Did the "creative" writers of the TV show "24" get their ideas from what happened to Larry Franklin?
A man I'm proud to call my friend, Dr. Lawrence Franklin, accused the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States (FBI) of being anti-Semitic. For a period of time in 2004, he admits to having served as a double agent for the FBI, pretending to "spy" for the America Israel Public Action Committee (AIPAC), while also feeding AIPAC and the Israeli Embassy, through Keith Weissman of AIPAC and Naor Gilon with the Israeli Embassy, false or misleading information. At least that is what I think I have gotten out of the articles I've read. According to Arutz Sheva, his claims are backed up by former AIPAC staffer Steven Rosen, who was interviewed by the Jerusalem Post.…
Article comments
26 - roger nowosielski
I thought the term was "Nefesh Chaya":
"In addition to his material self, however, man possesses a soul which is unique among all of God's creations. In describing the creation of Adam, the Torah says, "God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils a soul-breath of life (Nishmat Chaim). Man [thus] became a living creature (Nefesh Chaya)" (Genesis 2:7)."
27 - roger nowosielski
You're right. Nefesh Chaya is the result.
28 - Ruvy
The verses dealing with Noah and the flood are the most difficult in the whole Torah, zing, from the point of view of "believability". The Talmudic sages are divided as to the extent of the mabúa the Flood, some arguing that the waters covered the entire earth. Frankly, this is not credible to me and many others, and there is a minority Talmudic opinion that says that the mabúa covered only the Middle East.
This interpretation would allow for the descendants of kaÃn Cain to have survived with a "mark", the "mark of Cain". According to one scholar, this mark was the lack of a beard - and accounts for the sparse beards and absent beards on Asiatic men and "Native Americans" respectively.
29 - zingzing
well, asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.
and aren't there two different versions of the biblical flood story as well? one in which there are 7 pairs of each animal. except for the dirty pigs. and he sends out a crow instead of a dove (they didn't have the poetry down at that point, i guess).
hell, we've gone over the 2nd 10 commandments before i'm sure. the one about not boiling the kid of a goat in its mother's milk gets me every time.
30 - Ruvy
well, Asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.
That's why the minority Talmudic view of the mabúa - the Flood, where it only covers the MIddle East, is so attractive to me. Before I'm going to believe in something that looks impossible, I want some plausibility in it.
and aren't there two different versions of the biblical flood story as well?
No. There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two. And while you might like 16th century English poetry, I read the Hebrew and translate from what I see on the page in Hebrew.
As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel, kashrút, they are found in Leviticus, and have nothing to do with the Ten Commandments whatsoever.
31 - zingzing
"As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel..."
no, no, no. exodus 34:11â€"27.
"There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two."
ahem: "In Genesis 6-8, there are two stories of the Great Flood, a common story in the literature of the Middle East. These stories have been intermingled in the text by the editors and redactors. The older of the stories is found in Genesis 6:8-10; 7:1-10, 16c; 8:6-12, 20-22. This story comes from 1000 BCE and may have Egyptian influence. The newer story is found in Genesis 6:9-22; 7:11-24; 8:1-5, 13-19; 9:1-17, and comes from 500 BCE with Babylonian influence."
the two stories contradict each other in various ways, including the amount of animals to bring, who's going to die, why they are going to die, the length of the flood, etc. funny thing is, because of the way it's written (or slapped together), we get certain bits of our "common knowledge" about the flood from one story, and certain bits from the other. it's a strange thing, the bible, all muddled and unclear because it's been written and rewritten and chopped up and thrown together again. fucked up thing to base one's life on.
"And while you might like 16th century English poetry, I read the Hebrew and translate from what I see on the page in Hebrew."
or, "god damn your mp3 digital music--get me my records, you little whippersnapper! hell, i'll play my polka on the cylinders!"
32 - Dr Dreadful
There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two.
No, there are two: referred to by scholars as the J and P sources. They're trickier to distinguish because they're edited together, not left separate as with the Creation accounts. Nevertheless there are a number of differences: J has Noah taking seven pairs of every clean beast and two of every unclean while P has him taking two individuals of each species; in J it rains for 40 days and nights and the actual flood lasts for 150, but P says that the flood itself lasted for 40 days; J has Noah sending out a dove, in P it's a raven; etc.
