Shambam
New Member
Borukh Ha Shem Ki Tov Ki l'olam Chasdo
Posts: 6
|
Post by Shambam on Aug 29, 2005 14:31:57 GMT -8
Thank you for that feedback Netzar Y'hudi. I have considered your position before posting this but part of what I like about this forum is the opportunity to hear others state these positions and to be able to consider them outside of my own thinking. I was thinking that I had read for example, certain laws were to be observed by Noachi believers but not necessarily in the same way as they were to be observed by full converts or natural Jews. Anyway, this could potentially lead into another thread better suited for a continued discussion. Concerning the present topic, I have considered and in fact began to embark on adopting a "Biblical diet" which consisted of those foods we read were commonly eaten by various holy individuals in Scripture. This naturally works out quite well as being entirely Kosher as regards the items themselves. The only issue I find is that of mixing meat and dairy which could occur. I still have that as a goal, but I am behind on its implementation. I have several other issues that need to be resolved as well. Clearly, being -observant at even a relatively nominal level could easily become an involved activity! Hence, we develop an entire lifestyle. But in this case, I didn't set out to impose a set of rules for myself. Rather it was a 'natural', or rather a 'spiritual' inclination. I think I have discovered for myself that the real difficulty is to 'swear' on my own strength that I will keep these things, rather than look to Ha Shem and offer this humbly as an act of devotion, realizing that He alone is the saving strength at my right hand. One other question. We have no Jewish delicatessen or grocery anywhere near my community but some grocers stock certain items used by Muslims of which there is a small number here. Just out of curiousity, does the Muslim definition of kosher fall pretty closely to that of the Jewish perhaps to the extent that such foods would not have to be investigated for the correct qualities?
|
|
|
Post by Chizuk Emunah on Aug 29, 2005 15:14:14 GMT -8
No problem. Well, you are correct in thinking that. That is Orthodox Judaism's position. However, I would disagree based on what I quoted you from the and Acts 15. I commend you for that. That's how I started out. Yeah it's very close actually. So much so that when we were on better terms, a Jew could go into the home of a Moslem and not worry about what he was eating.
|
|
Shambam
New Member
Borukh Ha Shem Ki Tov Ki l'olam Chasdo
Posts: 6
|
Post by Shambam on Aug 30, 2005 9:29:33 GMT -8
Netzar Y'hudi, regarding your response/position in your statement "Well, you are correct in thinking that. That is Orthodox Judaism's position. However, I would disagree based on what I quoted you from the and Acts 15." I am not clear on the correct application of Rebbenu Yeshua's statement when he says "The P'rushim and Soferim sit in Moshe's seat, therefore whatsoever the Perushim and Soferim command, that observe and do" and of course continues on to say not to do in the manner in which they do and goes on to cite the issues with their observance and keeping of . I understand this on one hand to mean that, Orthodox Judaism does carry forth these teachings from them and therefore I can find somewhere in this body of knowledge that which our L-rd would have us observe. On the other hand, of course this is problematic because we can also find the rejection of the Moshiach in the literature. Thus at once I find the instructions releasing Noachi gentiles from certain observances like keeping kashrut and at the same time condemning the one we claim to be Moshiach. Thus, I could easily find myself in a situation in which I am the one who arbitrarily picks and chooses which observances to follow. To avoid self-delusion, what standard does one use to interpret what parts of rabbinical teaching should be carried over into one's application of instructions of Brit Chadashah? To say that the Ruach Ha Kodesh will guide us is not necessarily a complete answer since we must have some assurance that we are not being led by another "ruach". From the time of Moses through the second temple, didn't Israel have Urim and Thummim to validate direction from G-d? What is the counterpart in the current era? Is the "witness" of which Reb Shaul speaks such a thing and if so, how does this work for the observant talmid?
