What's the difference?

[berkeley]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

Can you summarize a bit?

He used the same scriptures as Chosen to justify a pastor setting the boundaries wherever the pastor sees fit. Much of the book is redundant, he goes into describing tribes in the OT- way too many pages dedicated to this.

He gave examples where some pastors draw the line.

I wish I could give more detail, but I read the book over 10 years ago.


Again, Brother Booker is a fine Christian gentleman. I don’t want this to come across as preacher bashing, as many of us “liberals” are accused of.

[Esaias]

Judaism is not just a set of beliefs about G-d, man and the universe. Judaism is a comprehensive way of life, filled with rules and practices that affect every aspect of life: what you do when you wake up in the morning, what you can and cannot eat, what you can and cannot wear, how to groom yourself, how to conduct business, who you can marry, how to observe the holidays and Shabbat, and perhaps most important, how to treat G-d, other people, and animals. This set of rules and practices is known as halakhah.

The word "halakhah" is usually translated as "Jewish Law," although a more literal (and more appropriate) translation might be "the path that one walks."

...

Halakhah comes from three sources: from the Torah, from laws instituted by the rabbis and from long-standing customs. Halakhah from any of these sources can be referred to as a mitzvah (commandment; plural: mitzvot). The word "mitzvah" is also commonly used in a casual way to refer to any good deed. Because of this imprecise usage, sophisticated halakhic discussions are careful to identify mitzvot as being mitzvot d'oraita (an Aramaic word meaning "from the Torah") or mitzvot d'rabbanan (Aramaic for "from the rabbis"). A mitzvah that arises from custom is referred to as a minhag. Mitzvot from all three of these sources are binding, though there are differences in the way they are applied.

...

In addition to the laws that come directly from Torah (d'oraita), halakhah includes laws that were enacted by the rabbis (d'rabbanan). These rabbinic laws are still referred to as mitzvot (commandments), even though they are not part of the original 613 mitzvot d'oraita. Mitzvot d'rabbanan are considered to be as binding as Torah laws,...

Mitzvot d'rabbanan are commonly divided into three categories: gezeirah, takkanah and minhag.


Gezeirah (in Hebrew)A gezeirah is a law instituted by the rabbis to prevent people from accidentally violating a Torah mitzvah. We commonly speak of a gezeirah as a "fence" around the Torah. For example, the Torah commands us not to work on Shabbat, but a gezeirah commands us not to even handle an implement that you would use to perform prohibited work (such as a pencil, money, a hammer), because someone holding the implement might forget that it was Shabbat and perform prohibited work. The word is derived from the root Gimel-Zayin-Reish, meaning to cut off or to separate.


Takkanah (in Hebrew)A takkanah is a rule unrelated to biblical laws that was created by the rabbis for the public welfare. For example, the practice of public Torah readings every Monday and Thursday is a takkanah instituted by Ezra. The "mitzvah" to light candles on Chanukkah, a post-biblical holiday, is also a takkanah. The word is derived from the Hebrew root Tav-Qof-Nun, meaning to fix, to remedy or to repair. It is the same root as in "tikkun olam," repairing the world, or making the world a better place, an important concept in all branches of Judaism.

Some takkanot vary from community to community or from region to region. For example, around the year 1000 C.E., a Rabbeinu Gershom Me'or Ha-Golah instituted a takkanah prohibiting polygyny (multiple wives), a practice clearly permitted by the Torah and the Talmud. This takkanah was accepted by Ashkenazic Jews, who lived in Christian countries where polygyny was not permitted, but was not accepted by Sephardic Jews, who lived in Islamic countries where men were permitted up to four wives.

Minhag is treated as a category of mitzvot d'rabbanan (from the rabbis), mostly because it is clearly not d'oraita (from the Torah), but minhag is generally not the sort of rule that is created by reasoned decision-making. A minhag is a custom that developed for worthy religious reasons and has continued long enough to become a binding religious practice. For example, the second, extra day of holidays was originally instituted as a gezeirah, so that people outside of Israel, not certain of the day of a holiday, would not accidentally violate the holiday's mitzvot. After the mathematical calendar was instituted and there was no doubt about the days, the added second day was not necessary. The rabbis considered ending the practice at that time, but decided to continue it as a minhag: the practice of observing an extra day had developed for worthy religious reasons, and had become customary.