33 - zingzing
that's what i said, dreadful.
and it's right at the beginning of the book, ruvy.
34 - Dr Dreadful
You and I must have been composing our comments at the same time, zinger.
Let me just say that I don't see the parallel stories in Genesis as compromising the integrity of the book. It was an earnest attempt by the early Hebrew scholars to set down an account of their origins, based on the best sources of knowledge available to them. I think they knew that their two creation myths were mutually contradictory, but they had no data which particularly supported one over the other - so they put them both in and let people make up their own minds.
The two flood stories had numerous differences as to the logistics, chronology and other details, but because they appeared to describe the same event they were merged.
The major difference between the accounts in both pairs is that there seems to have been an editorial impasse between the poetic rabbi and the one who wanted 'just the facts'. The result is a highly interesting piece of literature.
35 - roger nowosielski
Dreadful,
Since you're so au courant about codices, I've got to refer you to a heckuva literary analysis of Genesis by Harold Bloom, The Book of J, where he argues that the Genesis story is a far later creation, by a scribe in the court of Solomon, and by a woman.
Whether you accept the argument or not, it's a tremendous read.
36 - roger nowosielski
Correct. It's a work of redacting.
37 - Ruvy
"As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel..."
no, no, no. exodus 34:11"27.
"There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two."
ahem: "In Genesis 6-8, there are two stories of the Great Flood,
What did you do, zing? Take a night course in "Higher Criticism" at Eastern District High School?
You want to tell me what the Torah is talking about? I live according to the rules set down there - to you they are an old tome, nothing more.
Sh'mot/Exodus 34:11-27 all deal with Passover, following the Sabbath, redeeming the first born, the holidays of Sh'vuot and Sukkot, three pilgrimages to the central sacrificial Temple. They do not cover dietary laws per se, but deal with sacrifices.
All this garbage about "stories combined from different sources" are just that - garbage. There is but one Flood story and I do not give a damn how many secular fools with doctorates you quote. Let them take apart the Christian book before they bother with ours. Once they have thoroughly trashed and disproven Christianity, they can start in on Judaism - and they will find that proofs exist to make their arguments worthless.
38 - Dr Dreadful
Interesting review, Roger. Mr Bruggemann makes an excellent point that it's impossible to say at this point whether the author of J was a woman, not to mention that Bloom seems to provide no support for his assertion. You might as well say that the book was written by a scribe named Eli, and no-one would be able to prove or disprove your thesis.
39 - Ruvy
Nevertheless there are a number of differences: J has Noah taking seven pairs of every clean beast and two of every unclean while P has him taking two individuals of each species; in J it rains for 40 days and nights and the actual flood lasts for 150, but P says that the flood itself lasted for 40 days; J has Noah sending out a dove, in P it's a raven; etc.
Bingo!! Higher Criticism - the garbage I had to study in college 40 years ago.
Contrary to what you "scholars" think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah - to demonstrate One Author wrote it all. When a code runs from Genesis through to Deuteronomy, that is exactly what is being demonstrated. The subject of the code is only important in that you can identify with what is being talked about.
40 - zingzing
"You want to tell me what the Torah is talking about?"
well, there are two (maybe three) differing sets of ten commandments presented as "the ten commandments," and there are two flood stories. if you don't want to believe what's in your book, you don't have to.
"They do not cover dietary laws per se, but deal with sacrifices."
i never really said anything about that. i just said that the one about the goat was funny.
"All this garbage about "stories combined from different sources" are just that - garbage. There is but one Flood story and I do not give a damn how many secular fools with doctorates you quote."
well, it's a contradictory story then. either it's from two different sources, or god is one confused mother fucker.
"I live according to the rules set down there - to you they are an old tome, nothing more."
bomb, bomb, bomb tehran. i don't think you're living up to your ideals. and to me, it's more than an "old tome." it's certainly much more important than that.
41 - zingzing
"Contrary to what you "scholars" think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah - to demonstrate One Author wrote it all."
well, the man needs an editor. the continuity is a mess.
42 - roger nowosielski
It was just an exercise in alternative reading, Dreadful - not a dogmatic statement. But Bloom certainly casts doubt as to the authorship by Moses.