|
|
|
Post by messimom on Aug 30, 2005 10:11:11 GMT -8
My personal belief on this is that keeping dairy and meats to separate meals is a man-made law and not found in . The closest you will find to that in is the command to not boil a kid in it's mother's milk. I believe that the extension therefore to not eat dairy and meat together at all is an extra fence the rabbis threw up to not even possible break that mitzvot. I have to add also that I have not deeply researched that verse and intention behind it so if my understanding is wrong and someone out there has a fuller grasp of that mitzvot, let me know!! As my household would have to alter our eating habits again. Also I wanted to add that it that in your area there is more access to Muslim kosher foods than Jewish kosher.... Messimom
|
|
|
Post by Chizuk Emunah on Aug 30, 2005 17:09:20 GMT -8
I think one thing we have to keep in mind when we read these verses is that Yeshua was not criticizing what the P'rushim did (ie...adding fences), but the manner in which they carried them out. Essentially criticizing them for saying one thing and then doing another (the definition of a hypocrite) Matt. 23:23: Woe to you, soferim and P'rushim, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the : justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. (emphasis mine) Now to the root of the matter: I think our standard for determining whether or not Rabbinical halacha or a minhag should be observed should be judged according to . Where does say that a goy tzaddik should only keep the Noachide Laws? If a goy must only keep the Noachide Laws, then that leaves many areas wide open (ie...Shabbat, kashrut, honoring Father and Mother, etc...). Moreso, based on the governing principle of Acts 15, those laws handed down by Ya'akov HaTzeddik (a man widely respected by all sects of Judaism in the 1st Cent.) are only to serve as a starting point for new believers, and they are very similiar to the Noachide Laws (our own Noachide Laws if you will). Acts 15:13-21: 13After they had stopped speaking, Ya'akov HaTzeddik answered, saying, "Brethren, listen to me.
14"Shimon has related how G-d first concerned Himself about taking from among the Goyim a people for His name.
15"With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, 16'AFTER THESE THINGS I will return, AND I WILL REBUILD THE MISHKAN OF DAVID WHICH HAS FALLEN, AND I WILL REBUILD ITS RUINS, AND I WILL RESTORE IT, 17SO THAT THE REST OF MANKIND MAY SEEK YHVH, AND ALL THE GOYIM WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME,' 18SAYS YHVH, WHO MAKES THESE THINGS KNOWN FROM LONG AGO.
19"Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,
20but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
21"For Moshe from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Shabbat." One should study the Rabbinic works and apply the rules of Jewish hermeneutics, and test their findings against the written and Ketuvim Netzarim ('Newer Testament'). We will know that the Ruach HaKodesh is guiding us because it will not divert us from observance. Having just studied the Midrash Mekhilta (part of the Tannanite Midrashim, and the earliest of the Rabbinic writings), let me share my findings. I'll start off with the actual mitzvah: "You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk." Sounds pretty simple right? Wrong! What if a kid is boiled in his sister's milk? What if someone else boils a kid in it's mother's milk and offers it to you to eat? And so on.... Thankfully the Rabbis have worked this out for us a long time ago. Now, onto the results: 1. If one should not boil a kid in it's mother's milk, then they also should not boil a kid in any type of milk. 2. Because of the prohibition on boiling a kid in it's mother's milk, one should not boil any type of meat (again kosher only) with any type of milk or dairy product (because it is a milk derivative). *This also applies to cooking the two together. One may cook the items separately, then combine them after the meat is fully cooked.* 3. One should not eat meat that has been cooked in milk (or any dairy product). 4. Poultry (kosher only) does not lactate (produce milk), therefore they are not applicable to this mitzvah. 5. One should not benefit (ie...from the act of selling) from meat that has been cooked in milk (or dairy product). Hope that helps you guys. Remember, this is just my study and analysis of the Midrash. You are free to disagree with me if you like.
|
|
|
Post by Rick on Aug 30, 2005 20:01:41 GMT -8
It is my position that Mattitiyahu 23 has a small error in translation. When you consider the following verses;
“You shall not add to the Word which I command you, and do not diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHVH your Elohim which I command you. (D'varim 4:2)
Think not that I am come to destroy the law...till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law" (Mat 5:17-18)
But He answering, said to them, “Why do you also transgress the command of Elohim because of your tradition?(Mat 15:3)
‘This people draw near to Me with their mouth, and respect Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. ‘But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as commandments, the takanot,(enactments) of men.’ ” (Mat 15:8-9) So if you read the verses in Mattitiyahu like this,
Then Yeshua spoke to the crowds and to His talmidim, saying, “ On Moshe's seat sit the soferim and the P'rushim. “Therefore, all that he says to you to guard, guard and do. But do not do according to their works, for they say, and do not do. (Mat 23:1-3)
(there are several manuscripts that would support this variant), The verse makes much more sense, agrees with Scripture elsewhere, and is in line with Yeshua's teaching. I feel this would be a more accurate reading of the text, Netzar Y'hudi, would you agree with this assessment? you are far more knowledgeable in this area than I. Seems to me the mistake was made translating the 'original' Hebrew into Greek.
