Bob took some drugs and wrote:
>>>>>>> I respect those that are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't. Their diets and customs are their own business. I'm not
>>>>>> Jewish,
>>>>>> nor am I under their laws -- not the ones about food, not the ones
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> stoning children for insubordination, not the ones about stoning
>>>>>> homosexuals, not any of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Whoa, where did you hear that
>>>>> one? Jews stoning children and
>>>>> gays???
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've read it in the Bible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The bible is what Christians follow.
>>
>>
>>
>> Non-Christians also follow it, or parts of it (as the Jews accept the
>> Torah -- which is part of the Bible, dummy -- and prophets).
>>
>>> It's a book full of a lot of violence,
>>> both by man and his god. The
>>> Jewish torah is the same
>>
>>
>>
>> The Torah is included in the Bible, dumb ass.
>>
>>> but just leaves out some parts,
>>
>>
>>
>> You must've attended the same seminary some of Karen Winter's favorite
>> theologians attended.
>>
>>> the parts about Jesus being a messiah.
>>
>>
>>
>> You're in over your head, dummy. Christians point to TORAH and see
>> Jesus Christ; Jews reject him _in toto_.
>>
>>> So if you're going to blame Jews
>>> of old for abominations, blame
>>> the Christians of old too. They
>>> were one and the same.
>>
>>
>>
>> You're incredibly ignorant of Judeo-Christian history, not to mention
>> theology. That doesn't exactly surprise me.
>>
>>> Above you refer to stoning as if it is
>>> happening in present day Judaism,
>>
>>
>>
>> No, DUMB ASS, I was making a point most people with SOME familiarity
>> with the Bible can comprehend: that the very same texts which outline
>> kashrut (or kosher since you appear especially dim today) commandments
>> also command stoning for a variety of offenses. IOW, why should
>> someone who finds all the commands to stone homosexuals, adulterers,
>> or insubordinate children objectionable insist that the peculiarities
>> of dietary commands given to desert nomads 5000 years ago be practiced
>> today?
>>
>>>> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey
>>>> the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that,
>>>> when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then
>>>> shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him
>>>> out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
>>>> And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is
>>>> stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a
>>>> glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone
>>>> him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from
>>>> among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
>>>> Deuteronomy 21:19-22
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What a full-of-love book.
>>
>>
>>
>> Given your juvenile defiance, you're quite lucky you weren't around then.
>>
>>>> And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely
>>>> put to death. And he that curseth his father, or his mother,
>>>> shall surely be put to death.
>>>> Exodus 21:15, 17
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What a gentle and kind god.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them
>>>> have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to
>>>> death. Their blood shall be upon them.
>>>> Leviticus 20:13
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No violent intentions by a fascist
>>> god there, eh? Man sure knows
>>> how to make them up.
>>>
>>>> And fwiw, Dreck, who's claimed before to be "part" Jewish, would
>>>> have to
>>>> deal with his wife and brother in similar fashion:
>>>>
>>>> 'The man who commits adultery with another man's wife, he who
>>>> commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the
>>>> adulteress, shall surely be put to death.
>>>> Leviticus 20:10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you actually believe in this stuff?
>>
>>
>>
>> That's the whole deal, stupid Skank. I made a point in response to two
>> ****ing idiots who called me either an anti-Semite (Bob) or
>> "prejudiced" (you) on the basis of my rejection of OT dietary laws and
>> elaboration that asked why Jews uphold the archaic dietary laws but
>> none of the others. Those dietary laws come from Leviticus and
>> Deuteronomy, the same two books which told the Israelites to stone
>> insubordinate children, homosexuals, adulterers, and everyone else
>> outside of Israel. Funny how you now sarcastically write it's "full of
>> love" and so on; you're a ****ing hypocritical asshole for impugning
>> me on a point which you seem to concur. You're a blithering ditz.
>>
>>>> The dietary laws come from these same texts in Deuteronomy and
>>>> Leviticus
>>>> which prescribe stoning and hanging for various transgressions. If the
>>>> rigid laws about human relationships are no longer operative, why do
>>>> some Jews believe other rigid laws about diet are? THAT, stupid, was my
>>>> point. As I've also noted (and you snipped):
>>
>>
>>
>> Why did you not apologize for calling me prejudiced when you find
>> those commands at least as objectionable as I do?! Whore!!
>>
>>>> Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism hold that these
>>>> laws are no longer binding. Most Jews in Reform Judaism have
>>>> considered these laws a hindrance, rather than a facilitator, of
>>>> piety; this is still the mainstream Reform position. Some parts
>>>> of the Reform community have begun to move towards a more
>>>> traditional position. This tradition-leaning faction agrees with
>>>> mainstream Reform that the rules concerning kashrut are no
>>>> longer binding, but holds that keeping kosher is an important
>>>> way for people to bring holiness into their lives. Thus Jews are
>>>> encouraged to consider adopting some or all of the rules of
>>>> kashrut on a voluntary basis. The Reconstructionist movement
>>>> advocates that its members accept some of the rules of kashrut,
>>>> but does so in a non-binding fashion; their stance on kashrut is
>>>> the same as the tradition-leaning wing of Reform. The different
>>>> movements' positions on kashrut are reflective of their broader
>>>> perspectives on Jewish law as a whole.
>>>> http://www.answers.com/topic/kashrut
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I know some very
>>>>> orthodox Jews and they do NOT
>>>>> do the above.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then maybe they're not Orthodox enough. Why do they pick and choose
>>>> which rules to follow and obsess over?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why do the ones who have talked
>>> you into turning on their lights (work)
>>> during their sabbath not stone
>>> people to death?
>>
>>
>>
>> Go ask them, ****.
>>
>>> Are they not
>>> picking and choosing?
>>
>>
>>
>> It appears so to me. That was my whole point, you ignorant buffoon.
>>
>>> And since it's a part of both the bible and
>>> the torah,
>>
>>
>>
>> The Torah IS the Bible, you illiterate fool. Torah is also called the
>> Pentateuch, or first five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
>> and Deuteronomy.
>>
>>> why aren't you accusing
>>> Christians of stoning?
>>
>>
>>
>> Because Christianity isn't based on keeping OT law (vicarious
>> atonement: Christ is the fulfillment of the law).
>>
>>>>> Where are you
>>>>> getting your info from, the KKK?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, the Bible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nice book, that.
>>
>>
>>
>> With your sarcasm dripping all over the place, why do you hold so much
>> contempt for my statement that Jews should follow ALL of the laws
>> rather than just (some of) the dietary ones?
>>
>>>>> Usual, you're even more of a
>>>>> prejudiced
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There was nothing prejudiced in what I wrote, you loathsome bitch.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Loathsome bitch?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, a loathsome, insufferable, boorish, uncreative, slacking,
>> home-bound, agoraphobic, stoned, CAR-LESS psycho BITCH.
>>
>>> I guess if I were your mother or father,
>>
>>
>>
>> You aren't.
>
> The Torah is not part of the Bible, is is the 5 books of Moses.

Torah - the first of three divisions of the Hebrew Scriptures
comprising the first five books of the Hebrew Bible considered
as a unit.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Torah

Those first five books are the books of Moses (as I noted above):
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

> The New Testament translates incorrectly into Greek

No, it doesn't. The NT is consistent with the Septuagint (aka LXX),
which is the Greek version of the OT dating to the third century BC
(i.e., it was translated by Jews long before Jesus' birth).