"REAL XN," BROD & JOHN -- All major historians (e.g. James Parkes) agree that Christianity, the Church and Christians were indelibly defined between 135 C.E. and the 4th century C.E. with their gentile -- Hellenized -- version of "J*esus." Even if the pope or some other leader were to attempt to redefine "real Christians" today, it would remain nonsense. Xns will just have to deal with the 4th century definition. If they don't agree with it they define themselves out of Xy into something else and can define that. But their personal opinion doesn't change the definition of Xn, Xy or the Church. Xy -- *ALL* Xy -- is Displacement Theology from its core definition and its NT claiming to displace the "OT." Displacement Theology is, by definition, misojudaic. Xns have no other claim to "salvation." Stop your futile attempts to convince Jews otherwise and deal with it. From the tbs I read, a lot of people who call themselves Xns reject Xn doctrines and, instead of presuming to rewrite history, should acknowledge that they reject Xy. Look for a more enlightened path. Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

Yes, it was Romans who actually killed Ribi Yehoshua. But *way* beyond that, it is even clear from the NT description that the Jews in the Temple who called for his death, and that his blood to be on them and their descendents (the critical point of misojudaic charges), were Sadducee kohanim (priests) in the Beit ha-Miqdash (Hellenized to "Temple"), *not* Pharisees -- the sect in which Ribi Yehoshua held the title "Ribi" and forbears of today's Orthodox Jews. Those familiar with Judaic history will realize the most critical point: that the kohanim (Sadducees) became corrupted shortly after B.C.E. 175 when a rabid Hellenist priest, Yehoshua (Hellenized to "Jason") Ben-Shimon II Ben-Tzadoq, enlisted the support of the foreign occupier, Syria (Antiochus IV Epiphanes), to forcibly displace his Torah-observant brother, Yekhonyah (Hellenized to "Onias") Ben-Shimon II Ben-Tzadoq, as Kohein ha-Jadol (High Priest) in the Temple. This marks the watershed between the last Torah-true Sadducee Kohein ha-Jadol in the Temple (Yekhonyah Ben-Shimon II Ben-Tzadoq) and the Hellenist succession of Hellenist-Sadducee "High Priests" who followed his Hellenizing brother, Jason -- and the resulting split between the original Torah-true Sadducee kohanim (later "Essene" Sadducees) and the reform Hellenist-Sadducees who expelled the Torah-true Sadducee kohanim from the "Temple." Yekhonyah Ben-Shimon II Ben-Tzadoq, known as the last Torah-true Kohein ha-Jadol, is probably the person identified by the Essene-Sadducee kohanim as the "Moreh Tzedeq" (Righteous Teacher) suggesting that his brother -- and his successors -- were each labeled a "Kohein ha-Resha" (Wicked Priest). Thus, the Sadducees in the Temple at the sentencing of Ribi Yehoshua were the Hellenist-Sadducees, who were held to be "Wicked Priests" by both the Essene Sadducees and the Pharisees. Thus, it was the Sadducee Wicked Priests of the Temple -- *condemned* by Pharisees (today's Orthodox Jews) -- who shouted for the Romans to execute Ribi Yehoshua. Why? Because Ribi Yehoshua was a leading Pharisee Ribi, which meant a leading opponent of Sadducee Hellenizing and, not insignificantly, an opponent of the Roman Hellenist occupiers who kept the Hellenist Sadducees in control of the Temple! The Pharisees -- and Ribi Yehoshua was himself a Pharisee -- have always been *completely* innocent in the matter. Indeed, the Pharisees are well documented as continuing to befriend and shelter Paqid Yaaqov, ha-Tzadiq and the Netzarim until the Church (!!!) forcibly displaced their "competition" in 135 C.E. Fittingly, the Hellenist-Sadducees, the "Reform Judaism" of its day, became extinct with the destruction of their "Temple," which they had defiled. Tellingly, Xns (themselves deceived and unwitting Hellenists) *still* prefer the Hellenist (i.e. assimilating) elements (Reform Judaism and secular Jews) with whom they most closely identify while eschewing Orthodox Jews. Little has changed. But if Jews were armed with this information the anger could be directed where it belongs: at the extinct Hellenist and assimilating Sadducees -- *not* the Pharisees (today's Orthodox Jews) that included Ribi Yehoshua himself. Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