It is important to note that these "customs" are a binding part of halakhah, just like a mitzvah, a takkanah or a gezeirah.

http://www.jewfaq.org/m/halakhah.htm

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by berkeley

He used the same scriptures as Chosen to justify a pastor setting the boundaries wherever the pastor sees fit. Much of the book is redundant, he goes into describing tribes in the OT- way too many pages dedicated to this.

He gave examples where some pastors draw the line.

I wish I could give more detail, but I read the book over 10 years ago.


Again, Brother Booker is a fine Christian gentleman. I don’t want this to come across as preacher bashing, as many of us “liberals” are accused of.

Seems you and I at minimum think this is reaching too far. The situations are not comparable. The positions are not type and shadow...they are oranges and apples.

If one pull lines of scripture, un related, one could make a dictine for suicide.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

Seems you and I at minimum think this is reaching too far. The situations are not comparable. The positions are not type and shadow...they are oranges and apples.

If one pull lines of scripture, un related, one could make a dictine for suicide.

A "dictine" for suicide?

Is that what they pour on their BBQ in NC?

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

A "dictine" for suicide?

Is that what they pour on their BBQ in NC?

Nah.

That is called love and sweet tangy goodness we pour into bbq....silly....

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Well, this is interesting.

Here's an excerpt of a post I made a few months ago:



You took issue with that statement and proceeded to wax elephant about how wrong I was for saying a Pastor was within his role to (I'll use your word, since you like it more) "request" men shave.

Here was your response back then:



So which is this, Aquila? Is this you "playing the devil's advocate?" Or is this you being "multifaceted?"

Because what you just posted is a complete turnaround from what you slammed my Pastor and others over a few months ago.

Then: NO right or role to request anything other than what is expressly written in the Bible. "Man's tradition," and all that stuff.

Now: "As a pastor, he is within bounds to request what he desires."

That's a fair question.

I don't want to wax to radical, nor do I want to support that pastors can just legislate Heaven or Hell edicts from the pulpit.

Technically, a pastor can do anything they wish to do no matter who agrees or not. Those who wish to abide by any pastor's position, whatever it may be, will stay and serve in that church. Let me say that I personally do not support every position or approach a pastor might take.

Let's look at this as a gem with multiple facets. Some I don't agree with, some I do, and others I might tolerate if I feel it is approached ethically.

1.) Personally, I'm absolutely against pastors creating extra-biblical standards and proclaiming that it is a matter of Heaven or Hell. I see that as going way beyond the bounds of Scripture. This creates a "mini-pope" that has the power and authority to absolutely control a saint's life down to the very color of panty hose or sleeve length. I find this to be excessive and unbiblical control.

2.) I don't support pastors who would enforce a "platform standard", refusing anyone with a beard or who violates his opinion from serving on the platform. Why? Because it creates two classes of saints, when we are to be of equal value and service in the Kingdom. It unnecessarily divides the body without any biblical necessity to do so. If a man is born again and sanctified in the pew with a beard, then he's clearly saved and sanctified enough to serve on the platform with a beard.

3.) I have no issue with a pastor voicing his personal opinions or preferences, while allowing the saints to freely choose to honor those opinions or preferences or not. This pastor that I mentioned has stated that his preference is a ministry that is clean shaven. However, he doesn't prohibit men with beards from ever being on the platform. Nor does he condemn to Hell anyone who has a different preference. Out of love, the vast majority embrace his vision. But he will not deny the platform or condemn to Hell anyone who disagrees. This, I can support.

I guess when it comes to pastoral preferences, my support is given or denied based on how the pastor approaches it. Does he approach it in a forceful authoritarian manner, or as a gentle request without creating division or any repercussion if another is of a different opinion.

So, it's a fine line. The attitude and spirit of the pastor goes a long way with me.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

smh

I'm glad that you feel that way. Because honestly, it was some of the things you said that caused me to back up and think about it more clearly.

You might think that I always disagree and don't listen to you, but I do, Elder.

Thank you for just being you. When we aren't insulting one another, you do provide decent food for thought.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Chris how many people use your membership here?

Is that even allowed?

