And he says: "But it gets worse!
According to him that is! He begins to use NOT scripture but commentaries on the Torah and arguments not proven as fact to make the Jews look bad. Not a very good argument at best and anti-Semitic in its worst form since Hitler wasn't in his right mind in the first place!
Ezra the Scribe
HERE IS THE TRUTH ABOUT EZRA, NOTHING LIKE THIS NONSENSE!
Led the return to Israel in 3413 (348 BCE)
http://www.ezra.mobi/2010/01/life-of-ezra.html#comment-formThe order in which Ezra took the various measures attributed to him is uncertain. He probably presented the Law to the people during the Feast of Tabernacles in the autumn, most likely in the year of his arrival.
He also took action against mixed marriages and succeeded in persuading the people to divorce their foreign wives voluntarily. His efforts reached their climax when the people engaged in solemn covenant before God to enter into no more mixed marriages, to refrain from work on the Sabbath, to levy on themselves an annual tax for the support of the Temple, regularly to present their tithes and offerings, and otherwise to comply with the demands of the Law.
NOTHING HE DID WAS IN ANY WAY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT GOD WOULD HAVE HIM DO
"Judaism has known for “thousands” of years that Ezra rewrote Torah and Jeremiah was telling the people that the scriptures were corrupted, Jeremiah chapter 7 & 8. So poor Marcion was on the ball when he said there was something wrong with the god of the Jews."
The scriptures were corrupted but not in any way as this Atheist intimates it was, God from the beginning wanted His people of whatever people groups they were to be SEPARATE from people's who did not serve God, that is the simple idea herein mutilated by nonsensical conclusions!
Ezra was a priest of God who was under great pressure to reinstate the Jewish way of worship in a time when his people were scattered in another land in subjection to a people who hated their God and worshiped many gods, so to accuse him this way flies in the face of reason. If anyone was guilty of this it was the opponents of Ezra not Ezra himself.
"Ezra created god in his own image. In the image of a racist, Zionist, blood thirsty MONSTER, created he god.
Racism was invented by the Jewish Priest Ezra!"
This racist nonsense is straight from Hitlers warped mind, not Ezra but this argument about scripture taken entirely out of its context and reformed into this hate filled understanding of Gods prophet and his motives in saying certain things to his people is really taking it to far even for an Atheist!
"You don’t believe me?
Mein Kampf is the German version of the Book of Ezra. "
There is literally NO MENTION of this statement on the internet except a few atheists and this person BOB the Atheist, so it is obvious there is no proof of this overstated concept......it is the Bob doctrine alone and deserves no other response but the historical rather than the hysterical record of an Atheist!
Here is an interesting article about this book from the Jewish Encyclopedia: Especially the section on the SUPPOSED fabrications in this book!
http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5968-ezra-book-of
http://www.tektonics.org/af/divforce.html
"In his Edict to the returned Jews from Babylon he stated:"
Please note here: Ezra was a scribe as well as a hereditary priest. As a scribe he was trained as all before him, in the minutiae of religious law and was qualified to translate and interpret those laws. Remember Jews were taught from early on to absolutely memorize the scriptures, so Ezra being a preist of God and a Scribe would not have been one to misquote God lightly if at all.
"Not only did Ezra demand that the foreign wives of Jewish men be cast off, he demanded that all the children of such marriages be sent away.
His edict was multi-generational. Children, grandchildren and great grandchildren were to be cast off, never again to see their families. And wives, who had been with. their husbands only a few years, as well as those who had spent a lifetime with their mates, must also be sent away. No one whose blood was contaminated with non-Jewish blood could stay."
As you can see this Atheist is overplaying the sympathy card here on purpose, obviously in order to use the emotional element of this idea to sway his audience in favor of what he's saying!
But using this form of tactic is not right sinse he was not there to witness it first hand and the text he's referring to doesn't mention any of this happening at all, so it's simply made up emotional happening from his mind. It's fair to say that his argument is EMOTIONALLY based and not logically based!
HERE'S A GREAT ARTICLE EXPLAINING IN BETTER DETAIL WHY.
http://jbq.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/402/jbq_402_wolakfinal.pdf
It must be completely understood that to be Jewish was multiracial by nature, many different people groups made up the Jewish people throughout their history as well as now, Jewishness ISN'T BASED UPON SKIN COLOR BUT RELIGOUS DEVOTION AND OBEDIENCE TO GOD'S LAW, so to state that it was unusual for God to require separation from unbelieving people is simply absurd and stupid.
There is no contradiction in Ezra only a misunderstanding and accusation from an Atheist LOOKING for such contradictions. It is possible to find contradiction in any given text if seen in a wrong spirit or ignorance so the point he is making is lost amid the true understanding!
There is no contradiction in Ezra only a misunderstanding and accusation from an Atheist LOOKING for such contradictions. It is possible to find contradiction in any given text if seen in a wrong spirit or ignorance so the point he is making is lost amid the true understanding!
He further states:
"The policy instituted by Ezra was more severe and contradicted the Deuteronomic Law which said: “You shall not detest an Edomite… you shall not detest an Egyptian…The sons of the third generation who are born to them enter the assembly of the Lord.” Deuteronomy. 23:8
I THOUGHT I MIGHT TAKE THE liberty OF PASTING THIS ENTIRE worthy ARTICLE TO CLEAR UP THIS ATHEISTIC MESS once and for all!
Did Ezra the Scribe Tamper with the Law of Moses?
In Deuteronomy 16:2 it says, "Thou shalt therefore sacrifice the Passover unto the LORD thy God, of the flock and of the herd, in the place which the LORD shall choose to place his name there."
Yet in Exodus 12:5 it says, "Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats."
Says one writer, the reason for this difference is that Ezra the scribe re-wrote Moses' words in Deuteronomy 16, and changed the Law.
What is the truth?
|
Is there a contradiction between Exodus 12:5 and Deuteronomy 16:2?
Why does Exodus plainly tell us the Passover had to be a kid or a lamb, but Deuteronomy says even an animal from the 'herd" -- a bullock -- can be sacrificed? What gives? Why does Deuteronomy say "of the herd"?
This used to puzzle me. At one time I thought that perhaps the reference to the "herd" might have referred to a "herd of goats." Obviously, goats don't "flock" together like sheep do -- they are too independent. But we do speak of a "herd of goats."
However, in studying Ezekiel's description of the millennial Temple of YEHOVAH God, I discovered another answer to the enigma.
In Ezekiel 45:21 we read, "In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten." During these seven days of Passover, YEHOVAH God commanded various "Passover" sacrifices to be offered at the Temple, or sanctuary.
In Ezekiel 45:21 we read, "In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten." During these seven days of Passover, YEHOVAH God commanded various "Passover" sacrifices to be offered at the Temple, or sanctuary.
On the first day of the feast, two young bullocks and one ram and seven lambs were to be offered for a burnt offering to the LORD (YEHOVAH) (Numbers 28:16-19). These would be the "Passover" offerings, and fell on the first high holy day, when the Passover was to be eaten. They included two bullocks.
These sacrifices on Passover would fulfill the commandment in Deuteronomy 16:2 about the sacrifices "of the herd," which were to be made on the Passover. However, as the commandment in Exodus plainly states, the Passover sacrifice itself had to be a young sheep or goat of the first year, unblemished. Obviously Deuteronomy 16:2 is discussing a different sacrifice than the regular Passover lamb!
Another answer to this question, however, has also come to light. In studying in preparation for the Passover this year, I ran across a reference to Deuteronomy 16:2 which cleared up the whole problem. I discovered that the "Passover" sacrifice mentioned in Deuteronomy 16:2 could also refer to a special offering which often accompanied the Passover lamb itself, when it was sacrificed on Nisan 14. In The Secrets of the Haggadah: A Commentary on the Passover Haggadah, by M. Glazerson, we read the following:
"When the Pesach Sacrifice is offered, a Peace Offering is offered with it on the fourteenth day of the month, either from the bullocks or the sheep, large or small, male or female. This is called the 'Chagigah of the Fourteenth.' Of it, the Torah states: 'And you shall bring the Pesach as an offering of a meal to Hashem, your God; from the flock and the herd...' (Devarim 16:2). Scripture did not make this mandatory, but optional...
"When is the Chagigah brought together with the Pesach Sacrifice? They are offered together only in a state of ritual purity on weekdays when the Paschal lamb is too small for all those eating. It may be eaten for two days and one night. It is governed by the same regulations as all Peace Offerings...." (p.25).
One writer has claimed that the verse in Deuteronomy 16:2 refers to the Passover lamb itself, and that Ezra the scribe, who lived about one thousand years after Moses, changed the text and rewrote the words of Moses, adding the words "of the herd," and the entire commandment that the Passover lambs had to be killed at the "place where God put His Name," and not within their own gates or homes.
This idea would mean that Ezra, a faithful and true servant of YEHOVAH God, tampered with the Word of YEHOVAH God, and deliberately altered Holy Scripture -- a nonsensical and foolish idea, if I ever heard of one! Ezra would never tamper with Scripture. "For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments" (Ezra 7:10).
He was "Ezra the priest, the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the commandments of the LORD, and of his statutes to Israel" (verse 11). Ezra was a very righteous and godly man, and would never have tampered with or altered the meaning or the text of the books of Moses.
However, for a supposed man of YEHOVAH God to claim that Ezra changed the writings of Moses, and altered inspired Scripture (II Tim.3:16), changing its meaning, is tantamount to calling Ezra a heathen, pagan, and calling YEHOVAH a "liar" who didn't really preserve His Word as truly "inspired."
The truth is, YEHOVAH God Almighty inspired Moses when He gave him the Law -- the Torah. This includes Deuteronomy, chapter 16. Ezra did not change Scripture. It has been our understanding of the Scripture which has been lacking.
The Jewish book Secrets of the Haggidah clears up this mystery of the usage of the word "herd" in Deuteronomy 16, as it applies the the Passover. It is a reference to the Chagigah "peace offering," which could accompany the Passover sacrifice itself!
This is an example of how we must be very careful lest we leap to wrong conclusions when studying the Bible. As the apostle Paul wrote, we must -- "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, rightly dividing the word of truth" (II Timothy 2:15).
In our effort to "Prove all things" (I Thessalonians 5:21), we must be very careful that we are not led astray by ministers and teachers who lack true understanding and who use the word of YEHOVAH God to deceive, delude, and seduce YEHOVAH's people into the way of error. As Solomon wrote so vividly, "There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Proverb 14:12).
Truly we must be very careful, and not accept at face value the ramblings and musings and mutterings of modern day ministers and "false teachers" who misunderstand, misteach, and misuse the Word of YEHOVAH God to their own advantage and purposes.
There are many ministers out in the world -- wolves in sheep's clothing -- who teach absurdity and folly for profit. And far too many have been suckered in by their vain words of arrogance and pretense.
-- Edited By John D. Keyser.
Later he made this statement of overreach concerning Ezra which was an attempt to use emotion to piss off Christians and prolong the argument. This would usually stop any sane response and cause the argument to go south into emotion where he would dismantle his opponents.
But history being what it is there is an answer that is satisfactory in regards to this question and it doesn't lead down a rabbit hole!
Later he made this statement of overreach concerning Ezra which was an attempt to use emotion to piss off Christians and prolong the argument. This would usually stop any sane response and cause the argument to go south into emotion where he would dismantle his opponents.
But history being what it is there is an answer that is satisfactory in regards to this question and it doesn't lead down a rabbit hole!
"Racism was invented by the Jewish Priest Ezra!"
http://alltheusefulidiots.blogspot.com/p/destroying-race-card-with-truth.html
Mein Kampf, p. 186 . . . p.162"
This is clearly a case of "Grand ideas" with SMALL minds, Hitler was no more a Christian than the Atheist who quoted him. This is the common problem with those who understand NOTHING of truth and even less about comparing apples to oranges.
Hitler was only masquerading as a Catholic, he was in fact nothing but a bitter Jew who hated his own faith so deeply that it resulted in 6 million deaths of innocent people not counting the millions of innocent people killed defending the world from him.
So please..... don't compare sending people away from Judah INSTEAD OF STONING THEM AS MOSES WOULD HAVE DONE, to murdering millions for the simple idea of RACISM when the whole idea was invented by men in order to enslave weaker people groups!
The mixed people spoken of here are the IDOL WORSHIPPING and by extension God hating heathen, no matter what they said THEY WOULD DO the decades of disobedience had taken its toll upon the people and their ability to obey God.
They were sorry they got caught as we all are when exposed and will try anything to avoid capture. Their reactions were simple "Fight or Flight" reactions not true repentance and turning from their idolatry.
The thing to learn here is clearly not what this Atheist took from the story, that REPENTENCE must be genuine or it is rejected by a Holy God. The results could have been MUCH worse for them had the Law been used to the fullest extent of its jurisdiction here.
Sending them into exile was being merciful compared to stoning them for idolatry but the full law wasn't in place yet because EZRA WAS IN THE MIDST OF SETTING IT UP THERE. So let us learn that God is merciful and kind when he deals with those who deserve the full punishment of the law!
OK, let's first get a reality check here, the bible doesn't even teach RACE like we see it today (GO TO THE LINK ABOVE FOR THE TRUTH!), skin color had NOTHING to do with this. Jews are of MANY DIFFERENT skin colors around the world JUST Christians are.
Many people used to think of first-century Judaism as a monolithic block, a solidly unified religion, from which Christianity split off as a new religion. In contrast, we now know that there were many different sub-groups within ancient Judaism, and that the early "Jesus Movement" was just one of many different Jewish groups. Moreover, the separation of Christianity from Judaism was not sudden, but happened gradually over several generations.
Many people used to think of first-century Judaism as a monolithic block, a solidly unified religion, from which Christianity split off as a new religion. In contrast, we now know that there were many different sub-groups within ancient Judaism, and that the early "Jesus Movement" was just one of many different Jewish groups. Moreover, the separation of Christianity from Judaism was not sudden, but happened gradually over several generations.
Traditionally the Jews are classified as of the Black people of the middle east but you can be a Jew and be of any people because its about obedience to the Laws of God not our immature beliefs about Race mixing.
http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Jews.aspx#2
http://www.jewishfederations.org/black-jews.aspx
http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Jews.aspx#2
http://www.jewishfederations.org/black-jews.aspx
The Bible speaks of Nations OF PEOPLE not Races of color among people groups, and its a simple concept really because there is ONLY ONE RACE that God cares about "The Human Race" and that race must obey his rules or perish because of their OWN CHOICE to do so.
These Jews had knowingly disobeyed God and his clear warnings about intermarriage NOT WITH COLORED GROUPS among the people but with with idolatrous people of ANY COLOR whatever the reason for doing so, it was SIN to allow OTHER GODS into their midst and it would block God's abundance from them, in fact that was the reason they were in the problem of being dispersed in the first place.
"Ezra & Hitler are in total agreement
“it was against the will of the Eternal Creator. . .Nations that make mongrels of their people or allow their people to be turned into mongrels sin against the Will of Eternal Providence.”
Mein Kampf, p. 186 . . . p.162"
This is clearly a case of "Grand ideas" with SMALL minds, Hitler was no more a Christian than the Atheist who quoted him. This is the common problem with those who understand NOTHING of truth and even less about comparing apples to oranges.
Hitler was only masquerading as a Catholic, he was in fact nothing but a bitter Jew who hated his own faith so deeply that it resulted in 6 million deaths of innocent people not counting the millions of innocent people killed defending the world from him.
So please..... don't compare sending people away from Judah INSTEAD OF STONING THEM AS MOSES WOULD HAVE DONE, to murdering millions for the simple idea of RACISM when the whole idea was invented by men in order to enslave weaker people groups!
The mixed people spoken of here are the IDOL WORSHIPPING and by extension God hating heathen, no matter what they said THEY WOULD DO the decades of disobedience had taken its toll upon the people and their ability to obey God.
They were sorry they got caught as we all are when exposed and will try anything to avoid capture. Their reactions were simple "Fight or Flight" reactions not true repentance and turning from their idolatry.
The thing to learn here is clearly not what this Atheist took from the story, that REPENTENCE must be genuine or it is rejected by a Holy God. The results could have been MUCH worse for them had the Law been used to the fullest extent of its jurisdiction here.
Sending them into exile was being merciful compared to stoning them for idolatry but the full law wasn't in place yet because EZRA WAS IN THE MIDST OF SETTING IT UP THERE. So let us learn that God is merciful and kind when he deals with those who deserve the full punishment of the law!