43 - Ruvy
I guess the difference between me and you "scholars" is that I read the Bible - in the original - while you read interpretations of interpretations of the Bible - third hand. And I read that Bible every week, at least for several hours a week, to gain a better understanding of what is said there.
I do not spend my time on "alternative" reading or commentary - unless I actually trust the knowledge of the commentator. That means I read the works of rabbis or archaeologists - or of people who have totally alien motives to religion, but who stumble across it in spite of their original motives.
44 - zingzing
but it's right there on the damn page! it's not like these people are making this shit up. and you certainly aren't reading it "in the original." you may be reading a very, very old version of it, but it's nowhere near "original."
45 - roger nowosielski
Which original, Ruvy? Some of Christ's sayings are in Aramaic and in Syriac. I have too, in the Hebrew original, when I was in the seminary. And in the Septuaigint, Koine, and Vulgate.
46 - roger nowosielski
And you shouldn't suppose that German scholars who started the school of High Criticism couldn't either.
47 - Ruvy
and you certainly aren't reading it "in the original." you may be reading a very, very old version of it, but it's nowhere near "original."
Some of Christ's sayings are in Aramaic and in Syriac. I have too, in the Hebrew original, when I was in the seminary. And in the Septuaigint, Koine, and Vulgate.
There was no Kinko's out there in the desert of norhern Arabia where Moses got the law. Nor was there a printing prwess. So a whole series of rules sprung up around copying the Torah - designed to prevent the kind of lose play that took place with the Christian books. In all the versions of the Hebrew Torah that we use - known as the Koren Version - there are nine letter differences in the whole text between the témani and mizráHi texts and the ashkenazà text. That's nine letter differences out of some 305,000 letters over a period of over 2,000 years. That's a hell of a lot better than a scanner, a hell of a lot better than a monk straw boss dictating letter by letter to scribes in a monastary writing by candle-light.
The King James Translation has seen more change over 300 years. And remember that the Septuagint had errors in it, errors deliberately placed there to placate the editorial views of Greeks reading the text.
As for what Jesus said, the one line that sticks out in my head in the Aramaic, "elà elÃ, láma safakhtháni" is generally rendered wrongly by Christian writers who blindly copy the Greek and write down "eloi".
48 - roger nowosielski
commentary
49 - Ruvy
Roger, that is why I read the original and NOT the translation. That way, I translate what I read and check it against other translations.
The Greeks, who have a poisonously pagan and static mentality, have messed up the Bible more than I care to consider.
50 - Ruvy
well, Asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.
Isaac Mozeson, a linguistics scholar researching linguistics roots, noted the following.
"The Polynesian people have a tradition of a Flood that killed everyone except Nu'u, his wife, three sons and their wives."
Nu?
51 - Elvira Black
Ruvy:
I'm still going through the comments here, and great article by the way...
Perhaps this is an ignorant question, but what is the "official" or orthodox view regarding evolution?
52 - Ruvy
Elvira,
There is no official view. There is the Litvish view and the view of the Lubavicher Rebbe and his followers, which is very simple. The universe is nearly 5,770 years old and was created in 6 days.
This nonsense is disputed by none other than the Ramba"m, who stated that the story of Creation (and therefore evolution) is cloaked and hidden. When looking at this view, and taking into consideration all the other views of the Ramba"m on science and faith, one can reasonably assume deduce that his view was to go along with what science can prove.
Finally, there are the views of the m'kubalÃm, the Kabbala masters, who state unequivocally that the universe is about 14 billion years old based on their own calculations. This leaves room for the obvious development of life over a long period of time.
I hope this helps you out.
53 - Elvira Black
Thanks so much, Ruvy--you are a true gentleman and a scholar. Very enlightening indeed.
54 - Dr Dreadful
Contrary to what you "scholars" think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah - to demonstrate One Author wrote it all. When a code runs from Genesis through to Deuteronomy, that is exactly what is being demonstrated. The subject of the code is only important in that you can identify with what is being talked about.
Oh, good grief, Ruvy. You believe some discredited fringe theory that a code runs through the entire Torah, therefore millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars - reading, I might add, the 'original' - must be wrong.
Oy vey.
55 - roger nowosielski
It's codex, BTW; codices in the plural.
56 - roger nowosielski
You're not a biblical scholar unless you're a rabbi - that's the verdict. Forget the Germans because they surely must have an ax to grind.
57 - roger nowosielski
Of course, different standards apply to the New Testament, because it's not so sacred a book. Only the New Testament therefore has been subject to redacting, revisions and voting in the numerous Church Councils as to which books are regarded as genuine or sacred and which as apocryphal.
58 - zingzing
germans hate the bible.
59 - roger nowosielski
Spoken like a true biblical scholar.
60 - Ruvy
You believe some discredited fringe theory
Don't embarrass yourself, DD. I understand how the Codes work. You don't. You only whine over what some pack of bigoted fools call "discredited" in the political world of "science". And the world of science is at least as politcal as the world of business or the business of politics. These "scientists" couldn't stomach the idea that the Torah has any legitimacy. So they dishonestly smeared honest mathematicians and had the editor of the magazine declare the subject closed, preventing the mathematicians from answering the smear campaign in the same forum. That is what occurred when the Torah Code was "discredited". That's not science - that's political maneuvering and lying. Atheists will lie like rugs to preserve their faith.
And I will be happy to accuse the statisticians who smeared the good names of Eliyahu Rips and Doron Witztum of defamation - even if Professors Rips and Witztum would rather not. And I would be even happier to accuse the editor of the magazine involved of unfair practice - even if Professors Rips and Witztum would rather not.
Why do I know the Codes work? They work because the Mossad came to one of the Code developers and begged him to help them figure out when Saddam Hussein would attack Israel with Scud missiles. The Code developer pointed out that you cannot use the Codes for divination of future events, and why, so the Mossad agents provided all the information they could in place of dates.
Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date - and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles. But any of the three dates could have been the date. Because until he actually ordered the launch, Saddam Hussein had the free will to launch or not to launch. That is hard science.
61 - Ruvy
The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars - ARE wrong.
62 - Dr Dreadful
Don't embarrass yourself, DD.
I don't appear to be the one doing that.
These "scientists" couldn't stomach the idea that the Torah has any legitimacy. So they dishonestly smeared honest mathematicians
No, that's what you'd prefer to have been their motivation. You're attributing motives and projecting - an ad hominem and a strawman all wrapped up in one neat package.
Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date - and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles.
'T a minute. Wasn't that you arguing just now that the Codes don't predict the future?
Because until he actually ordered the launch, Saddam Hussein had the free will to launch or not to launch. That is hard science.
Which discipline?
The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars - ARE wrong.
There's literally no answer to that.
63 - roger nowosielski
As I said, Dreadful, you've got to be Jewish to have access to God's word. If you're not one of the chosen, you're damned.
64 - zingzing
ruvy, you are being so gullible.
65 - zingzing
ruvy: "The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars - ARE wrong."
dd: "There's literally no answer to that."
yes there is. it's "are not." and then you thumb your teeth at him, sir.
66 - zingzing
damn it. close enough.
67 - Silas Kain
But I thought Jesus came to fulfill Scripture and make the Old Testament null and void -- a thing of the past? You don't have to maim your male young to be Christian. There's no more dietary laws to speak of. And, if Jesus did fulfill Scripture, why are Far Right Religious Whack-O's saying that the final battle will be in Jerusalem in accordance with the Torah? The more I dig into this web of ancient deceit, the more confused I become.
68 - zingzing
silas, all you have to do is read your torah in the original and turn it into a word search--all the answers will appear to you as if you knew it already. and then you'll be ruvy.
69 - Silas Kain
After the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon and Qur'an I think I'll take in some light reading by...
... L Ron Hubbard.
70 - Ruvy
Ruvy wrote: Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date - and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles.
Dreadful responded: 'T a minute. Wasn't that you arguing just now that the Codes don't predict the future?
The Codes don't predict the future. To have legitimate data, you generally need a date. The Mossad didn't have that. That's what they were looking for. They were trying to perform divination. The Code developer told them that this couldn't be done. Basic rules of physics (laws of chance and game theory) state you cannot predict a decision before it is made. The Mossad provided all sorts of data in place of the date, hoping that they would tease one out of the array. They got three dates and chose the one that appeared closest to the cluster of key words submitted, hoping that this would be the date. It turned out to be that date after all. Bu there was NO way of knowing this before the actual launch occurred AND suceeded in hitting an Israeli target.
The Mossad went in and gambled. And they won.