Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Inigmawiki (talk | contribs) at 14:23, 17 October 2008 (→Additional 3RR Warning). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

For extremely urgent and time-sensitive matters, please email me inigmatus at gmail dot com

ATTENTION

This user has been resurrected. A common sense understanding with the majority of Jewish and non-Jewish editors has fostered a real working relationship that aims to improve Messianic Judaism and the efforts at reconciliation and focusing on NPOV issues has helped create a new atmosphere of cooperation with all involved.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
• If you're ready for the complete list of Misplaced Pages documentation, there's also Misplaced Pages:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk 17:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Christian Forums

Ryan, go to my userpage and send me an e-mail and include a return e-mail address. CyberAnth 07:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

In the meantime, I have preserved the content of the page at User:Inigmatus/CF_Draft. I hope that is alright. CyberAnth 20:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk it up wikis

Feel free to post your comments below. Inigmatus July 1, 2005 22:48 (UTC)

NESARA (Surprise!)

Contrary, maybe, to appearances, I'm not advocating for the deletion of all the NESARA-related articles. I've enjoyed the discussion and although I do think that "Dr." Barnard was a crank and his idea is nutty I also think there's a place for that article in Misplaced Pages. I do believe it needs to be cut down by about 80-90%, and I may try to do that but I'll post my proposed revision here or on its talk page first for your thoughts. Sound ok? -EDM 6 July 2005 04:49 (UTC)

I'd love to see what you can do. I think the bill could use a better summary, and the "case for" and "against" could use some truncating. Thanks for your thoughts, I too have enjoyed the conversation; and I look forward to seeing what you can contribue to a sound resolution on the article. Inigmatus July 6, 2005 04:54 (UTC)

• I've put a draft revised article text on the article's Talk page. Thoughts? -EDM 6 July 2005 06:00 (UTC)

• • I like it. Go ahead and edit it with your proposed changes, as consensus has been reached. We should move for speedy keep once done, so the admins can remove the VfD notice. Inigmatus July 6, 2005 14:51 (UTC)

The Kings Tavern/Christian Forums

Nice work on the The Kings Tavern and Christian Forums articles. When I created the Christian Forums article, I had no idea of it's history (other than that it was founded by Erwin) and didn't know it had merged with Kings Tavern. I do remember the Left Behind Message board, and was disappointed when it was shut down, especially since Jerry Jenkins himself posted there. Anyway, keep up the good work! :-)

Image Tagging Image:Harveyfbarnard.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Harveyfbarnard.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Misplaced Pages (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam 21:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Proposal: one-revert rule for each other's edits

Hi Inigmatus, I would like to propose that with regard to each other's edits, we honour the one revert rule in the future. It's not Misplaced Pages policy, but it would essentially mean that - starting from now - articles we both edit and have disagreements about could not change state without both of us agreeing.

One revert. If I change something and you don't like it, you can revert, and it then moves to the talk page. Similarly in the reverse case.

I think this might help us improve NESARA, at least.

RandomP 12:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision in the main namespace

Hi Inigmatus, I noticed your rewrite of Messianic Judaism under the title Messianic Judaism revision. As explained on Talk:Messianic Judaism, similar pages should not typically be in the main namespace. The only exception to this rule is when the original page is a copyright violation.

I have moved the page in question to User:Inigmatus/Messianic Judaism revision (a process known as userfication). I will leave a note to this effect on Talk:Messianic Judaism as well. JFW | T@lk 20:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Here is a copy of a message I left on the Messianic Jewish talk board:

Perspective

The whole perspective of how the article begins is wrong. Messianic Jews for the most part do not identify with Christianity. The article seems to be written from a Christian or Jewish anti-missionary perspective. Only one faction of Messianic Judaism uses Christian terminology and approach such as Jews for Jesus. (Some Messianic Jews even disagree with Jews for Jesus).

The original church was made up of only Jews, Messianic Jews. Christianity is a branch off it by the ministry of the apostle Paul. Today's Messianic Judaism sees itself as a revival of the original Messianic Judaism and its Hebraic roots, and not Christianity.

The article should be written from a Messianic Jewish perspective only to cite that a faction identifies with somewhat of a Christian identity and use of Christian terminology.

Thats my 2c worth... CowboyWisdom 16:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Here is a good resource link:

• Open Directory Project - Messianic Judaism

Messianic Judaism Revision Review

• I will most certainly review the proposed revision; I have a meeting in 40 minutes so I may not be able to get back to you promptly. I will say that the part I did get to read sounded great.

