volgadon

The high priest usually wore very ornate layers of garments, different colours, and a breastplate with 12 stones, but upon entering the Holy of Holies, wore only white robes.

it is also worth noting that the sages after the fall of the 2nd temple stressed being both ritually AND morally pure. The behaviour of the majority prior to the destruction of the temple was decried, was considered as having caused said destruction.

Levi.

Unless you want your book confined to the bodice-ripper section, you might want to change the title.

What is he like now? That is the only really important issue.

I just got home from work, so I'll post a longer reply later, but most of those rules come from the Masoretes, early medieval period, folks!

We know no such thing. In fact, there is a concept of deliberate scribal changes.

why don't you try it (again?). But how many can see it through? I didn't. My first mission president, a native, encouraged other methods. The second one, from utah, pushed tracting. It wasn't a terribly efficient or effective method. For about 2/3rds of my mission the rule was no eating with members, period. Not for my first year I didn't. Cell phones on a mission are a godsend. There are plusses and minuses. You are right though that it isn't as physically demanding, but spiritually, it is no easier today than in the past. Socio-cultural thing in the main. It was a test of the people more than of the missionaries. One still does. He just happens to have a more efficient system in place now. Of course, which is why having served a mission shouldn't be the sole criterion. And a good portion of RMs tend to be that way.

Like who?

Of course he is more knowledgeable on Kabbalah than I am, but I don't recall much of the sort either in it or in other Jewish interpretations. Note the preposition 'in'. Even a quick glance at Judean geography will reveal why mountains are in that verse. Apart from the literal, geographical sense, the usual meaning of mountain is that of a holy place. By its very definition and Hebrew etymology, a temple is a holy place. No reason to separate the two. As both LDS and Israeli, I don't accept your additional reading. =) As everything you have arbitrarily reinterpreted is actually temple terminology, I think your reading is forced. You could probably see that in anything.

Very few at that time were sent on missions.

Exactly.

Mainstream what?

I like the following bit by Rashi, the most influential Jewish commentator of the Middle Ages. God said "Abraham!" "Here I am." "Take your son." "Which one, I have two" "Your only one." "But both Isaac and Ishmael are only sons to their mothers." "Whom you have loved." "I love them both." "Isaac."

Spot on.

Personally, were I one of those elders and was informed that a member said there is such and such a rule, yet I don't know about it, i would not call the mission president. The member is obviously mistaken. Missionaries get pounded with the mission rules at every possible opportunity, so if they do not know of such a rule, such a rule does not exist in their mission.

The Church of Christ (then known as the RLDS) was not formed until quite a few years after Joseph's death. In the 1860s, IIRC.

Here is a definition, from one of my favourite sites. äæîðä ìôéåè

Or you could write a piyut......... Refua shlema!!!!!!! the sooner, the better.

According to tradition, this was the tree that Abraham sat under, well one of the traditions. don't get me wrong, I don;t think it was the tree, way to young.

Actually, Lot chooses an area outside of Canaan. He leaves both pasture lands in Canaan to Abraham his uncle. What is devastating to Abraham is that he now has lost the person he considered his heir. Lot has left the nest, so to speak. After this bitter disapointment, this failure, does the Lord promise Abraham that his seed will inherit the land. Also, it may very well be that Lot was on the outksirts of the city, or dwelt in town seasonally.

R Zechariah wasn't attempting to prove it through the verse, but to emphasise his point.

It is a feat of strength and endurance..... Actually, we don't really know much about education in the pre-exilic period. Most of what we do know comes from after the Second Temple. Some of it was probably similar, but I really couldn't say what. Perhaps one and the same in origin, but even in the Bible have vastly different meanings. The Lord cast Pharaoh's host into the sea, not taught them there. Perhaps mar much later underwent a transformation like rabbi, into a teacher and expounder of the law, but that results from a developement of the honorific, the respect due a sage. I don't think it would be myrrh, though that was known at least in Exodus, probably earlier. Not sure what the etymology for Moriah is. Traditionally it seems to have been understood as seeing, but I'm not sure about that.

Welcome back. Actually, what I wrote was in reply to a website Vanhin had found, where the wrong roots or such were given for teacher. Moreh is actualy Hebrew, not Aramaic, and comes from yod-reish-heh, to teach or to instruct. Not to be confused with yod-reish-heh for casting (and shooting) or for drinking. It really is not the same word as mar, maran or moroni. There are some rare Aramaic influences pre-galut, but I did qualify my statement. Tcholent is potent stuff. Chili has nothing on it. =)

Which is why there are others, you don't have to post everything!