What you just wrote makes no sense.

The Torah traditionally means the first five books of what Christians have come to refer to as the Old Testament but which Jews call the Tanakh.

A later meaning of the word also includes the rest of the Tanakh and the written commentary on the Tanakh. It certainly does not replace it, nor is it meant to; it interprets it and clarifies it. You write that for much of history, “the Ark of the Covenant and the stone tablets of Moses were gone” (the Ark, by the way, supposedly contained the tablets). But that would not require human-derived laws to replace the commandments on the stones, because the knowledge of the commandments was not lost.

In fact, replacing religious law with secular law could only be argued to be something that Reform Jews might do (and even then it’s not really part of Reform Judaism). That process is a lot more common and more descriptive of what cultural or secular Jews do, Jews who are Jews in the ethnic sense only.

So when you write “Thus a predominant history of Judaism is utilizing human laws to replicate the effects of divine laws, and eventually they replaced divine laws. Thus socialism’s promotion of class envy is considered righteous and the Moses law against adultery and envy, is considered obsolete and transfigured by jurisprudence and precedence”—that is not a history of Judaism. All religions do change somewhat over time and not all members of a religion follow every last rule of that religion, but Judaism is hardly unusual in that respect, and socialism is absolutely not part of Judaism. You have described Jews who have lost their religious affiliation as Jews. In fact, the more religious American Jews are, the more likely they are to be conservative politically.

The Torah was an attempt to replace divine laws, the laws of Moses, prophets, and God, with human derived laws, since for much of Jewish history after Noah, the Ark of the Covenant and the stone tablets of Moses were gone. Supposedly God took them away so that humans wouldn’t be able to research them or corrupt them.

Thus a predominant history of Judaism is utilizing human laws to replicate the effects of divine laws, and eventually they replaced divine laws. Thus socialism’s promotion of class envy is considered righteous and the Moses law against adultery and envy, is considered obsolete and transfigured by jurisprudence and precedence.

Even in Jesus time, the Jewish leaders were declaring that on the Sabbath day, you can’t heal people and various other laws and rules humans made up for their own aggrandizement. The Sabbath day, supposedly to make one day a rest day and to devote it to holiness, is now about pleasing man made laws and lawyers.

The story about various clans of Jews abrogating their Covenant with God, is a good story to have in these days. Because just as the federal and states attempt to overwrite the US Constitution, so the same can be said for the Jews who decided a king in war was more valuable than their King in Heaven. They abrogated their hierarchy and organization.

For the US, the hierarchy of power went something like this:

God led to the US Constitution, which leads to federal power over state power such that the states cannot abrogate federal power, nor can federal power abrogate the US Constitution, nor can the Constitution abrogate God’s powers of creation.

The only thing that was allowed to change the US Constitution was the free will and choice of the people themselves, in each state. By replacing God with Hussein Obola, by replacing state power with federal goons, and replacing the US Constitution with the Rule of Totalitarian Husseins and Clinton messiahs, the American people have abrogated their compact and covenant.

Only about a third of this country are traitors. Only about a third of the colonies were independence minded, and another third were loyal to GB.

Lucifer also led a third of the host of heaven.

This 1/3rd thing is kind of common for wars.

Shit, at this point I might even consider voting for Jeb (though not really).

A Study of 1 Samuel

Bill Says:
The whole point of being a conservative (or at least a main point) is that politics shouldn’t be a major part of our lives.

If we have to adopt “politics is everything” now, we’ve already lost to the left.

What being a conservative, be careful what you telling, look to the chaos what your ilk done, millions around the world suffering…..

Maybe you can ask your sister for info on some of the amazing things that Hillary did while in office as SecState?

😛

On a more serious note, getting back to Neo’s post at the top –

While it’s unlikely that many of the Dems who are seeing the Comey news will actually vote for someone other than Hillary, there are likely to be a number of Dems who just decide to stay home that day. And that might affect both overall turnout for Hillary, and also down-ticket races that get fewer voters as a result. So the numbers still contain some good news.

She does not see a flaw on the horizon.

She is fully aware of the vast right-wing conspiracy to harm the Clintons. ( poor devils )

She regards Hillary as a blow-out success as SecState…

And that wondrous things are afoot.

Did I mention that she’s in a swing state ?

&&&&&

As Dilbert puts it: facts and logic are wildly over-rated where people are concerned.

