In Mourning During Pesach...

"For the hurt of the daughter of my people I am hurt. I am mourning; Astonishment has taken hold of me." I'm trying to be positive about life and rejoice, but someone's got to bear the burden of my families. Can I do it alone? Sure; Kevin Fosko and others have helped; but can I really bear the burdens of my family alone?! Did not Yehovah (B"H) say, "I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion." ? Yet, I am one for at least these families--Czerneckis, Andrulewiczes, Danilowiczes, Foczkos, Rusznaks, Gajdoszes, Uszinskys, Trudnyaks, Monkas, Novaks, Margiewiczes, Monkas, and even such as the Haslinkskys (the family of the maternal brother of Katariana Szuanna "Katherine Susan 'Maria Uscianski' " Uszinskyova Gajdos).

Has G-d made even the Anusim and bnei-Anusim people for His glory? Yes, He has. "For as the sash clings to the waist of a man, so I have caused the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah to cling to Me,’ says the Lord, ‘that they may become My people, for renown, for praise, and for glory; but they would not hear.’" Then why are we silent? Why don't we care about our Jewish heritage? Why don't we care that we are of the chosen of G-d to bring His Gospel that we have heard, and that some of us have received, to other Jews and gentiles? "“For I know their works and their thoughts. It shall be that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and see My glory.  I will set a sign among them; and those among them who escape I will send to the nations: to Tarshish and Pul and Lud, who draw the bow, and Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands afar off who have not heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they shall declare My glory among the Gentiles. Then they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord out of all nations, on horses and in chariots and in litters, on mules and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,” says the Lord, “as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord.  And I will also take some of them for priests and Levites,” says the Lord."

How I wish that  that Yad L'Achim and Benjamin Netanyahu (among others) could see that very few Messianics wish to proselytize (force or induce conversion), many of their ancestors (like mine) having been proselytized and thus not really being Messianic, anyway (Proselytization never works; and whether one converts is always up to G-d, anyway.).  But why won't they hear? 

"How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!”"

"So what percentage of Jews actually reject the Talmud?"

That's a good question. An exact percentage can't be taken down or ascertained. This is because of three things:

• Even some Karaites and quite a few Messianic Jews will take parts of the Talmud that are not in contradistinction from Scripture and follow them or implement them--e.g., Hanukkah; the names of the months. By the way, the Pharisee name "Nisan" and Hanukkah both appear in Scripture.
• There are Humanistic and other Jews (e.g., Yaron Yadan) who reject Tanakh altogether because they intertwine it with the Talmud. Yaron Yadan tellingly states, for example, "The prophet Ezekiel contradicts the words of the Torah...Know that this contradiction is found even within the Torah itself, for in Deuteronomy (24:16) it is written, "Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: a person shall be put to death only for his own crime." The Gemara in Sanhedrin 27b reconciles the contradiction: "'visit[s] the guilt of the parents upon the children'! On those who continue their fathers' deeds." That is, the children are punished (for their parents' guilt?) when they continue to sin. See Ibn Ezra on Exodus 20:4, who went on at length about the reconciliation of contradictions." Yaron Yadan himself has the trouble of both separating the Torah from the Talmud, and separating--for instance--individual punishments and curses on the family line as a punishment to the family's partriarch or matriarch--viz. direct and indirect consequences.
• The percentage of Karaite, Messianic, and other--both Patrilineal, Matrilineal, and both-parent--Jews who reject the Talmud entirely can't be ascertained. Om an incidental-but-perhaps-related note, we can't even account for how many Jews were murdered in the Holocaust--usually only Matrilineal Jews who are more than a 1/16th or so Jewish are counted (though Scripture--e.g., Galatians 4:22-24 and 1 Chronicles 7:14--accounts that Isaac was the first Jew, and that Manasseh children were 1/16th Jewish and still Jewish).

I've Made My Decision In Terms Of Naming A Pet...

If I ever get a pet, I may name the said pet after a deceased love one. After all, based on the answers that I've received (one of them quite inappropriate, as I made clear), I see no contradiction against or contradistinction from Judaism or Jewishness in naming a pet after--for example--my beloved and late Great-Granduncle Bernie. The answers (not in chronological order) that I received are as follows, and I break down the answers as to why they affected me to decide that naming a pet after Great-Granduncle Bernie would be okay:

Firstly (and I made quite clear that I didn't appreciate being yelled at or having to ask a follow-up question):

Reform Judaism/Answered Question

Expert:	Rabbi Sue Levy
Subject:	Naming Pets In Judaism
Question:	QUESTION: Is naming a pet after a deceased loved one appropriate or encouraged for a Jewish person to do? ANSWER: Dear Nicole, No, it is absolutely NOT appropriate to name a pet after someone who died. Chag Sameach, Rabbi Sue ---------- FOLLOW-UP ---------- QUESTION: Why is it inappropriate to do so?
Answer:	A pet is not a person who will carry on the honored legacy of the individual being remembered. You cannot teach a put about the person for whom it is named. A pet cannot emulate that person or behave in its honor. A pet cannot feel a sense of connection with that individual. It is degrading to the memory of the deceased to consider an animal worthy of such an honor.

Secondly (and I give David kavod for not yelling at me, and I asked him partly because he didn't list himself as a "rabbi" or an Anti-Messianic ["Anti-Missionary"] type):

Orthodox Judaism/Answered Question

Expert:	David Rosenblum
Subject:	Naming Pets In Judaism
Question:	Is naming a pet after a deceased loved one appropriate or encouraged for a Jewish person to do?
Answer:	Hi Nicole, Please know that I am not a Rabbi. I never heard of a provision for naming a pet after a person.  It is most certainly not encouraged.  I would avoid it for the following reason (this is my own judgement and subject to critical debate): The purpose of naming someone after they passed away is so that their memory should continue.  Since we remember the dead fondly, we remember their good deeds and will strive to emulate their ways which benefits ourselves for obvious reasons but also benefits the deceased since we improved ourselves in their merit.  This is stimulated by attaching the name to another person and continually calling that person who has equal standing in the hierarchy of creatures, by that same name.  If the name is attached to a lesser creature I can see the possibility of the memory being degraded and the effect being nullified and perhaps even reversed.  In other words, since we degraded the memory, we will not end up emulating the good ways and perhaps incur a negative trait due to the degradation. About the naming in general: many families attach great importance to this and sometimes quarrel about which name to give to newborns.  I always hear Rabbis say that the loss of peace is a much greater issue than can be gained by naming after their loved one.  Intelligent and learned Jews always are very easy with giving up the right to such honors in favor of keeping peaceful relations.  To me it always seemed that the naming after a deceased is a nice to have but not very important. I hope this helps. David

Thirdly:

Nicole Maratovah CzarneckiNehemia Gordon

8 hours ago near Baltimore · 

• Is naming a pet after a deceased loved one appropriate or encouraged for a Jewish person to do?

  Like · 

  • 

    Nehemia Gordon No, not according to Jewish tradition.

    about an hour ago · Like
  • 

    Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki What about according to Karaite Judaism, or would the same principle apply?

    about an hour ago · Like

Fourthly (and this connects to this):

Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki

3 hours ago near Baltimore

PublicFriendsFriends except AcquaintancesOnly MeCustomClose FriendsPeople That I Follow On TwitterSee all lists...FamilyFamily FriendsNotre Dame Classmates andCreative Kids Camp and Greater GreenbeltRelatives? and RelativesFriends and AcquaintancesChurch and CCACollege FriendsFriends of Friends and AcChapelgate Christian AcademyHomeCollege of Notre Dame of MarylandUMBCHoward Community CollegeHoward CCBaltimore AreaUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore CountyAcquaintancesGo Back

: Wait a minute: if you give a pet a Jewish name, isn't that possibly naming that pet after a deceased loved one--e.g., "Rivkah", 'imenu?

Like ·  · Share

• 

  David Marshall Would that be bad, if a pet were named after a deceased loved one?

  3 hours ago · Like
• 

  Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki From what I've gathered, a name is connected to the deceased one's soul. So, if it causes one to stumble, then yeah.

  about an hour ago · Like
• 

  Tareq Ayoub i think it is abad

  about an hour ago · Like

Fifthly:

Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki

Friday near Baltimore

PublicFriendsFriends except AcquaintancesOnly MeCustomClose FriendsPeople That I Follow On TwitterSee all lists...FamilyFamily FriendsNotre Dame Classmates andCreative Kids Camp and Greater GreenbeltRelatives? and RelativesFriends and AcquaintancesChurch and CCACollege FriendsFriends of Friends and AcChapelgate Christian AcademyHomeCollege of Notre Dame of MarylandUMBCHoward Community CollegeHoward CCBaltimore AreaUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore CountyAcquaintancesGo Back

: Is naming a pet after a deceased loved one Jewish or Jewishly appropriate?

Like ·  · Share

• 

  Michelle Ravens Czarnecki I don't think so!

  Friday at 3:19pm · Like
• 

  Amy Chai I'm just thinking...no. I think you could use a Jewish or yiddish term though, such as the equivalent of "sweetie" or "cute" but not a proper name of someone passed.

By way of these answers, I'm getting  impression that one's naming of a pet after a deceased loved one would be okay provided that doing so would not cause someone else to stumble--after all, if one can't die for another person, why should he or she have to live for the same--especially if living is or was incumbent on the other person (After all, that Yeshua died for someone else is often an objection to Yeshua per a perversion of. for example, Deuteronomy 24:16, and Ezekiel 18:4 and 18:20.)? . Also, as a ChaCha expert stated, what the deceased one would have wanted or not wanted is what matters.

So, maybe I shouldn't have stopped for a minute and worried when a Golden Retriever named "Bernie" affected me to, G-d willing, someday name a pet after Great-Granduncle Bernie--after all, especially if I don't have children, can't one of my "fur children" have a family name? By the way, the above-cited verses meant only that a sinful human couldn't die for another sinful human--if anyone died for someone else, G-d would have to (See, for example, Psalm 112 and Isaiah 43:10-13--where G-d even states, "And My servant whom I have chosen,[t]hat you may know and believe Me, [a]nd understand that I am He."--and 53.). 

Also by the way, the answers from Amy, David Marshall, and Tareq (as far as I know) came from gentiles; Michelle is my twin and (as much as I love my twin) not--as far as I know--a mevinah (though she was our community college's JSU President until an Anti-Messianic type came in and took it over); and I'm a little surprised that Nehemia, for a Karaite, cited Jewish tradition as opposed to giving an answer from a purely-Karaite (even if a Non-Messianic Karaite) perspective. 

Furthermore by the way, since--in the case of a grieving cat owner--"[i]t might be wise to purchase another cat, similar in breed to the previous one, and even name it the same name as the previous one.  [since t]his will somewhat alleviate the pain.", why can't a grieving person name his or her fur child after a deceased loved one?

"Why did God create gay?" Real Yahoo.com Question With Real Answer

This is a very-complicated question, but worth answering. Isaiah 45:7 reads: "I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity; I, the Lord, do all these things.’" Romans 1:26-27 reads, "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." Furthermore, Romans 9 partly reads:

"14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.”[f] 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

"19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?"

Even further, 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 reads:

"7 And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. 8 Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong."

Therefore: homosexuality seems to have been created for two main reasons:

1) As a hardening of hearts
2) As a thorn in the flesh

By the way, the Greek for "thorn in the flesh" is "skolops sarx"--as Strong's Concordance notes. So Paul, a Pharisee, may well have had a figurative thorn--viz. homosexuality. For Pharisees (P'rushim) such as Paul to be single was uncommon. The Talmud itself records only one case: "They said to Ben 'Azzai: Some preach well and act well, others act well but do not preach well; you. however, preach well but do not act well!74 Ben 'Azzai replied: But what shall I do, seeing that my soul is in love with the Torah; the world can be carried on by others." (Yevamot 63b)

In Case Wikipedia Deletes This...

Here's what Messianic Jews and gentile Christians alike have failed to take up in regards to Messianic prophecy--in other words, I (as far as I know) am the only Messianic Jew taking this up:

Psalm 112

Ironically, Messianic Jews and gentile Christians alike have failed to take up the following:

"Praise the Lord! Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, Who delights greatly in His commandments. 2 His descendants will be mighty on earth; The generation of the upright will be blessed. 3 Wealth and riches will be in his house, And his righteousness endures forever. 4 Unto the upright there arises light in the darkness; He is gracious, and full of compassion, and righteous. 5 A good man deals graciously and lends; He will guide his affairs with discretion. 6 Surely he will never be shaken; The righteous will be in everlasting remembrance. 7 He will not be afraid of evil tidings; His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord. 8 His heart is established; He will not be afraid, Until he sees his desire upon his enemies. 9 He has dispersed abroad, He has given to the poor; His righteousness endures forever; His horn will be exalted with honor. 10 The wicked will see it and be grieved; He will gnash his teeth and melt away; The desire of the wicked shall perish."(NKJV)

Messianic Jews and Christians could easily argue that the psalm states, for example, "his righteousness endures forever", not "will endure forever", meaning that only God could fit the description of the one whose "righteousness endures forever." Furthermore, for instance, verse 2 ("His descendants will be mighty on earth; The generation of the upright will be blessed") could be connected to zerah (i.e., "Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.") in Isaiah 53:10.

Therefore, especially in connecting Psalm 112 to Isaiah 53, one could argue that only Jesus fits the description of the Messiah. Furthermore, in light of that Messiah has to be God, one could connect Psalm 112 to Isaiah 43:11 ^[32] and Isaiah 45:21^[33].

By the way, be forewarned: if I did any more editing, I'd have to weed out much of the Anti-Messianic bias. 

Is the New Testament Anti Semitic?

This video best explains it, but I in particular want to respond to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA; by the way, who I decided that I am not following on Twitter because of their endorsement of this article and Prof. Pieter van der Horst). I am disappointed in the JCPA for allowing Prof. van der Horst to decontextualize the New Testament and revise history.

Addressing Prof. van der Horst's first claim:

"The New Testament has several anti-Semitic elements in its chronologically latest documents. The Gospel of John has Jesus call the Jews “sons of the devil.” There is also a case of an anti-Jewish outburst by the Apostle Paul."

Prof. van der Horst cleary missed the verses about Jews worshipping either G-d or devils. For example:

1. Leviticus 17:7
   They shall no more offer their sacrifices to demons, after whom they have played the harlot. This shall be a statute forever for them throughout their generations.”’
2. Deuteronomy 32:17
   They sacrificed to demons, not to God, To gods they did not know, To new gods, new arrivals That your fathers did not fear.
3. Joshua 24:14-15
   ¹⁴ “Now therefore, fear the Lord, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the Lord! ¹⁵ And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
   
   

   
   

Prof. van der Horst also misses that Paul was not Anti Semitic but frustrated that these particular Jews would not accept that they had the blood of an innocent Man on their hands and that the blood could wash them clean only if they accepted that their Passover was sacrificed (cf. Matthew 27:24-26, Luke 23:33-35, Acts 18:5-8, 1 Corinthians 5:7). By the way--and this is another discussion--, Pilate was a vicious, crowd-riling Anti Semite who knew what he was doing and did not really believe Jesus to be innocent.

Paul indeed even stated:

"I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit,² that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. ³ For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen^[a] according to the flesh, ⁴ who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; ⁵ of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen."

What is Anti Semitic in that? 

In conclusion, Prof. van der Horst and Manfred Gerstenfeld, Prof. van der Horst's interviewer--as well as the rest of the JPCA--would do well to read the New Testament (Hadashah) and the rest of TaNaKH in content.

Once a Jew, Always a Jew? Jewcy.Com and My Take...

I somewhat agree with Michael Nehora. As a Messianic Jew who's not writing this to proselytize or get into very-long discussions and debate (since I'm taking it and adapting it from my original comments, anyway), I believe that Jews are first and foremost an 'am, an ethnos, a people--which is part of why, as Torah commanded, one must be cut off (i.e., exiled or even put to death) for worshiping other gods--viz., cutting yourself off from G-d in some way was cutting off your very life, your very being.

Of course and along the same lines, under the New Covenant, we (that is, we Messianic Jews) believe that Jesus (Yeshua) is the Messiah and that either Yeshua died for you or you will ultimately die (viz. be eternally condemned to She'ol, Gehenna, etc.) for not believing in Him. Thus,  cutting yourself off from G-d (in this case, Yeshua or Jesus) in some way is cutting off your very life, your very being.


Hence, as the Talmud (which I don't follow) rightly states (nonetheless), and as Michael alluded to, "A Jew, even if he sins, is still a Jew." Because of this and because of cutting yourself off from the Jewish G-d, you are a Jew who has cut his life off as opposed to a Jew who became a gentile. As Tanakh states, anyway, a Kushite can't change his skin and the leopard can't change his spots (cf. Jeremiah 13:23); thus a Jew, though he or she cuts his or her life off, remains a Jew.


Besides, as I didn't think about until I posted this blog entry:


"When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations,
When He separated the sons of Adam,He set the boundaries of the peoplesAccording to the number of the children of Israel.
⁹ For the Lord’s portion is His people;Jacob is the place of His inheritance."

Another Case For Aliyah--A Self-Hating Cousin Who Supports the KKK

This will go to show how much my family who stayed, survived the Shoah, yet didn't make aliyah after all the tsores that we've been put through as a family and as part of Israel are--at worst--dangerously self hating. This is why, even though Poland and even other countries figure into our history, we (and any other Jewish person) must make aliyah lest we blackslide (cf. Jeremiah 8:1-6). By the way, I will be nice and censor my cousin's name for his sake. But I see that (unless it's the same picture that I can see today or he hid the picture), the coward did take the KKK picture off of his profile (So, I know that he knows better but won't face that we're Jewish.):


April 9, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki [I recently unofficially changed my middle name to "Maratovah".]
Antisemitism? [That was one of his listed views at the time.] We're Jews!
How dare you, especially given that the Margiewiczes are Jewish!

[Censored]
There were no Jews in my family since many generations. I hope that there were any Jews. I'm sorry you're Jew, it's not my fault.. I don't like Jews and it's not you business. Just like you don't like rats and it's not my business.

April 9, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki
Sorry man, my great-granddad's grandma Katarzyna Margiewicza Andrulewicza was a Jew. So, we're Jewish. Get used to it.

[Censored]
And she's dead. I will not talk about that with you. I don't like jews and thats all.

April 10, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki
You hate yourself, you know. I'm just saying.

April 11, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki
And you'll really have to come to terms with this. From JewishGen.org:

Run on Sunday 10 April 2011 at 22:20:56

Town
(coords) District Name / Company
(registered) Street Occupation Notes 
Horodziej Nieswiez MORGIEWICZ, J 
joiner/carpenter Ostrowski 
Wasiliszki 
5347 2451 Lida MORGIEWICZ, Konst. 
landowner Lebiodka 75 
Zabloc 
5356 2451 Lida MORGIEWICZ, Stan. 
landowner Lebiodka 480 


Did being Jewish suck in some ways? Yes. But should we let the envy and hatred of the gentiles get to us? No.

[Cousin]
it's Morgiewicz, my surname is Margiewicz.. and my family is not from Poland, all polish generations are normal, not Jewish..

April 11, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki
"Morgiewicz" is a variant of "Margiewicz". Also, Lithuania, Ukraine, or Belarus? Doesn't matter- Margiewiczes and Andrulewiczes, as well Margiewicz Andrulewiczes all either may have had or did have a presence there.

[Cousin]
If you are Jewish and it's your problem. I am not and don't like Jews. Maby there were a few people with Margiewicz surname, but it doesn't matter the all Ma/orgiewiczes are or were Jews.

April 11, 2011Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki
I'm saying us in particular, though "Morgiewicz" and "Margiewicz" mean "marginal [or marginalized] son [or descendant thereof]." I'm not saying that you have to return to Judaism- besides, G-d brought us out of Judaism ages ago. But we're still ethnic Jews. Don't let the pogroms, Holocaust, etc. make you become the very people who hate you: you only end up hurting yourself if you become your enemy.


He still has this picture, though (I saw a different one than this unless I had also seen it before or it's the same one that I saw, but I remember that I saw a white-hooded-clad man in his picture before):