Should I have any concerns with anything I will certainly let you know. Sincerely, Rivka 15:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I have submitted a dispute case both at : Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-13 Messianic Judaism and Requests_for_mediation#Messianic_Judaism

CowboyWisdom 16:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

MJ Protection

Inigmatus, any idea as to why the page is still being protected? I put in a couple of requests for it to be unprotected and they suddenly disappeared after a night. Suffice it to say, nothing was unprotected. Rivka 14:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the lock has been removed from the MJ page. I could be wrong, but I went on there and saw no lock to speak of. What should we do now, post another vote on the talk page about using your revision as the article or...? Rivka 21:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

MJ Theology

I've got my first rough thoughts on my talk page. I think you'll find that I'm from a rather different segment of Messianic Judaism than the one you've documented. It's getting late, so please go easy. I expect that quite a bit more will need to be added.

I've deliberately not mentioned this in the MJ:talk page. It's too rough right now for that.

NathanZook 05:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's up now. Please have at it.

NathanZook 04:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Response noted, reply posted. I'm about to head to bed, so I'll probably check again Motze Shabbas. NathanZook 04:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's Motze Shabbas, then there's motze Motze MOTZE Shabbas. I'm needing a lot more energy for other matters than I thought. I gave a really short response on the theology rewrite proposal. I don't know when I might be ready to try to drive something like this again. Sorry. <<sigh>>

NathanZook 03:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

First Fruits of Zion

I just got through reading Restoration , so when I saw the FFOZ article I was interested. Do you plan to expand it more? --In ur base, killing ur dorfs 15:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Elaragirl, I have a big interest of FFOZ, the One Law Movement, and Grafted-In theology. I hope to add to these topics in the future. Jamie Guinn 16:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is this happening?

Well, I become extremely angry and upset when I see that I or someone else is unjustly treated. Inigmatus, these administrators are shameless bullies. They don't care about what's right, they only care about being seen as right! I've been blocked with no explanation from an edit war where PinchasC gave me no sufficient explanation; because he HAS NO REASON for doing it other than that he doesn't like me. It's absurd! Please avoid PinchasC; he acts like a gentleman but everything I ahve seen him do to me has proven that he is corrupt through and through. If you really wanted to help me, you'll revert edits for my sake in the future. Oh, and please report him for violating 3rr without any sort of reasonable discussion. 12.65.162.148 14:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Even when working with "corrupt" admins, the best method for conflict resolution is to always keep a cool head. 3RR was violated, and I will of course inquire about it, but even more importantly I have done the more appropriate thing and offered to open up your changes for discussion in Messianic Judaism talk. inigmatus 16:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't understand, they are selfish louts, raping my emotions and destorying my livelihood. I want to cut my eyeballs out. REVERT IT BACK TO MY VERSION, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUDGE WHAT IS BETTER AND WORSE! 12.65.114.23 16:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You might be barking up the wrong tree. The reverts are to a version of the article that I myself drafted. I'd love to discuss them in Talk:Messianic Judaism, and I think you are free to post there. As such, I disagree with some of your changes personally, as I believe it adds unnecessary POV, but that is a debatable issue I'd like to engage you in the Talk page. inigmatus 16:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't engage you in the talk page; they blocked me and didn't explain why. They are an arrogant bunch of reactionary statists. You have no idea how much their administrative privelages here at WP have allowed them to trample innocent people they disagree with. I am tired of being beaten, destroyed, and my intellectual value sealed off. I am very seriously considering leaving this whitewashed facade that is a box of rotting corpses. What am I supposed to do after the 31-hour block expires? They'll just block me again.

