User talk:Wlmh65

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Wlmh65, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --TeaDrinker 19:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Netzarim

There doesn't appear to be any third-party, reliable information on this "movement" at all. From what I can tell, it's just a website. Do you think we should just delete any mention of it from the article at all? I suspect we should. Please discuss on Talk:Nazarene (sect). Jayjg ^(talk) 16:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Proposal

Hello and Shalom. While my religious affiliation is with Messianic Judaism, I am very interested in the ancient Jewish Netzarim (just see my userpage), the original followers of Ribi Yeshua of Natzret, Pharasaic in style, which I believe that Messianic Judaism should be based upon. I am interested in collaborating with you in making Nazarenes one of the better articles on Wikipedia. Note that I have no bias nor affiliation to the group in Ra'anana, and do not consider Yirmeyahu "ben David" a true successor to the Paqids (how is a Goy descended from David HaMelekh?); I am simply interested in documenting things that verifiably exist. I reside in the United States; I assume you reside in Israel? Thank you for your time and cooperation. Noogster 05:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems strange, Wlmh65, that you would be so quick to delete/erase sourced information that is so relative to the topic you are interested in, and that you have decided that Jaygj is a higher authority on the subject than truly wants to work with you. Please note that when I included different modern movements in the article, I said that these groups SELF-IDENTIFY as modern movements (maybe I should just repost it and make that more clear?). These very non-inclusionist sentiments might make it almost impossible to add a Yirmeyahu ben David article somewhere down the line. We've got the timecube articles for example and its remote founder, and there's no challenge to that being properly documented (timecube only has literally a half a dozen believers). Please respond in my talk page. Noogster 16:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know

I'll try to keep an eye on it, but please keep me informed. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your post on Shaul avrom's page

You fail to recognizing how wide the gamut of the term "Messianic Judaism" truly is. I, personally, am a strict monotheist so I do not really believe that Yeshua HaMashiach is/was divine (tho I do believe in his pre-existance, which happens to be very Jewish less Maimonides), don't believe in the "trinity", and I don't believe in a personal Satan. The following is good reading on the topic: http://www.mikvehyisrael.com/trinityone.html I do not consider there to be a "dual Torah" (mainly because the written Torah never references the Oral); there was a written and holy Torah given to Mosheh, which is essentially inalterable, and then there is the traditional interpretation of the Torah beginning with Mosheh on Sinai and developing all the way to the present day, exemplified and recorded in the Talmud, and which we can comfortably call the "Oral Torah", as it is the authoritative and traditional interpretation of the Torah.

Furthermore, while the Ra'anana group gets plenty of things right, I do not consider it the authoritative modern re-creation of the Netzarim sect for two reasons:

1.)I'm only going by the website here, but it seems that they hardly use any of the NT other than a reconstructed version of Matthew.

2.)Yirmeyahu "ben-David" was formerly Clint Van West, a gentile. The paqids were all descendants of Yeshua of Natzrat, HaTzadiq, HaMashiakh, a descendant of course of David HaMelekh, their line starting with Yaqov HaTzadiq and continuing onward. Gentiles don't descend from David HaMelekh! So he is definitely not a legitimate 16th paqid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noogster (talk • contribs) 02:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

This is in response to your comment on my page denouncing Messianic Judaism.

First, I ask that you change your attitude. You are being very condescending and generally just talking down to me, and have referred to me along the lines of being "hopeless", "an evil prophet", or something of that nature. In truth, I am here to learn and I have learned a lot and I've got plenty of learning left to do; it is not my place to believe that I have ever somehow reached a religious monopoly on G-d. G-d forbid you ever meet anyone who is a Christian, if you're speaking to me in this tone.

1.) Are you referring, by chance, to the CANON of the NT (which of course is Constantinian and therefore extremely disputable). If you are referring to the books within the NT themselves then I couldn't disagree more. The vast majority of the seemingly antinomian/non-Torah sentiment seen in most translations of the NT is due to the biases of the translators themselves and not the pristine state of the original works (as your own leader's Mattityahu reconstruction can attest to); the only exception I can think of is some of the writings traditionally attributed to Paul (I realize H. Maccoby wrote a pretty decent book, but his perspective is not the only valid or well-researched one). Luke/Mark are cousin works of Matthew, and the traditional interpretation of John painting Jesus as G-d/divine is false; read the following: http://www.mikvehyisrael.com/trinityone.html As for your claim of it being "Hellenistic", I don't know what you're going on about there, since the entire thing was written by Jews.

2.) Where did you ever get the impression that I was a Karaite?; Karaites only believe in using canonized scripture, while I have repeatedly stated more than once that the Talmud (and subsequent oral works) are the authoritative traditional interpretations of the written Torah. Yeshua was definitely a Pharisee, a Galilean Ribi I never stated the contrary; it would be ludicrous to paint him as a Sadducee or anything similar. But my problem is that, you are trying so hard to reconcile your beliefs with Orthodox Judaism that I doubt you even fully believe that he's the Messiah.

P.S. Please see Brian Tebbit'ts blog here: http://rabbiyeshuaswisdom.wordpress.com/ The man has some pretty strong theology and can answer all your questions about NT Noogster 02:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wonder how much longer we're going to have to continue with this (as long, I suppose, as I have some questions about what you state).

Your #1: Then I suppose that means that the vast majority of people aren't anywhere in the ballpark of your idea of "salvation"? Sadly, only 5% of Jews today are Torah observant. The Reform movement caused half of that, and the Kharedim caused the other half.

Your #2: I'm not so sure. In Judaism, the Mashiakh is the greatest, the most important, and the most holy person that has or ever will walk the earth. I don't try to pare it down.

Your #3: He probably would.

Your #4: This is what I have the biggest problem with. First of all, what are you citing as "the various accounts of his life"? Of course, you are referring to NT, aren't you! My allegiance to him is unshaking; I don't try to minimize any aspect of him, not his life, birth, teachings, death, resurrection, or Messiahship. In a way, him being the Messiah doesn't truly matter or have any implication on the infinite truths of his teachings, but in another way stating that it is "irrelevant" whether or not he's the Messiah is just ludicrous. Your leader would agree with this, as he has various things on his website discussing and defending his Messiahship. The late Rav Yitchak Kaduri, zt”l, master Kabbalist, stated before his death that the Messiah appeared to him, and that his name was YEHOSHUA: http://rabbiyeshuaswisdom.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/the-rebbes-name-is-the-revealed-name-of-mashiach/ Noogster 02:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. When I referred to Yirmeyahu as a "gentile" I was talking about him being BORN a gentile (his conversion was certainly valid), for the fact that a valid Paqid requires direct descent going back to David HaMelekh, and people that are born Gentiles certainly aren't going to have that trait! Noogster 02:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Triangle K

An editor has nominated Triangle K, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triangle K and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this article is going to need substantially mpre information and sourcing to have a chance. Please see what you can do. DGG (talk) 01:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hoshana Raba 2006 300x224.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hoshana Raba 2006 300x224.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]