Hebraic Puns

I understand that the term Jews nominally identify membership to the Tribe of Judah. My understanding, however, is that the term Jews is now an umbrella term for anyone claiming Hebraic descent, and not just limited to actual members of the Tribe of Judah.

If all Jews were descendants of the Tribe of Judah, then what precisely happened to the other tribes? How come the Jewish diaspora enabled certain Benjamites to retain their identity at least 2000 years ago, but somehow lost such identity 2000 years later?

Recently, I have seen new interest in interpretations of the prohibition against homosexuality in Leviticus in popular culture - possibly due to this article published last year. I have a somewhat-biased interest in this issue, so I wanted to look at newer translations of Leviticus and try to get a sense of what the landscape is.

I came across the writings and translations of Jacob Milgrom. He seems like a serious authority on Leviticus, and there is a collection of articles dedicated to his legacy. I realize he wrote on a lot of topics, but his statement on homosexuality, published in part in his 2000 translation of the middle books of Levictus, but easier to digest in this book (p. 196-197). It reads, in part:

>Does the Bible Prohibit Homosexuality? Of course it does, but the prohibition is severely limited...First, it is addressed only to Israel, not to other nations. Second, compliance with this law...is irrelevant outside it. Third, it is limited to men; lesbianism is not prohibited. Thus it is incorrect to apply this prohibition on a universal scale...While the Bible never applauds homosexuality, neither does it prohibit most people from engaging in it.

My question is, how radical is this interpretation? It doesn't have the same implications as the article in the Journal of Theology mentioned above, but it does seem a strong condemnation of blanket prohibitions against homosexuality. Was Milgrom on the fanatic or lunatic fringe in his interpretation? Or is this a more accepted reading of Leviticus? (I am aware that this is of course radical compared to modern conservative readings of scripture; just trying to see how this all fits together).

Has Mexico ALWAYS been a Christian and Semitic nation? Here are some subtle hints and evidences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Mexico

From: Jace Willard, "Christian Myths in Pre-Columbian Mexico: An Analysis of the Writings of Fray Servando Teresa de Mier" in Joseph L. Allen ed. The Book of Mormon Archaeological Digest, Volume II, Issue V, 2000, pp. 12-13

According to Torquemada, "The first missionaries, in order to write the Aztec tongue . . . that we call Mexican, were in agreement with the wisest Indians created in the School of Santiago Tlatilolco (sic), and as their pronunciation has two Hebrew letters, Sade and Scin, they substitute them in their writing by approximating the first with tz and the second with a soft x. But . . . the majority of the conquistadors, being from Extremadura or Andalucia, or Arab in their pronunciation, strongly pronounced all of the x's written by the missionaries. . . . Because of this the Spaniards said "Mexico" (Mejico), even though the Indians invariably pronounced it "Mexico" (Mescico) with the Hebrew letter Scin. . ." Mexico with a soft x like the Indians pronounced it means: "where Christ is worshiped" and [thus the term] "Mexicans" is the same as "Christians." . . . And Mexi, I ask, means what? As the Indians pronounced it, it is a Hebrew word that means, taking it from the Latin unctus, what we call "anointed," taking it from the Greek Chrestous, what we call "Christ," and taking it from the Hebrew Mesci, what we call "Messiah."

The Cross of Palenque

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Mexico/Chapter_8

Written by Susan Hale: " One other of the monuments of Palenque should be mentioned, the Temple of the Cross. It rises from a truncated pyramid, and forms a quadrilateral separated by pilasters, ornamented with hieroglyphics and human figures. The openings lead through an inside gallery to three little rooms, of which the middle one contains an altar, ornamented with a frieze. Above this altar until recently stood three marble slabs, of which one is now in the Smithsonian Institute at Washington, the central stone at the National Museum in the city of Mexico, and the third still remains at Palenque. They are six feet four inches in height, four f

A character in a story I am writing is supposed to be from a culture heavily inspired by Pre-Monarchy Israel, with some Rashidun Caliphate themes thrown in for flavor. While for the most part, the Israeli part will be derived from what secular archeology tells us about Pre-Monarchy Israel, what are some themes or elements that would be recognizably "Jewish" to a lay reader without being or being considered Antisemitic? The character is supposed to be an unambiguous "good guy."

The character in question is supposed to be an alien, so I suppose that gives me some leeway, but one of the most central aspects of his intended culture is also an Aztec/Sangheili(the elites from Halo) - inspired focus on ritual bloodletting(ritual cutting to swear an oath, wartime human sacrifices, etc.) I understand that this is terrifyingly close to the horrifying and evil (not to mention completely wrong) "Blood Libel" canard, but I feel it is so central to his culture and what I have planned for him I don't like changing it much...

As a final piece of cultural confusion, the character in question is also supposed to be a Christian with some morally fundamentalist leanings(extremely scientifically progressive, though).

Some things I already have:

Repeated references to an Exodus-like narrative, with a Moses/Muhammad-like "Prophet" at the center.

A strong adoration for and emphasis on a Law-like set of "traditions" that remained mostly unchanged by his and his family's conversion to Christianity.

A yarmulke-like pattern of ritual scars on the top of his head, applied during a manhood ritual at roughly the age of 13

An emphasis on oral tradition and psalm-like recitation of scriptures when worshipping.

Thoughts?

I understand that Hellenist Jews lived outside Israel, spoke Greek and took on other Greek customs. But what I am confused on is:

1. Did they follow the Mosaic laws just like Hebraic Jews? So were circumcised and avoid pork and so on?
2. Does this include ethnic Jews who converted to paganism and/or no longer practice Judaism?

