OT -- Re: random cover of a range

[Yigal Chripun]

Denis Koroskin wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:28:33 +0300, Christopher Wright
> <dhasenan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Don wrote:
>>> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>>> "Yigal Chripun"<yigal100 at gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:gn9qp7$apa$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>>> A millennium ago, Europe was in the midst of the dark ages while all
>>>>>> scientific advances were made by Islamic scholars (know Algebra?),
>>>>>> and the
>>>>>> christian world went on holy crusades to fight the evil
>>>>>> "barbarians", now
>>>>>> a millennium later the wheel had turned and the Islamic world is
>>>>>> in its
>>>>>> own dark-age (Iran is prime example of that) and the Islamic
>>>>>> extremists
>>>>>> are calling for Jihad against the corrupt and evil heretics of the
>>>>>> west.
>>>>>> Non of that is present in Judaism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm no theology expert, but from what I understand, the Islamic
>>>>> concept of
>>>>> Jihad really refers to a person's internal good-vs-evil struggle,
>>>>> not an
>>>>> external struggle. The so-called "Muslims" that take Jihad to mean
>>>>> actually
>>>>> committing violence against other people are bastardizing thier own
>>>>> religion
>>>>> in the same way that some people bastardize Christianity into
>>>>> allegedly
>>>>> being pro-"white power".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not quite so. Jihad is one of the pillars of Islam, and has about 4
>>>> sub-categories one of which is _Jihad_by_sword_
>>>> here's a quote for example from
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on_Jihad :
>>>> <quote>
>>>> Ibn Rushd, in his Muqaddimāt, divides Jihad into four kinds:
>>>>
>>>> "Jihad by the heart; Jihad by the tongue; Jihad by the hand and
>>>> Jihad by the sword." He defines "Jihad by the tongue" as "to commend
>>>> good conduct and forbid the wrong, like the type of Jihad Allah
>>>> (swt) ordered us to fulfill against the hypocrites in His Words, “O
>>>> Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites”
>>>> (Qur'an [Qur'an 9:73]). Thus, Seraj and Ahmad Hendricks have
>>>> expressed a view that Muhammad strove against the unbelievers by
>>>> sword and against the hypocrites by tongue
>>>> </quote>
>>>>
>>>>>> the only link between Judaism to Christianity is that supposedly
>>>>>> Jesus was
>>>>>> Jewish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Umm...Judaism and Christianity share an entire Bible. Of course,
>>>>> Christianity adds another Bible (the "New Testament") but they equally
>>>>> revere what they call the "Old Testament", which *is* the Jewish
>>>>> Bible. As
>>>>> part of that Bible, both religions contain The Ten Commandments,
>>>>> Moses,
>>>>> Abraham (this particular part also being shared by Islam), Adam and
>>>>> Eve,
>>>>> Noah's Ark, and probably some other things. I'm not sure where you
>>>>> get the
>>>>> idea that Jesus's religion is the only connection between Judaism and
>>>>> Christianity.
>>>>>
>>>> Christianity has mostly redefined out of existence most of the
>>>> Jewish concepts if not all of them as they appear in the bible (the
>>>> old testament), and the new testament which overrides the old one
>>>> defines different, and contradicting new concepts.
>>>> Christians use different interpretations of the bible and the
>>>> christian faith basically broke backwards compatibility (to borrow a
>>>> software concept) with Judaism.
>>> You seem to be assuming that modern Judaism is identical to
>>> first-century Judaism. It clearly isn't. In particular, (1) the
>>> destruction of the temple required significant "breaking of backward
>>> compatibility" (not to anywhere near the same extent as Christianity,
>>> of course), and (2) Orthodox Judaism recognizes the Talmud, which was
>>> written down later than the New Testament.
>>> Also Christianity retains the Tanakh(Old Testament) word-for-word and
>>> regards it as authoritative. This put strict limits on the extent of
>>> possible divergence.
>>
>> Divergence of belief in the historical content of the text, yes. (I
>> know that Christianity has some divergence on whether the text is
>> completely and literally accurate in all aspects. I don't know whether
>> there are any young-earth creationists among non-Christian Jews, or
>> anything like that.)
>>
>> However, there are a lot of commandments given down regarding what is
>> clean and unclean, and how to distinguish, and treatment for being
>> unclean in various ways. That is universally ignored. Doctors do
>> better at healing people than priests who follow the Torah exactly. In
>> case of an infestation of mold in your house, you are going to call
>> someone who specializes in that issue, and they're not going to follow
>> the Torah, even if they are the strictest of orthodox Jews. And I
>> haven't seen any Christian who felt compelled to avoid eating
>> shellfish due to biblical restrictions.
>>
>
> I know one - Jesus.
>
> There is also "Jews for Jesus" organization that follow kosher diet.
> And I've also heard of christian old-believers in Russia that don't eat
> pork and shellfish.
>
>> I don't know many ultra-Orthodox Jews; do any of you know a Jew who
>> would go to his priest regarding a rash before he would go to a doctor?
>
> I've heard many Jews refuse to do the blood transfusion even if it costs
> them their life.

Where did you hear that?
I doubt that since the preservation of life is a holy jewish principle 
and which cancels all other commandments in the bible.
for example, driving on the Shabat is a a sin but if we're talking about 
an ambulance driving to save someone's life than it's becomes completely 
"Kosher". As the saying goes: "if you saved one soul of  Israel as if 
you saved the entire world".

Kinda the exact opposite of the Jihad concept that other people believe in.