I would like to examine the facts on which you base your statement. I've worked as an IDF soldier at the Allenby Bridge a number of months, in better and calmer days, when I could strike up conversations and chat, with some semblance of civility, almost friendliness (I tried anyway), with the thousands of Arabs going back and forth to Jordan every day. (Most of the soldiers preferred to minimize their dealings with them, but I was curious and tried to treat everyone with respect and learn what I could.) I have also dealt personally with Arabs in the Shomron and coming from Gaza to work in nearby Israeli towns. I have talked with countless Arabs, including Arab Christians. on a personal basis. Every Arab I met found it expedient to deny hating Jews -- hating only Zionists. However, only a nincompoop or a rabid misojudaic fails to realize that's a ruse; surely not a PhD candidate? What was the title of your thesis -- that would be particularly interesting -- and in what area did you earn your Ph.D.? Just like some Africans believe J*esus was black and Europeans have typically painted J*esus as a European, most of the Arab Christians I've encountered are appalled by any suggestion that their J*esus was a Jew. Khanan Asrawi articulates the popular Arab Christian belief: J*esus was a "Palestinian"; an Arab, *not* a (unimaginable horror) Jew. Some were so shocked, disgusted and offended by my assuming their J*esus was a Jew (I was no less incredulous that they didn't know that) that they were visibly sickened by the suggestion; at least one college student paled and appeared nauseous. Clearly, nothing was as loathsome to them as calling their J*esus a Jew. That could only be because they loath Jews. I grant that there are likely some Arabs, Muslims as well as Christians, who don't hate Jews -- but not among any of those I've met. That's personal experience. Incorporate that in your thesis. Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

Save your breath, and stop writing drivel and nonsense. It was the Pharisees who betrayed Jewish sovereignty time and time again, including during the Hashmonean era, and especially when they brought Pompey's army to Jerusalem. The Saducees were actually the ones who originally proclaimed the revolt in 66. Facts are facts, so stop trying to twist them. In any case, it is not cut and dry that today's Orthodox Jews are direct descendants of the Pharisees. And STOP trying to evangelize Jews using Jewish subterfuge.

"kohein ha-Jadol" (???) = Kohen Gadol There is no 'yod' in Kohen, and no 'J' in Hebrew.

Ribi Yehoshua didn't live during the Khashmonaim or Pompey era. What you assert in that era was no longer the case during the lifetime of Ribi Yehoshua. For one thing, the split within the Sadducees took place shortly after BCE 175 which affected subsequent events. The Pharisees didn't even come into existence until ca. BCE 135. Catch up Jake. The Teimanim, who are the most pristine tradition of Torah, pronounce gimel with a dageish as "j." Do you even know what a dageish is? Learn what you're talking about before sounding off. Why do you argue against exonerating the Pharisees who, despite your ignorance, are widely acknowledged by all historians of any international stature to be the forbears of today's Orthodox Jews? What is your religious affiliation that you would oppose exonerating today's Jews? Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

In Yemenite Hebrew there is such thing as a jimmel rather than a gimmel. Obviously Paqid is of Yemenite origin.

Who are you to decide what is the most pristine tradition? You are wrong. Gimel, with or without a dagesh, were merely variants on the 'g' sound (hard and soft), not a J sound. J is a separate letter in Arabic. It has been noted that some of your posts in the past have accused reform Jews of being responsible for causing the Holocaust. Did you decide this before or after you gate-crashed the Jewish people? The notion that Jesus was a Pharisee, or that today's Jews should be considered Pharisees, is your own personal opinion, which you are welcome to share. But your attempts at cryptic evangelization of Jews should be exposed for what they are.

IF SO - THEY WOULD AKNOWLEDGE JEWISH OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND

You're really cookin' with the technicalities on old Paqid there. Excellent stuff ! I wasn't aware of some of the things he had said, prefering not to read many of his comments that earlier had seemed unkosher. They other day I had to step in when I thought he had crossed the line in a talkback with a friend.

as he do nothing in Babylonian exile he also has nothing to do with istablishing the state of israel because you come back here in a bad way about islam we can see that its teaching could be from any where but not from God jesus worn us about the fals prophet God permet to this prophet to do what he do we beleive that God watch us there for we are happy because he know what good for us ++++++++++++++++++++ thanks to the govornments of israel that give us the freedom to build churches +++++++++++++++++++++++ and if you people beleve in jesus every thing will become green as you beleive when the masheah come

