Repost: Moshe Looked To Torah Shel Brit Chadashah, and Legalistic "Messianic Judaism" Is Not Jewish

"Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘If a person sins unintentionally against any of the commandments of the LORD in anything which ought not to be done, and does any of them, if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD for his sin which he has sinned a young bull without blemish as a sin offering..."

Those who insist on keeping all 613 mitzvot make the blood worthless ("For it is impossible for those who...fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.", as Hebrews 6 partly reads.). They like to play pick-and-choose mitzvotwhile under grace, since they cannot possibly go to the Temple and offer akorban l'kippur.

Besides, "the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.", as Hebrews 10 partly reads.

To advocate that keeping all 613 mitzvot while under grace is a mitzvah, is a sin. Legalism is sin, and "if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?"

Rick Santorum Is Clearly An Anti Semite And Non-Evangelical Catholic

There's evidence that Priscilla and Aquila had no children. Want more evidence? They were busy tent-making and running a house church. They had no time to have children. Yet Rick Santorum would criticize Priscilla and Aquila, two Yehudim Tzadikim who clearly practiced some form of birth control. Meanwhile, Rick Santorum-- in a speech at Florida's Ave Maria University-- said that mainline Protestants (and by mainline Protestants, he means Evangelicals-- remember "excuse me-- 'Reformation'"? Rick Santorum said that Protestants) are not Christians and that Satan is going after the United States like no other nation. Rick Santorum deliberately forgets that not only do Protestants support Israel, but that Israel are the chosen people-- we Jews are attacked both generally by our own (Antimissionaries, including Self-Hating Jews-- who obviously have no interest in 'Am Yisra'el or Yeshua) and by gentiles (not all gentiles, but obviously the Anti-Israel gentiles).

So, I'm Focusing On Some Indirect Relatives' Branches, But...

That doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see more direct relatives be more found out about (I've had some, but relatively-little, luck or blessing over the past couple of days, and only one instance regarding Dad's side-- as far as I recall.). Meanwhile, speaking of blessings, I have a question for G-d: where's the blessing of karma for Ginny Cha and against Tiki and scheduled-to-be Traci Lynn Johnson Barber? By the way, shouldn't Ginny Cha have justice in her favor? After all:

• But You have seen, for You observe trouble and grief, To repay it by Your hand. The helpless commits himself to You; You are the helper of the fatherless. 
• A father of the fatherless, a defender of widows, Is God in His holy habitation.
• Defend the poor and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and needy.
• The LORD watches over the strangers; He relieves the fatherless and widow; But the way of the wicked He turns upside down.

Ginny Cha is worse off than a widow in many respects. Her husband, who karma (vengeance) has yet to hit, is still with his mistress while Ginny Cha was left with two on-the-way, and is now left with two newborn, girls and two young boys to raise-- and her husband refuses to pay for his affair and divorce.

Meanwhile, karma has yet to hit some of my own relatives-- including my dad who left my worse off than a widow in many respects as well--, but that's another discussion. Meanwhile, I sometimes wonder (like in the case of Tiki Barber) how long until this will be fulfilled in favor of those like Ginny Cha. I mean, sometimes I wonder, is G-d (so to speak) f___ing with us?

"¹¹ Then I said, “Lord, how long?”

And He answered:

“Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant,
The houses are without a man,
The land is utterly desolate,
¹² The Lord has removed men far away,
And the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land.
¹³ But yet a tenth will be in it,
And will return and be for consuming,
As a terebinth tree or as an oak,
Whose stump remains when it is cut down.
So the holy seed shall be its stump.”"

How I look forward to the End of Days! 

What Did Jesus Bring? Redemption

She sadly misses the point, though Benedict XVI has hutzpah-- he doesn't really believe that Jesus is G-d.

"I’m confused about what the jews were doing for those 3000 years before Jesus was born. I mean, if we agree that the God of Abraham is Jesus’ dad, then… God didn’t arrive with Jesus."

Firstly, Jews were stuck keeping a Torah that involved discrimination and breaking donkeys' necks when we couldn't kill lambs-- see D'varim 23:1-8 and Shemot 13. Romans 7:4-25 explains the purpose of Torah and that Jesus brought yeshuat v'kippur that was based on better than Torah. So, Jesus brought yeshuat v'kippur based on chen v'rachamim.

Secondly, Yeshua brought the fulfillment of Vayikra 17:11:

"‘And whatever man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell among you, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’"

By the way, this is why the following is figurative, which proves that Non-Evangelical Catholicism and the doctrine of transubstantiation are pure kefirot:


"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said,“Take, eat; this is My body.”
^"Then He took the cup, and when He had given thanks He gave it to them, and they all drank from it.  And He said to them, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many. Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”"


Thirdly, Yeshua brought more than I can name here.


In conclusion, Yeshua brought chofesh m'Torah l'Moshe, yeshuat v'kippur based on chen v'rachamim, and fulfillment much of Tanakh, among other things.

Another Example of "Judge Not"'s Real Meaning

Here's what"Judge not lest ye be judged" really means and in context: don't be a hypocrite. Paul wrote down, "For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged." (1 Corinthians 11:31) We are supposed to judge, including judge ourselves. Furthermore, a Jewish Corinthian was judged for licentiousness: "For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed." (1 Cor 5:3)

Pseudo-Christian Liberals and Tax Deductions

To say the least, I figured that-- well, here we go again. Pseudo-Christian Liberals always try to do this kind of stuff. Here's what a George Soros-loving, Far-Left, Pseudo Christian proposed; and the rest of the conversation but his and my part in it will be censored. So for both our sakes will be his name (I'm not willing to get sued by a man who thinks that Potter in "It's a Wonderful Life" was a Republican and who endorsed that awful University of Indiana, Bloomington study against Bill O'Reilly.).


Read this like a phone call, because I'm just using what this man said to sum up what he believes-- and believes to the detriment of not only churches and schools like those of Chapelgate, but batei knesiyot and shuls, mosques and madrassas, and other organizations as well. By the way, I posted only a part of the conversation; the part where I refused to get goaded into an argument with this guy.


So this George Soros-loving, Far-Left, Pseudo Christian  proposed the following:




[Paraphrase of what he told a mutual friend] The charity tax deduction should be abolished. 
...


 did I? I thought I proposed including religious organizations in said category.








 I propose excluding religious organizations from the category of an acceptable tax deduction. I believe that it infringes on the separation of church and state. I believe it attaches strings to religious organizations. Furthermore, I believe that it is grotesquely abused. I also believe I am going to get killed on this one.










It also frustrates me that many religious persons will defend Mitt Romney's right to use his church as a tax dodge and overlook his exceptionally immoral accumulation of wealth. He should be giving 90% of that away.




AS I said earlier, I believe it is showing favoritism to persons of religious belief. While I recognize the right of a holy God to show such favoritism, I categorically deny the right of a secular state, particularly under the guise of our particular system, to do so.




 in the moral sense.








 I think that charitable tax deductions should be acceptable when they are for some sense of the greater good, virtue in its historic sense.




...






 if you are going to use WSJ, can I use HuffPo?






 Isn't he simply identifying a return to a pre-Jeffersonian situation?








Indeed. I think they should get. WE are in a massive deficit. Either we cut spending (and yes Reagan fans, foreign policy is big government and expensive), or raise taxes.










 not surprising. Why do you think these people support policies that would seem to so threaten their wealth?








And that, I believe, is where Jesus comes into play. If America's evangelicals would start loving people like he commands us to, we wouldn't have many of the problems that government poorly tries to deal with. But of course they do a bad job. What do we expect from something as massive and complex as the Untied States?




 agreed on Buffett.


...




 the film in question was by Jamie Johnson, heir to the Johnson and Johnson fortune, and it was about the unethical nature of wealth perpetuation in the United States. He disowned her for being interviewed in it.
...




[Me] I don't see why legitimate good should be taxed. As pointed out, the tax deduction is there to protect the religious organizations from the government and vice versa-- which is based on a 1954 law endorsed heavily by then legislator Lyndon Baines Johnson.




 indeed it is worth seeing! I would love to hear your thoughts on it.






[Me] I've said what I'm going to say.

Who's Worse: The Sinner or the Enabler Thereof (And Also A Sinner)?

Having gone through abuse (though never sexual abuse), I have to wonder who's worse between the to-be-late (and justly punished) JoePa or the short-term escaper Jerry Sandusky (who got off in this life only because of "Coker" (1977), "Kennedy" (2008), and JoePa and other child-molester enablers). JoePa is the enabler of the short-term escaper Jerry Sandusky, and Jerry Sandusky is clearly the sinner who is (or rather, was) enabled. Compared to my dad's and grandparents' enablers regarding me, JoePa is the sexual-abuse equivalent regarding the Jerry Sandusky victims.

Meanwhile, a Biblical equivalent of my dad's enablers (including my dad's mother in law) and of Joe Paterno includes the Corinthian community of Messianic Jews who allowed a young Jewish Corinthian to sleep with his stepmother:

 ¹ It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named^[a] among the Gentiles—that a man has his father’s wife! ² And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. ³ For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. ⁴ In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, ⁵ deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.^[b]
6 Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? ⁷ Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.^[c] 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Was Paul allowed to let the enablers get away with what they were doing? Absolutely not:

   
⁹ I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. ¹⁰ Yet I certainly didnot mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. ¹¹ But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person. 
¹² For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? ¹³ But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”^[d]

Were Paterno correctly handled in the American legal system, he would've been just as my dad's enablers legally should be and the Jewish Corinthians Biblically were: accomplices. Paterno can be thankful that he escaped justice in the short term, however, because he wasn't prosecuted legally. Being prosecuted Biblically is enough for him.


As I said, meanwhile, I have to wonder who is worse: the sexually and otherwise immoral, such as Jerry Sandusky; or the "puffed up" such as Joe Paterno. To sin is one thing; to knowingly enable and even encourage sin is another.

Why I've Suffered So Much: At Least Partly Because of That Kapo Mary Rusnak Gaydos

I don't exactly remember who Jack Feldman is descended from, by the way; but I begin to suspect more and more that his Chron's-- besides his trief eating-- comes from his Fosko-Rusnak matriarch being a kapo as well. My side (the Fosko-Rusnak-Gaydos side) has been visited for certain:

Numbers 14:18
‘The LORD is longsuffering and abundant in mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but He by no means clears the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.’


I mean, I don't think that we can any more into entering the abyss zone than having four of the five Rusnak-Gaydos children (Grandaunt Mary Ann and Grandma included) being absolutely wicked (The only one who would not be wicked by doing or enabling any wickedness was Grandaunt Helen, who I didn't know was habat tzedekah until after she was gone.), having even some of habnei v'banot shel habat tzedekah take after the bnei-v'banot ra'im (Ashley and Matt, I'll name you as two of them. Shame on you for not acknowledging our Yiddishkeit and Eloheinu v'Elohim Avinu.), and having some of us bnei v'banot suffer abuse which we have not (or at least tried not to have) perpetuated the cycle of.


While I'm on the subject of Matt, by the way, why does he have Spina Bifida? And why do I have Cerebral Palsy? And why does Jack have Chron's (if his Fosko-Rusnak matriarch was indeed also a wicked kapo)?


Deuteronomy 7:13
And He will love you and bless you and multiply you; He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your land, your grain and your new wine and your oil, the increase of yourcattle and the offspring of your flock, in the land of which He swore to your fathers to give you.


Let me give you a hint: Great-Grandma Gaydos and her zerim sure haven't been blessed:

Leviticus 21:17-24

New King James Version (NKJV)

¹⁷ “Speak to Aaron, saying: ‘No man of your descendants in succeeding generations, who has anydefect, may approach to offer the bread of his God. ¹⁸ For any man who has a defect shall not approach: a man blind or lame, who has a marred face or any limb too long, ¹⁹ a man who has a broken foot or broken hand, ²⁰ or is a hunchback or a dwarf, or a man who has a defect in his eye, or eczema or scab, or is a eunuch. ²¹ No man of the descendants of Aaron the priest, who has a defect, shall come near to offer the offerings made by fire to the LORD. He has a defect; he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God. ²² He may eat the bread of his God, both the most holy and the holy; ²³ only he shall not go near the veil or approach the altar, because he has a defect, lest he profane My sanctuaries; for I the LORD sanctify them.’”
²⁴ And Moses told it to Aaron and his sons, and to all the children of Israel.


Hint two: 


While we may not be koheinim, let me ask you this: if being one "who has a defect" (including one that results in the said one being "blind or lame, who has a marred face or any limb too long, a man who has a broken foot or broken hand, or is a hunchback or a dwarf") is even a (for a lack of a better term) just-because curse to zerim shel Aharon; how likely would you think that any one of those defects could be inflicted even on non koheinim who are or whose predecessors were kapos?


Numbers 14:18
‘The LORD is longsuffering and abundant in mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but He by no means clears the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.’


As I said, by the way, being crippled and being sickened (with me, Matt, and Jack-- if his Fosko-Rusnak matriarch was indeed also a wicked kapo-- included) aren't the only curses which the zerim of the kapo Fosko Rusnaks-- especially those of Mary Rusnak Gaydos-- have had to endure.

A Short Hanukkah Story...

A Jewish boy was on the corner of a busy street in a busy city. This Jewish boy was poor and begging for money. Most of what he got was either persecution, begging, or just no money. Some gave him money, but one  who gave him money mercilessly persecuted him while giving him the money. "Here, Jew. Here's your money. Poor boy; is that all you ever think about?" Then the persecutor just walked away.

People who begged the boy for money were beggars themselves, begging for some of the money which he'd be given or asking how he'd begged. Then came a disheveled-looking, long-haired-seeming man in dirty-appearing  clothes begging for money. The boy, not knowing what else to do, gave him the money. Then the disheveled-looking man held out sevenfold the money that had been given to him. "Can I keep this?"

The boy nodded. Then the man held out tenfold of the sevenfold. "Can I keep this?" The boy nodded, more surprised than at first. A hundredfold of the tenfolded sevenfold appeared in the man's hand. Then the man gave the boy the money.

"Yeshua!" The boy cried. Then the man walked away, and the boy ran home with enough money to live for at least the next couple of days.  

What Does "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged" Really Mean?

Luke 6:37-38

³⁷ “Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. ³⁸ Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.” 

So is Jesus contradictory when he says the following?

Leviticus 19:15-16

¹⁵ ‘You shall do no injustice in judgment. You shall not be partial to the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty. In righteousness you shall judge your neighbor. ¹⁶ You shall not go about as a talebearer among your people; nor shall you take a stand against the life of your neighbor: I am the LORD. 

And

Leviticus 20:1-3

 ¹ Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, ² “Again, you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘Whoever of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell in Israel, who gives any of his descendants to Molech, he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones. ³ I will set My face against that man, and will cut him off from his people, because he has given some of his descendants to Molech, to defile My sanctuary and profane My holy name.

Leviticus 19:15-16 calls for that "[y]ou shall do no injustice in judgment... In righteousness you shall judge your neighbor". Meanwhile, Leviticus 20:1-3 calls for that "'[w]hoever of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell in Israel, who gives any of his descendants to Molech, he shall surely be put to death.'" Isn't that judging (Leviticus 19:15-16) and taking a stand against the life of a neighbor (Leviticus 20:1-3)?

So what does "Judge not" mean, besides that Jesus is not at all contradictory? Don't be a hypocrite! After all, "...He repays man according to his work, And makes man to find a reward according to his way." (Job 34:11); and "...if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is." (1 Corinthians 3:12-13)

So, judge but don't be a hypocrite. "[']For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.'" Paul then was not contradictory when he said the following about a young Corinthian national:

1 Corinthians 5 (Emphasis mine)

Immorality Defiles the Church

 ¹ It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named^[a] among the Gentiles—that a man has his father’s wife! ²And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. ³ For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. ⁴ In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, ⁵ deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.^[b]
6 Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? ⁷Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.^[c] 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Immorality Must Be Judged

   
⁹ I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. ¹⁰ Yet Icertainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. ¹¹ But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person. 
¹² For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? ¹³ But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”^[d]

Repost: What Is With Everyone Suing and Prosecuting Everyone Nowadays?

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2011

What Is With Everyone Suing and Prosecuting Everyone Nowadays?

For example, Dr. Conrad Murray-- who should've lost his license but not been prosecuted. What; are my family going to be prosecuted for my aunt Mary Carole's death in 2008 when she decided not to take her insulin that day and was a determined alcoholic, anyway? We couldn't have done anything about her. And Justin Bieber-- honestly, don't sue the woman. Besides, you, Mr. Bieber, pulled a Herman Cain-- responded to legitimate allegations too late and amatuerly.

Save the prosecution for those like my granddad who ought to be prosecuted for the 2007 malice-murder-intent scenario and Social Security fraud regarding my great-grandmother Mary Trudnak Czarnecki. Save the suing for real discrimination, theft, and other lawsuit-worthy cases. Don't be frivolous or unjust in suing or prosecuting. The Criminal Justice and Corrections System in America is clogged up enough. Also-- as with Mr. Bieber--, why not resolve matters as soon as possible instead of a long time later if you have nothing to hide and something legitimate to contend?

Besides, 1 Corinthians 6 reads in part:

 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? ² Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? ³ Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? ⁴ If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? ⁵ I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? ⁶ But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!
⁷ Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated? ⁸ No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you dothese things to your brethren! ⁹ Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,^[a] nor sodomites, ¹⁰ nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. ¹¹ And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

Second Draft of My Essay for Criminal Justice

In regards to Introduction to Corrections, I still maintain that the class could have been taught with much less book learning and more "chit chat", or engagement of and with the material. Engagement of and with the material would not only have supplemented the book learning, but applied it and made it easier to remember. The field events were a fine application; but the engagement known as "chit chat" would have also helped, and frankly helped apply to the field experience what we learned in class.

I also maintain that Drako did not apply "the punishment fits the crime" first, and the Ancient English did not apply lex talions and wergild first. The Hebrews did, and Genesis 9:6 applies one of the first-- if not the first of the-- Drakon-associated codes. As for lex talions (family justice) and wergild (restitutive sanctions-- e.g., blood money), the Hebrew Torah gives cases in which each are to be applied. For example, if a man accidentally kills another and does not flee to a marked city of refuge allows for lex talions, or if he must make restitution for a baby who he caused to be miscarried during a fight allows wergild.

I respectfully bring to point that I did not like the mockery of Christianity. Being a Messianic Jew and now understanding that (as far as I can tell) you are a Non-Messianic Jew, I fully respect your right not to believe in Jesus. However, I did not like the mockery of, incidentally, what the Quakers themselves based their rehabilitative, reformatory, and penitentiary models on. To them and me, Jesus would not just have been another high for drug and alcohol addicts, let alone one comparable to work and other addictions for the same. I also did not like the "Lazarus has risen" joke regarding Cameron. To me, Lazarus' resurrection was a sacred even and nothing to make light of, let alone to use as a metaphor for Cameron finally coming back to class after car problems.

I myself do not seek to proselytize, but hold strong Evangelical Christian, Messianic Jewish views. As the Quakers did with the views, I apply my views to my life and every aspect thereof, including an Introduction to Corrections class and corrections themselves. On that point, I found the Drug Court to be consistent with a Quaker-Christian view of saving the lost, rehabilitating, reforming, and bringing to penance. As a Messianic Jew, I look forward to seeing the Drug Courts-- and now the Mental Health, Veterans', and other Specialized Courts-- increase in number and effectiveness in decreasing the backlog in the Criminal Justice System.

In conclusion, I learned much about corrections and how to strengthen and apply my views to corrections in Introduction to Corrections, but I still would have liked to engage more with the material to supplement it and the applications of it (e.g., the field trips). I also, as I said, would've liked to see less mockery of Christianity, although I understand your views and certainly do not seek to proselytize. However, as aforementioned, I will do my views as the Quakers did with their views-- that is, apply them to corrections, and learn about other views in light of how to examine and strengthen my own.

Draft of My Reflection Essay For Criminal Justice (It'll Be Easier To Write It This Way First)

In regards to Introduction to Corrections, I still maintain that the class could have been taught with much less book learning and more "chit chat", or engagement of and with the material. Engagement of and with the material would not only have supplemented the book learning, but applied it and made it easier to remember. The field events were a fine application; but the engagement known as "chit chat" would have also helped, and frankly helped apply to the field experience what we learned in class.

I also maintain that Drako did not apply "the punishment fits the crime" first, and the Ancient English did not apply lex talions and weirgald first. The Hebrews did, and Genesis 9:6 applies one of the first-- if not the first of the-- Drakon-associated codes. As for lex talions (family justice) and weirgald (restitutive sanctions-- e.g., blood money), the Hebrew Torah gives cases in which each are to be applied. For example, if a man accidentally kills another and does not flee to a marked city of refuge allows for lex talions, or if he must make restitution for a baby who he caused to be miscarried during a fight allows weirgald.

I respectfully bring to point that I did not like the mockery of Christianity. Being a Messianic Jew and now understanding that (as far as I can tell) you are a Non-Messianic Jew, I fully respect your right not to believe in Jesus. However, I did not like the mockery of, incidentally, what the Quakers themselves based their rehabilitative, reformatory, and penitentiary models on. To them and me, Jesus would not just have been another high for drug and alcohol addicts, let alone one comparable to work and other addictions for the same. I also did not like the "Lazarus has risen" joke regarding Cameron. To me, Lazarus' resurrection was a sacred even and nothing to make light of, let alone to use as a metaphor for Cameron finally coming back to class after car problems.

I myself do not seek to proselytize, but hold strong Evangelical Christian, Messianic Jewish views. As the Quakers did with the views, I apply my views to my life and every aspect thereof, including an Introduction to Corrections class and corrections themselves. On that point, I found the Drug Court to be consistent with a Quaker-Christian view of saving the lost, rehabilitating, reforming, and bringing to penance. As a Messianic Jew, I look forward to seeing the Drug Courts-- and now the Mental Health, Veterans', and other Specialized Courts-- increase in number and effectiveness in decreasing the backlog in the Criminal Justice System.

In conclusion, I learned much about corrections and how to strengthen and apply my views to corrections in Introduction to Corrections, but I still would have liked to engage more with the material to supplement it and the applications of it (e.g., the field trips). I also, as I said, would've liked to see less mockery of Christianity, although I understand your views and certainly do not seek to proselytize. However, as aforementioned, I will do my views as the Quakers did with their views-- that is, apply them to corrections, and learn about other views in light of how to examine and strengthen my own.

A More Specific Example of Frivolous Lawsuits-- re The Papua New Guinean Who I Mentioned....

I am under persecution from HAYRIPITIR1/JLO801. He's threatening me with a frivolous lawsuit. He claims to be simultaneously in Papua New Guinea (as HAYTRIPITIR1), California (as JLO801, on his YouTube profile), and Maryland. His latest threat under his second username:

I ask you nicely to remove the video. since you do not want to do it, that is find with me. Im currently station in Andrews Air force Base in Maryland, since you live in Maryland too that is perfect for me. I will sue you... for violated my privacy. So you think I'm in overseas and not in the State lol we are in the same State. So I gave you 48 hours to get that video remove or i will contact my local police get you arrested. take you to court. read the law about violating person privacyrivacy is the expectation that confidential personal information disclosed in a private place will not be disclosed to third parties, when that disclosure would cause either embarrassment or emotional distress to a person of reasonable sensitivities. Information is interpreted broadly to include facts, images (e.g., photographs, videotapes), and disparaging opinions.surreptitious interception of conversations in a house or hotel room is eavesdropping. See e.g., N.Y. Penal §§ 250.00, 250.05
one has a right of privacy for contents of envelopes sent via first-class U.S. Mail. 18 USC § 1702; 39 USC § 3623
one has a right of privacy for contents of telephone conversations, telegraph messages, or electronic data by wire. 18 USC § 2510 et seq.
one has a right of privacy for contents of radio messages. 47 USC §605

I did nothing wrong. I merely mentioned his name since he commented re a video which I made. Besides, NY penal codes don't apply in MD.

I Should've Mentioned This In My Last Video...

If I sued for all of the times that I've had legitimacy to sue (and I've had plenty, including against Mia Danilowicz for her frivolry-- and I could've easily countersued for her attempt to defame me, misrepresent me and herself, and attempting to stifle legal and acceptable freedom of speech and expression of information), I could've sued.

But I haven't sued? Why? As I mentioned in my last video, a person who brings themselves into a matter needs to deal with whatever arises because of the matter. I, for example, have dealt with Mia-- I've called for any boycott for Marcela "Mia" J. Danilowicz until she gets her act together and starts treating people right. I'm not reaching out to befriend her again and apologize for anything that I may have done-- she added me as a friend in the first place, anyway, then removed me; and I have nothing for which to apologize to her.

Also, suing for selfish reasons is not Christian-- or even good Non-Messianic Jewish-- behavior.

Fear vs. Fear: Fear vs. Dread

My cousin Jeff Vazzo recently wrote "I Will Not Fear". What is fear? According to Jeff, "The "Church" tells us to fear god even when God is in us, around us and works through us. Fear is the unbelief." This is the negative type of fear, known as dread.

Often, especially since we are in Laodicea, we are given this message by the Church: "[']May the God of Avraham and also the god of Nachor, the god of their father, judge between us.[']" The NKJV incorrectly translated this as "[']The God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, and the God of their father judge between us.[']" Nachor and Terach feared the g-ds of Ur, even if they feared G-d at the same time. But remember that a man cannot righteously serve two g-ds at once.

Positive fear is what Jeff described as "God’s Son is my fortifying power." Ya'akov himself "swore by the Fear of his father Isaac" (The CJB reads, "But Ya'akov swore by the One his father Yitz'chak feared.").

Ya'akov even understood, "It is a fearful [that is, dreadful] thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Understanding the dreadful side of G-d, he confidently told Lavan, "['] If the God of my father, the God of Avraham, the one whom Yitz'chak fears, had not been on my side, by now you would certainly have already sent me away with nothing! God has seen how distressed I've been and how hard I've worked, and last night he passed judgment in my favor.[']"

So, Ya'akov understood both sides of the Fear of G-d. Ya'akov feared G-d and only G-d-- for the most part, anyway; though he did sometimes dread-- e.g., Esav and Lavan.

"For God will bring to judgment everything we do, including every secret, whether good or bad. [Here is the final conclusion, now that you have heard everything: fear God, and keep his mitzvot; this is what being human is all about.]"

Don't Let Legalistic Grinches Steal Christ-Mass, Chag Mashiach

"Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free,[a] and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage." (Galtians 5:1, NKJV) If anyone gives you drek about Christmas (Chag Mashiach), Easter (Chag HaT'khiyah Mashiach), etc.; tell them to go do their homework and learn the actual origins, not the origins of what they were alternatives to.

Matters like this have "occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you." (Galatians 2:4-5)

Dr. Conrad Murray: Prison Is Enough? Maybe Loing His License Was...

And since losing a license means no income, the taxpayers will be taking care if Dr. Murray, anyway. Prison or welfare? Either way, he'll end up on welfare. So, with Dr. Murray, Michael Jackson already picked his poison (since he was a druggie, anyway). We may as well pick ours-- and not prison. Losing a license was enough for Dr. Murray.

Two Take-Home Essays For Corrections And a Sidenote

"What is 'corrections'?" is the descrpitive/informative essay. Reflecting on my experience in the Introductions to Corrections class is the obvious reflective essay. The descriptive essay will require some review. The reflective will not. I'm going to be frank about Dr. Traurig and what a macher he is, how I still stand by that Torah was the first lex talions, weirgild, and punishment to fit the crime, etc.. I'm going to tell how I didn't like that, for one matter, his language wasn't that of a doctorate scholar. I'm also going to state that I didn't like how he mocked religious belief, etc..

As for the sidenote: most or all of the views from Columbia, Maryland on my Feedjit feed are mine. I go to Howard Community College for the time being, and the browsers aren't automatically set up (unlike at home) to ignore my own views of my blog.

When Legalism Sprouts Up The Most

I notice that Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter are the times when legalism sprouts up the most; all because of what each originally historically coincided with and were in fact meant to be alternatives to-- the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest, the believed-to-be Sukkot celebration of the Puritans gone wrong and long left un-recelebrated, the Greco-Roman Winter Solstice, and the likewise Spring Solstice.

The Early Church created Christmas as 'Am Yisra'el created Hanukah, both to counter the Winter Solstice. The Early Church also created Halloween and Easter to counter the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest and Greco-Roman Pagan Spring Solstice.

Thanksgiving is another discussion.

Don't let P'rushim and other legalists streal your freedom to observe alternative-to-paganism, Christ-centered mo'edim v'chagim.