Team socialization dominates — as does salesmanship.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/director-comeys-clinton-standard-wouldve-helped-this-marine-avoid-a-conviction/

“However, there is one conviction under Section 793(f) in a military court martial proceeding that is starting to get some media attention over the past few days – United States v. Rickie Roller (1993).”

I know for a fact this isn’t the only servicemember convicted under 18 U.S.C. 793(f). And if your friends say “oh, that’s just the military” tell them it’s a federal court system that follows the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent. And in fact the Supreme Court is the final court of appeal, after the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, so if it were less just than the civilian federal court system the SCOTUS would be overturning convictions right and left. But that rarely happens because in many ways the military justice system is more faithful to the Constitution and precedent then the other federal court system they see on TV.

Just the minimum facts (read the article). U.S. Marine SGT Roller was transferring. On his last day at his intel division he “hastily” packed a gym bag with what he thought were personal items from his desk. He didn’t unpack his bag for several weeks, and discovered he had accidentally put classified documents in it. He was afraid he’d get in trouble, and he was moving, so he figured he’d destroy the documents when he got to his next duty station. But one of the movers found them first.

“Roller was convicted in a general court martial under Section 793(f)…”

His conviction was upheld on appeal.

“[P]rosecution under section 793(f)(1) is [not] precluded of a person who, being entrusted with an enumerated item or information relating to the national defense, in some way violates the terms of his entrustment: violation of the terms of this kind of entrustment does not terminate the entrustment. The terms of any entrustment of national defense information necessarily include a requirement of due ‘care, use or disposal of it,’… [otherwise] many, if not all, acts of gross negligence that constituted a violation of section 793(f)(1) would terminate the entrustment and preclude prosecution under the section.

…Appellant could be and was prosecuted for such loss.”

I’m sure your liberal friends think Hillary Clinton was vindicated. She wasn’t. She just got a pass. 20 somethings with high school diplomas are held to a higher standard. Comey is vile. He sat there all smug, and vomited out nonsense that gross negligence being against the “American tradition, possibly unconstitutional,” the statute is invalid, etc. And I know Directory Comey is supposed to be a man of “unimpeachable integrity.” I suppose he is by Washington DC standards. He carved out a special exemption for Hillary Clinton that servicemembers don’t get. They’re not powerful, they aren’t connected. They’re also not named Clinton.

I wonder if it would make a dent in your liberal Hillary-voting friends’ mindset to know that marine, army, and air force sergeants, and navy petty officers, are expected to know what (Comey’s word) “unsophisticated” Hillary Clinton just can’t grasp. Are they proud to know Hillary Clinton really is above the law, and if it were anyone else they would be going to prison.

And then tell them this was not some right-wing with hunt. She really is guilty as sin of causing massive damage to national security and committing a felony in the bargain. Other people have been convicted for far, far less. Ask them if they’re proud of themselves for not caring about her crimes or national security.

In no shape or form do I consider OM to be an enemy. I only consider him to be gravely mistaken as to depth of the threat that Hillary represents and disagree that a viable alternative to Trump exists. As far as I can see, OM and I are on the same side, we want the same things, we simply disagree as to the options available.

It only takes a bit of historical knowledge to recognize that a fascist dictator (that would be Trump at his worst) doesn’t even begin to compare with the evil that Orwell’s “1984” inescapable logic explicates as, the Left’s ‘end state’. In my considered opinion, the dynamics of our circumstances, dictates that Hillary’s election will be the tipping point, that leads us over the precipice.

Nor is my view even in the minority, as most on the right agree that a third term for Obama…aka Hillary… will be, at the least disastrous. So the only people I identify as ‘blind’ are those who refuse to acknowledge the obvious.

And where do you get my questioning a6z’s “relationships, personality or circumstances”? I only questioned his assertion that at this point in history “politics isn’t everything”. Even then, I explained that it was only ‘everything’ because of what was at stake, the fanaticism of the forces attacking America and how close we now are to losing it all.

And irrational accusations of my assertions being egotistically motivated is ‘projecting’. It is you that consistently reacts emotionally, often personalizing your accusations.

I take no pleasure in the grimness of my rationale, indeed I weep over the state of our country. I just can’t pretend otherwise. Grim acceptance of where cold logic leads, while praying that the premises that underlay that logic are flawed is not a signifier of egotism. I long ago got over myself, being well aware of my “feet of clay”, would that I could say the same of you. Heal thyself first, doctor.