Only me. I hope my clarification above helps.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Judaism is not just a set of beliefs about G-d, man and the universe. Judaism is a comprehensive way of life, filled with rules and practices that affect every aspect of life: what you do when you wake up in the morning, what you can and cannot eat, what you can and cannot wear, how to groom yourself, how to conduct business, who you can marry, how to observe the holidays and Shabbat, and perhaps most important, how to treat G-d, other people, and animals. This set of rules and practices is known as halakhah.

The word "halakhah" is usually translated as "Jewish Law," although a more literal (and more appropriate) translation might be "the path that one walks."

...

Halakhah comes from three sources: from the Torah, from laws instituted by the rabbis and from long-standing customs. Halakhah from any of these sources can be referred to as a mitzvah (commandment; plural: mitzvot). The word "mitzvah" is also commonly used in a casual way to refer to any good deed. Because of this imprecise usage, sophisticated halakhic discussions are careful to identify mitzvot as being mitzvot d'oraita (an Aramaic word meaning "from the Torah") or mitzvot d'rabbanan (Aramaic for "from the rabbis"). A mitzvah that arises from custom is referred to as a minhag. Mitzvot from all three of these sources are binding, though there are differences in the way they are applied.

...

In addition to the laws that come directly from Torah (d'oraita), halakhah includes laws that were enacted by the rabbis (d'rabbanan). These rabbinic laws are still referred to as mitzvot (commandments), even though they are not part of the original 613 mitzvot d'oraita. Mitzvot d'rabbanan are considered to be as binding as Torah laws,...

Mitzvot d'rabbanan are commonly divided into three categories: gezeirah, takkanah and minhag.


Gezeirah (in Hebrew)A gezeirah is a law instituted by the rabbis to prevent people from accidentally violating a Torah mitzvah. We commonly speak of a gezeirah as a "fence" around the Torah. For example, the Torah commands us not to work on Shabbat, but a gezeirah commands us not to even handle an implement that you would use to perform prohibited work (such as a pencil, money, a hammer), because someone holding the implement might forget that it was Shabbat and perform prohibited work. The word is derived from the root Gimel-Zayin-Reish, meaning to cut off or to separate.


Takkanah (in Hebrew)A takkanah is a rule unrelated to biblical laws that was created by the rabbis for the public welfare. For example, the practice of public Torah readings every Monday and Thursday is a takkanah instituted by Ezra. The "mitzvah" to light candles on Chanukkah, a post-biblical holiday, is also a takkanah. The word is derived from the Hebrew root Tav-Qof-Nun, meaning to fix, to remedy or to repair. It is the same root as in "tikkun olam," repairing the world, or making the world a better place, an important concept in all branches of Judaism.

Some takkanot vary from community to community or from region to region. For example, around the year 1000 C.E., a Rabbeinu Gershom Me'or Ha-Golah instituted a takkanah prohibiting polygyny (multiple wives), a practice clearly permitted by the Torah and the Talmud. This takkanah was accepted by Ashkenazic Jews, who lived in Christian countries where polygyny was not permitted, but was not accepted by Sephardic Jews, who lived in Islamic countries where men were permitted up to four wives.

Minhag is treated as a category of mitzvot d'rabbanan (from the rabbis), mostly because it is clearly not d'oraita (from the Torah), but minhag is generally not the sort of rule that is created by reasoned decision-making. A minhag is a custom that developed for worthy religious reasons and has continued long enough to become a binding religious practice. For example, the second, extra day of holidays was originally instituted as a gezeirah, so that people outside of Israel, not certain of the day of a holiday, would not accidentally violate the holiday's mitzvot. After the mathematical calendar was instituted and there was no doubt about the days, the added second day was not necessary. The rabbis considered ending the practice at that time, but decided to continue it as a minhag: the practice of observing an extra day had developed for worthy religious reasons, and had become customary.

It is important to note that these "customs" are a binding part of halakhah, just like a mitzvah, a takkanah or a gezeirah.

http://www.jewfaq.org/m/halakhah.htm

That was a good bit of information! Thanks bro!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Thanks for that. I needed a laugh today. Didn't need the whiplash from the sudden 180 you made, but the laugh was good.

It's not entirely a 180. It's a multifaceted issue. I tried to iron it out in post #166. Maybe it will help clarify. (Link below.)


http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=166