Shalom Rick
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 31, 2005 3:18:17 GMT -8
Do rabbinics answer why it was okay for Abraham and Adonai to consume meat and milk together?
And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it. And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat. (Gen 18:7-8 KJV)
Mark
|
|
|
Post by Yitzchak on Aug 31, 2005 3:42:57 GMT -8
Do rabbinics answer why it was okay for Abraham and Adonai to consume meat and milk together? And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it. And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat. (Gen 18:7-8 KJV) Mark Mark, Generally their answer is based on the time difference between the offering of the dairy, and meat meals. The sages say there was several hours lapse between the serving of milk and meat, and therefore that is what is ascribed to today. Rashi and Rambam differ, and so some of the other commentators on . The generally accepted practice is to wait 6 hours. Some teach that eating, or cooking milk and meat together was an idolatrous practice, and as prohibits idolatry, we should not eat them together. In Kabbalah it is taught that milk represents life, and meat death, and therefore one should not mix the two together. Thus the saying, "Two Jews, three opinions" (smiling) I for one, am with you on the Avraham situation. I keep Biblical Kashrut, which I do not believe requires me to separate meat and milk. I am not a milk drinker, but definitely love my cheeseburgers. Shalom, Yitzchak
|
|
|
Post by Chizuk Emunah on Aug 31, 2005 5:20:22 GMT -8
I have heard that variant used, and it does fall in line with the rest of Scripture. However, since there is such a big difference between they (the P'rushim) and he (Moshe), I would have to really delve into the different manuscripts to look for the possible translation error. The great thing is that I am already studying Mattiyahu, so it shouldn't take long to get an answer. Right. I've also heard the argument that it is okay to serve meat and dairy at the same meal, so long as one person does not partake of both at the same time. I think the real issue at stake is not whether you can eat meat and milk together, but in whether you should cook meat and milk together. Like I said earlier, I think one is completely safe from violating the mitzvah by cooking them separately, then combining them after the meat is fully cooked.
|
|
|
Post by Yitzchak on Aug 31, 2005 9:29:14 GMT -8
Some even teach that as long as you say Birkat HaMazon after eating, you may immediately eat either milk or meat right after that meal.
I agree with you. I do not cook meat in milk, or cook them together.
Shalom,
Yitzchak
|
|
|
Post by R' Y'hoshua Moshe on Sept 5, 2005 10:14:51 GMT -8
I tend to agree with this. Yeshua does warn us about the teachings of the P'rushim (Pharis.) and we see that it is very obvious that He did not follow all of their oral halachah. A few examples would include some of their Sabbath rules, washing of hands ect. So, we either believe that Yeshua is contradicting Himself and teaching His followers that which He Himself does not do (which would be quite ironic based on the passage in question)….or we can read His statements within the context of what He already has said. I think that even if one chooses not to read it as “he” (in regards to the passage in question) you can easily interpret the passage to mean that we should keep the written (as “Moshe’s Seat” is the subject matter), but not to do as the P’rushim (Pharis.) do, because they say and do not. Because Yeshua clearly does not keep all of the oral (as we see in the Four Witnesses), is He doing the very thing that He is criticizing the P’rushim for? I think not. I agree. Although, I am a milk drinker. I think the mitzvah is much more simple than most make it out to be. Simply put, don't cook a kid in it's mother's milk. If you don't do this..........you have not broken the commandment. And, for Gentiles coming into a observant walk, this is what I reccomend. When the Beit Din of Yerushalayim got together and it was stated... "Now therefore why do you tempt G'd, that you should put a yoke on the neck of the talmidim which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" - Acts 15:10 The above passage is not speaking of the written ...it speaks of the oral (as found in Mishnah, Talmud, ect.) that even they and their father's had a hard time keeping. Therefore, because this was their judgement that the Goyim where not bound by rabbinic halachah, I agree that this should be the case for all those whom are coming to the faith....and even for us. Let the of Moshe given by YHVH Himself be the only true authority. Shalom, Reuel
|
|
|
Post by Chizuk Emunah on Sept 5, 2005 15:55:51 GMT -8
After re-examing the evidence, and analyzing it in contex of what Yeshua was talking about, I agree and believe that the correct translation should read "he" and not "they." (As do two manuscripts of the Shem Tov)
|
|
q27
New Member
Posts: 39
|
Post by q27 on Sept 5, 2005 20:34:45 GMT -8
Exo 23:19 The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the LORD thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.
Is this a commandment to maintain a separation of dairy products and meat?
If it is, then the commandment is distinctly unclear. There is no mention of separating anything here - just the prohibition not to do something.
To get some idea of what I am talking about let's look at a rather extreme set of circumstances -
Exo 21:2 If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
Am I to take it that this is a defacto commandment to maintain slaves? Perhaps 'commandment' is too strong a word - perhaps the little word 'if' might be appropriate. Whatever, the point I am making is that in the commandment there is a recognition that keeping slaves is OK - Is it still OK?
If I use the same logic arriving at a commandment to separate certain things ( dairy products and meat) then I would need to be consistent in my interpretations and apply the same guidelines to Exo 21:2 - that as a Messianic I am indeed entitled to keep slaves.
I suggest most of us would not accept this form of argument - and neither do I.
So, returning to Exo 21:19, what is this commandment about boiling kids in their mother's milk all about?
I don't know, but I can offer some suggestions, speculations even, which I have read in some commentaries.
Boiling the offspring in their mothers milk was a superstitious custom that was practiced by neighbouring peoples - partly to do with the fertility of the earth. Such superstitious beliefs were not to be followed by G-d's chosen people and the practice was therefore forbidden.
The practice is cruel. Even if the kid was killed prior to boiling the mother would be is pain without her kid to empty her udder.
For me, eating a kid (if if in fact the kid was eaten) is a waste of the breeding program. The fact that the mother was producing milk indicates that the kid was not of weaning age. Even if I was starving and there was only a kid left to eat, I could cook it in ways other than boiling it in its mother's milk.
But I don't think this commandment has to do with eating.
There is another possibility which I have not read elsewhere - noting that this commandment follows on from 'first fruits' - well, the commandment is contained in the same verse as the responsibility of 'firstfruits' of the land going into the house of the LORD - that a kid still sucking on it's mother is really very young and may be deemed 'firstfruits'. The additional commandment may be designed to stop a custom or practice that had the potential to break the first part of the commandment - the firstfruits bit.
This is my choice - but I was not there either. However, I really cannot see how any argument could say that this particular commandment is about separating certain foods - which ever way I read it the idea of separation is just not there, in the text.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Sept 8, 2005 5:54:55 GMT -8
I've been trying to stay out of this one as much as possible; but I want to express my appreciation for Netzar Y'hudi's patinet explanations. We must remember that Messiah lived in a Jewish culture and therefore lived and practiced kosher accordingto the Jewish standard. If He had not, it certainly would have been worth mentioning. Paul not only lived a observant lifestyle; but testified that he had consistently lived according to "the customs of the fathers" (Acts 28:17). This would suggest that his definition of kosher was more orthodox. We believe that oral is for our benefit and use; except for the few ocassions when it conflicts with written . At the same time, we do not hold oral to the standard of defining sin against Adonai. In practical application, we teach written and exhort others to live obediently. We live oral and give an example.
|
|
|
Post by messimom on Dec 16, 2005 0:28:03 GMT -8
The following quote came from the current Christmas discussion happening in another thread:
Gross. Who figured that out? YUCK.
Does this cross over into the kosher eating category? What do others think of this? JW's won't take blood transfusions in medical procedures because "the life is in the blood" and it is like cannibalism in their theological opinion. Is this a legitimate concern for those who are insulin dependant?
EWW. Gross again.
I'm sure there are health draw backs to eating many of the other non-kosher species too. Has anyone looked into that? I actually have a mormom acquaintance that has stopped eating pork because she believes it is unbiblical. Oh, how I pray for that lady.
Messimom
|
|