I am aware of Mary Douglas' Purity and Danger. Are there any other published works worth checking out? If suggesting something, I would appreciate the intent of the author instead of just a list of books I'm expected to purchase. Thank you in advance!

Happy C?(h|H)ann?ukk?ah?

Because nobody can fucking agree on how to spell it.

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1972/02/chiasmus-in-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

This is in response to: https://np.reddit.com/r/latterdaysaints/comments/3d1rfd/turns_out_there_are_only_11_pages_of_the_book_of/

As a disclaimer to start, I am not a linguist.

For those of us who believe that the Book of Mormon is not of ancient origins, the fact that Joseph Smith clearly used the Bible to write the Book of Mormon is a given. There are whole sections takes from the Bible, and it is very clear he intended to make it sound as biblical as possible. So if he was copying the style and language of the Bible which does have Hebraic poetic forms, why should it be surprising that these might show up in the Book of Mormon? It isn’t, and would actually be expected to happen. Basically, showing there to be some Hebraic poetic forms could be both supportive of ancient origins or that Joseph Smith was creating Bible fan-fiction. Essentially, this debate about Hebraic poetic forms in the Book of Mormon seems to be a moot point.

But I’ll indulge the premise that it supports the claim that it is of ancient origins in order to show how ridiculous the methodology is. First, the study of biblical parallelism usually focuses on the relationships between lines, sentences, or phrases. This FARMS publication takes it one step further by saying “Although…[this type of parallelism]…has been the standard by which parallelisms are known and understood, many scholars have contended that Lowth was too narrow in his definition.” And then this is what they use as their definition which is based on what one scholar has contended:

“Once we admit smaller segments as being parallel – e.g., words, phrases, even sounds- though the lines to which they belong are not parallel, we raise the incidence of parallelism with a text…but take a global view, finding equivalences anywhere within a text, we raise incidence of parallelism still more.” (pg. xiiv)

Basically their approach is taking a scholar whose views are in the minority of Biblical parallelism in order to justify casting a wider net to catch more fish. Adele Berlin (the scholar) even admits that this broadening will clearly increase the incidence rate. In footnote ten it states:

*“Berlin admits that ‘the definition of parallelism offered here is broader than that found in most biblical studies.’ However, broad as it may appear, her definition is more conservative than that of Paul Kraus, who once set out to prove that the entire Old Testament was composed of poetic forms. Upon failing to do so, he c

My name is Brian.  I've been married to my wife Tina for the past 25 years and the father of a full quiver (ages 12-21 yrs).  I have a love for learning and have earned an M.A in Messianic Judaism, a B.A in Middle Eastern History (focus on the 2nd Temple period) and an M.A. in Counseling (emphasis on spirituality).  I have traveled to Eastern,Europe, Argentina on missions trips,and have seen revival,and desire it on a larger scale as the days are short and more workers are needed.!
I'm constantly drawing out of the the well of the word in its grammatical/literary context, historical context, and cultural/religious context this in turn challenges my own walk  of faith. More than all this, is discovering the reality of  moving more in the power of G-d in "Jesus name" as the book of Acts reveals.

https://twitter.com/jamesstudy7

https://www.patreon.com/jameshouseofstudy

We are also lo0king into expanding into discord, once we reach our initial goals. shalom!"

May His Face Shine Upon you"

Im going to paint my room and i need to know the exact way to write it, google translate is giving me different results and i dont know anyone irl to ask :/

classic "Dialogue" article by Robert Patterson. link goes to pdf:

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V33N04_173.pdf

I have started reading up on some resources, and wanted to hear opinions from this group.

Yahua and Yahushua are to things that the Hebraic roots movement and particularly the sacred name aspect of them has brought to the conversation In fact, they rather insist that those are the true names and that anyone else who doesn't use those names are either deceived in ignorance or deceiving and part of the conspiracies of the world to keep others in ignorance. They would take upon themselves the mantle of being super scholars even though they are not native speakers, have not studied the history and context in Judaism of the actual names, and sometimes don't speak Hebrew but wind up achieving an amalgamation of just having enough ignorance to be dangerous as they will use english dictionaries and strong's concordances to achieve what their own minds have settled upon as the ultimate truth nevermind what any other voices are saying, despite their credentials, despite having more years as a believer, etc

But the irony of all this is that these were Christians and pagans, they say, called out of what they had been doing to serve the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But then they would throw away all the traditions of people who were in the 1st century Judaism. This is indeed ironic because the movement as a smaller lesser known cousin to Messianic Judaism which, in perspective, has long been in existence as Judaism has over Christianity, so Messianic Judaism over Hebraic roots.

It's as if Catholicism underwent a reformation to Protestantism, and then Protestantism underwent a reformation to kabbalah.

Not that this is a perfect analogy, but I will maintain the latter end of this analogy because I've seen many people go very strange places from Hebraic roots... namely, flat earth theory, gap theory, day age theory, nephilim lovers and watchers, sacred name cults, Sanhedrin replacers... and the list goes on.

There's a problem when we reinvent Judaism out of the picture and to use another analogy, after the mishkan was erected we are told that the cloud descended and dwelt upon the tabernacle, in the midst and among the people.

If they had built it wrong, we can be sure that G-d would have taken exception that the mishkan was not done after the pattern shown on the mountain. Now this is not to endorse the Talmud, the Oral Torah, or traditions whole sale--as there were a scant few that Yeshua took exception for, and it wasn't for their inventiveness. It was for the fact that the precept that they had in place was used