I didn't decide. If you had read any Jewish historians you would realize that they all concur that two traditions vie for the most tradition reflection of Torah at Har Sinai: Teimani and Bavli. Of these, virtually all give the nod to the Teimani. Gershom Shalem is one of many examples. Read a book instead of stating your unsubstantiated opinions as if they are facts. The better question is, Just who is Jake to decide contrary to all of the well-known Jewish historians? Argue Arabic with someone who cares but Prof. of Biblical Hebrew, Khaim Tawil, of Yeshivah University in the U.S., who visits Ra'anana often, sits just a few rows behind me in Beit K'nesset Moreshet Avot, here in Ra'anana. Dr. Yehudah Amir, whose Ph.D. is in Teimani history, sits a few rows in front of me in Beit K'nesset. Both, along with a couple of hundred congregants who, along with me, pronounce a gimel with a dageish in it as a "j" -- as all Teimanim do. Blissfully arrogant Jake is ignorant of this as well. In the past few decades, as interest in the Pseudepigrapha and other Judaic literature of the period from the BCE 1st-century to the 4th century CE has ascended, particularly following historian James Parkes' watershed authoritative book on misojudaism ("anti-Semitism") in early Christianity, and as the Dead Sea Scrolls, and particularly 4Q MMT, has come to light and the implications been published, virtually every historian of this period having international stature agrees that Ribi Yehoshua was a Pharisee. Jake, though, contradicts all of these internationally recognized historians. Read a book, Jake. You're driven by axe-grinding, not knowledge. It is an unavoidable fact that Devarim 28.15-69 promises that if Israel neglects keeping Torah catastrophe will result. A catastrophe of the scope of the Shoah is the most unavoidable product of that promise in the entire history of Israel and one doesn't have to look far or hard to see the cause. The Reform movement, abandoning much of Torah, immediately preceded the Shoah. Those are indisputable facts. Deal with it. As for when I figured out the connection between the Reform movement and the Shoah: quite recently, after a tb, perhaps from Charles, asked (a couple of months ago or so, not the latest time) something about why ha-Sheim allowed the Shoah to happen to Torah-observant Jews -- and, if that was so, I wanted to know why too. Instead of crying in ignorance, I researched... and found the answer. Israel of the time and place could not accurately be described as Torah-observant Jews. A large segment of Jews in Europe followed the Reform movement. All you have to do is Google and read what the original Reform movement stood for and no reasonable person who believes in Torah could escape the connection. Which are you, Jake, unreasonable, disbelieving Torah or ignorant of the facts? Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

I didn't decide. If you had read any Jewish historians you would realize that they all concur that two traditions vie for the most tradition reflection of Torah at Har Sinai: Teimani and Bavli. Of these, virtually all give the nod to the Teimani. Gershom Shalem is one of many examples. Read a book instead of stating your unsubstantiated opinions as if they are facts. The better question is, Just who is Jake to decide contrary to all of the well-known Jewish historians? Argue Arabic with someone who cares but Prof. of Biblical Hebrew, Khaim Tawil, of Yeshivah University in the U.S., who visits Ra'anana often, sits just a few rows behind me in Beit K'nesset Moreshet Avot, here in Ra'anana. Dr. Yehudah Amir, whose Ph.D. is in Teimani history, sits a few rows in front of me in Beit K'nesset. Both, along with a couple of hundred congregants who, along with me, pronounce a gimel with a dageish in it as a "j" -- as all Teimanim do. Blissfully arrogant Jake is ignorant of this as well. In the past few decades, as interest in the Pseudepigrapha and other Judaic literature of the period from the BCE 1st-century to the 4th century CE has ascended, particularly following historian James Parkes' watershed authoritative book (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue) on misojudaism ("anti-Semitism") in early Christianity, and as the Dead Sea Scrolls, and particularly 4Q MMT (Prof. Elisha Qimron), has come to light and the implications been published, virtually every historian of this period having international stature agrees that Ribi Yehoshua was a Pharisee (from Charlesworth to Orthodox Rabbi Harvey Falk and Jews for Judaism). Jake, though, contradicts all of these internationally recognized historians, Jews for Judaism and Orthodox Rabbis. Read a book, Jake. You're driven by axe-grinding, not knowledge. It is an unavoidable fact that Devarim 28.15-69 promises that if Israel neglects keeping Torah catastrophe upon Israel will result. A catastrophe of the scope of the Shoah is arguably the most unavoidable product of that promise in the entire history of Israel and one doesn't have to look far or hard to see the cause. The Reform movement, abandoning Torah, immediately preceded the Shoah. Those are indisputable facts. Deal with it. As for when I figured out the connection between the Reform movement and the Shoah: quite recently, after a tb, perhaps from Charles, asked (a couple of months ago or so, not the latest time) something about why ha-Sheim allowed the Shoah to happen to good Jews -- and, if they were good (i.e. Torah-observant) as the tb asserted (without substantiation), I wanted to know why too. Instead of crying in ignorance or grinding an axe, I researched to find the logical answer. European Israel of that time could *not* accurately be described as Torah-observant Jews. A large segment of assimilating Jews in Europe had conceived, and begun following, the Reform movement. All you have to do is Google and read what the original Reform movement stood for and no reasonable person who believes in Torah could escape the connection. Which are you, Jake, unreasonable, disbelieving Torah or ignorant of the facts? Paqid Yirmeyahu Israeli Orthodox Jew Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il