you are talking about. You have not stated what post you are talking about. Are you brain-damaged or what? You are "debating" on the level of an adolescent. And you continue with your bullshit "antisemitism" slander.

    So tell me, what variety of "Messianic Judaism" do you adhere to? Do you agree with Monte Judah that the Book of Hebrews should be chucked out of the Bible? Are you associated with a named congregation? Do you have a web presence where I can learn about what you believe?

    So you go around "assessing" people as "antisemitic" if they successfully refute your false ideas about the Bible? Brilliant! By that standard, I would guess there are few that are not "antisemitic." Your sickness is really shining now dude. You are like someone who shouts RACISM if anyone disagrees with Obama's policies.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "Messianic Judaism" cult.=anti-Semitic insinuation there. That's fairly clear!
    Bullshit. It says nothing about Judaism at all. It says nothing about Jews at all. It is a statement that some cults are calling themselves "Messianic Jews." The fact that there are such cults is obvious. Just look at Monte Judah. His rejection of the Book of Hebrews is a case in point. Others question all of Paul's writings. It is not antisemitic to state the facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "So I used your style and talked down to you like you do to me."--what admirable behaviour, Richard. Wow. That'll shine your light real bright. You really are one brilliant dude, aren't you?
    It worked, didn't it? You have fully exposed the crap that was in your heart. This thread began with NO AD HOMINEM in my first posts. Then you introduced your arrogance, so I responded in kind knowing that your character would be exposed. It worked, but you don't want to admit it. No surprise there.

    Remember, all you had to do was present some facts to refute what I wrote, but you chose to spew shit. Nice move dude.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    "That's why I wrote my review of Friedman's book. It was just another brick in that wall that needs to come down."--Well, then you utterly failed. The great, great majority of feedback to his works are positive. Of course, you can be Judge and Jury and think everyone else is wrong. Because that's what you're doing. Try reading some feedback on his book. Does your Judge and Jury attitude smack of arrogance? Naw...couldn't be. (Oh, and Friedman happens to be Jewish, too! Hmm..anyone notice a pattern here?)
    No, I'm not the "judge and jury." I presented facts, and the facts remain unrefuted. You have not even touched them! The fact that others like his work implies nothing about the problems I found with it. Don't you know anything about truth? It's not a democracy. Truth remains truth no matter how many reject it, and a lie is a lie no matter how many believe it. It really seems strange that you don't understand such simple things.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  7. #27

    Lenny again

    Well Richard, let me disagree with you... it's clear that you do think quite highly of your opinions, and do believe that your opinions are the only right way to understand anything. That makes it highly doubtful that I'd want to really dialogue with you, dude.
    Your use of such great words like "bullshit" and "crap" is quite impressive, too. You can be really proud of your extensive vocabulary. You know, my uncle of blessed memory (you probably wouldn't like him, he was a Messianic Jewish rabbi) used to say that anyone who resorts to cursing in a discussion is doing so out of a sense of losing control over a discussion. Hmmm...

  8. #28

    A little more friendly 'dialoguing'

    It's interesting how you diss the writings of such prominent Bible scholars as the men I mentioned. I guess they have nothing pertinent to say to any discussion, right Richard? Of course, had you actually read anything that they wrote, you'd see otherwise. You'd see that Bivin, Lindsey, Buth and Young have spent their professional careers studying and expounding on the meaning (from the Greek text) of Yeshua's teachings in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. A waste of time, Richard? Apparently, if I understand your words. Flusser, Safrai, Lapide and Stern, as well as Friedman, have from the Jewish side, also spent their careers in the understanding of who Yeshua was as a Jewish rabbi and as the Messiah. A waste of time? Try reading their works and see, instead of blindly criticizing and mass lumping people together, as you do as Mr. Judge and Jury (I stand by my impression that you enjoy doing that). Watch: you'll do it again if you respond to me. I'll point it out in my next post.
    Now to clarify matters: I believe all 66 books of the Bible are the inspired words of G-d. That would include the book of Hebrews. But of course you would rather be Mr. Judge and think that I didn't...well, you are wrong.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Well Richard, let me disagree with you... it's clear that you do think quite highly of your opinions, and do believe that your opinions are the only right way to understand anything. That makes it highly doubtful that I'd want to really dialogue with you, dude.
    I don't think it's really as clear as you think. I would have much more reason to say the same of you, wouldn't I? I mean, you are the one who began slinging unnecessary and invalid ad hominems. So grow up already.


    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Your use of such great words like "bullshit" and "crap" is quite impressive, too. You can be really proud of your extensive vocabulary. You know, my uncle of blessed memory (you probably wouldn't like him, he was a Messianic Jewish rabbi) used to say that anyone who resorts to cursing in a discussion is doing so out of a sense of losing control over a discussion. Hmmm...
    Again, you waste everyone's time, including your own, writing bullshit that has nothing to do with the issues at hand. This is typical of your posts. You wasted everyone's time writing ad hominens and other logical fallacies like appeal to authority (without even quoting a single word those "authorities" wrote!) and now you think to make points by criticizing my use of common slang? Like I said, grow up already "Doctor."
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,829
    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    It's interesting how you diss the writings of such prominent Bible scholars as the men I mentioned. I guess they have nothing pertinent to say to any discussion, right Richard? Of course, had you actually read anything that they wrote, you'd see otherwise. You'd see that Bivin, Lindsey, Buth and Young have spent their professional careers studying and expounding on the meaning (from the Greek text) of Yeshua's teachings in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
    I didn't "diss their writings." I didn't need to because you didn't bother to cite a single thing they wrote! What kiind of moronism are you suffering from? I already explained that merely citing a list of "authorities" and then claiming that they "prove your point" without presenting any actual evidence is absurd in the extreme. You really don't have a clue how to present an argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    A waste of time, Richard? Apparently, if I understand your words. Flusser, Safrai, Lapide and Stern, as well as Friedman, have from the Jewish side, also spent their careers in the understanding of who Yeshua was as a Jewish rabbi and as the Messiah. A waste of time? Try reading their works and see, instead of blindly criticizing and mass lumping people together, as you do as Mr. Judge and Jury (I stand by my impression that you enjoy doing that). Watch: you'll do it again if you respond to me. I'll point it out in my next post.
    Yes, it is a waste of time for you to claim that a list of names is all you need to support your argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_sabra View Post
    Now to clarify matters: I believe all 66 books of the Bible are the inspired words of G-d. That would include the book of Hebrews. But of course you would rather be Mr. Judge and think that I didn't...well, you are wrong.
    I never said you didn't believe in the 66 books, or that you believed Hebrews should be thrown out. I used that as an extreme example of how "Messianic Judaism" contains schismatic groups who make up their own crap and sell it as the "true roots of Christianity."

    It would help if you responded to what I have actually written.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •