Re. brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at
Sun Nov 3 22:44:40 EST 2002

JDay123 at (Jd) wrote:
>Bob LeChevalier wrote: 
>The law was changed irreguardless of their interpretations.  They
>could not accept the fact that the priesthood was changed from the
>Levitical order to that of the order of Melchisedec.  
>"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a
>change also of the law." (Hebrews 7:12)

You seem to be contradicting the nincompoop, who insists on focusing
on Christ's statement that not one iota of the law shall pass away.
So who is right, Christ, or Paul?

>When God gets a mans attention, His intention is to show him Jesus.
>"It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
>Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father,
>cometh unto me." - Jesus  (John 6:45)

But people learn of the Father, sometimes, on their own initiative.
One could argue that God inspired them, but by that argument, one can
argue that God inspires everything.

>Here you see Jesus referring to "the prophets" in speaking of this
>matter.  This not only gives the writtings of the prophets an
>equally authoritative status as the Law of Moses (found in the
>Torah), but it also bypasses in a sense any claim that an
>understanding of an  "Oral Torah" (read Rabbinic interpretations,
>Talmud etc.) is required if one is assembling doctrine.

You fail to understand that in those times, "the prophets" were
largely an oral tradition - the only people who had written copies
were the Essenes with the Dead Sea Scrolls, and maybe the priests of
the temple (who had probably memorized them and so needed no written
copy even if they had them), and indeed several of those considered
prophetic writings by the Jews are not part of the Bible, but are the
Apochrypha (accepted by some Christians as canonical) and
Pseudopigrapha (accepted by no Christians).

>>>Also it's irrelevant due to the fact that not even all Jews
>>>themselves adhere to the Rabbinical form of  Talmidism any more than
>>>all Christians adhere to the Popery of the Papal decrees.
>>I merely threw in that comment because you and others seem to have a
>>hangup about the Talmud and yet have no problem with oral law not
>>recorded in the Bible, when in fact the two may be the same thing.
>Well, do you have any evidence that they are in fact "the same

The Jews appear to make the same argument for their oral law that you
make for your oral law.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list