P.S. about the 3RR: No, they didn't technically violate 3RR, but that isn't the issue. My problem is that they are inhumane, elitist bullies. They refuse to negotiate anything with me, even as I am incredibly patient with them and wish to negotiate. They don't tell me why they revert edits, why they block me, and why they won't talk to me about not talking to me. I feel that's a real weakness at WP: as long as you stay technically within a system of established arbitrary rules, no matter how much you exploit others, you're likely to get away with it (well, except for assuming good faith, they're horrendous with doing that for me). I am feeling extremely nervous and anxious right now, and it doesn't help me any more knowing how much I'm being trampled on by the people that are supposed to be maintaining justice here. The way they hide behind their brand of legalism is just driving me nuts. 12.64.6.114 19:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, they have finally done it to me. I am now blocked for two months, an impossibly long time to wait. I offer you, one of the few people I can trust and feel has some conscience at Misplaced Pages, a way to assist me. They will never unblock me regardless of how sickenengly unjust the premises are: WP is just not flexible enough and it's thought that the admins are always correct when in reality they often take their privelages to extreme levels of oppresiveness (as has been done to me). How you can assist me now is by me sending edits of a MJ article directly to you, perhaps me email, and you review and post personally. For example, please review my latest change to the MJ article, and revert to that version if you feel it is good. I refuse to illegitimately sockpuppet, so if you do not do this for me, my only choice is to leave Misplaced Pages permenantly and I can nearly guarantee you will never see or hear from me again. Thank you. 12.64.90.78 02:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I have reviewed your changes to the article. I support some of them. I will be pursuing some of the changes in due time, as they make sense to me at least. It's the "Baby out with bathwater" principle - you had some stuff reverted that may not have been necessary to have been reverted. I'll see what I can do to salvage some of your edits. If you wish to contribute further though, please do not email me your contributions. I have enough work on my hands to do.

Please work with WP and the established guidelines. If you are banned, and if there is no other recourse for you personally to appeal, I'm sorry. I'm not here to start a revolution in WP admin policies. Not to preach, but I think humility is an outworking of the fruit of the Spirit, and with it, a lot of work on the articles can get done in this mindset. After all, it was with painstaking humility that allowed the article to get radically changed to what it is today from what it was a few months ago before the redraft. I know you have issues with particular editors and admins. I disagree with some of their behaviors as well, but I can not be an advocate for what I also believe is inappropriate behavior in your edit summaries and personal language. I'm sorry if you may disagree, but I just think it proper and right that I should hold fellow Messianics to a higher standard of behavior than that of even the most "kind" antimissionaries. If your banning prevents you from appealing, then I am sorry for that too. I would be upsetting the relative peace the article is enjoying now (as well as spending time on a personal issue when I could be spending time improving MJ articles) if I were to continue being an advocate on your behalf beyond this point, and that is where I stand for now. I empathize with your plight, but it's not my fight yet, especially when the Messianic representation in WP is so few, and your banning practically represents a third of the known regular Messianic editing team.

In closing, I encourage you to take that 2 month break. In fact, I encourage you to not even care about the article for two months, and instead focus on your own character development, before thinking about comming back. Perhaps when you return, God will have seen to the increase of the number of us, and the further improvement of the articles to the point where the antimissionaries themselves give up trying to silence the truth about Messianic Judaism. in the love of Yeshua, sincerely, inigmatus 07:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'd like you to know that I am an antimissionary; it's the fact that I don't believe that Messianic Judaism is a missionary effort in any way shape or form (other than the extreme protestant wing of it, which is dying and will disappear in short time), and that people who think it is a missionary effort are full-out wrong for believing that it is, that does me in. I think it can be agreed that at least 60% of my edits are of definite positive, factual, and nuetral value, while another 30% are of debatability, and perhaps a 10% negative, but that isn't good enough for the people here that constantly revert them. We know they have their own agenda when it comes to these things so we shouldn't try to conceal it to ourselves. I've known and embraced humility for a lifetime, but I am outspoken (Moshe was known to be of great humility, yet prone to great outrage, and Yeshua was in apparent and loud outrage at the underhanded money-changing going on in the Temple of Yerushaleim); it's the likes of PinchasC, Humus Sapiens, and MPerel that need to have their powers (but not their accounts!) stripped for two months just to instill an ounce of humility into them. About your "fruit of the Spirit" idea, I am not much for this tiny "charismatic" branch of MJ. The Ruach HaKodesh is simply such an esoteric and mysterious concept, and so little explanation as to what it IS in the Bible is given, that so much attention should not be due to such an immaterial concept. My edit summaries? I was unnecessarily rude, of course now I concur, but being rude is overtly apparent human error and maybe it is a little unpleasant, but it isn't truly evil and sinister as the Machevellianism the administrators represent. So I really don't even know if after 2 months I can possibly imagine where the project will be, or where I will be for the project; it is just too long for me, I don't know how to cope with it. I had a dream and a vision for the Messianic Judaism article and project, to make it a wonderfully structured, seamless, and accurate depiction of Messianic Judaism. Here is a small list of synagogues that I believe represents the pinnacle of maturity in Messianic Judaism. If the vast majority of Messianic Jewish synagogues followed the model of one of the following congregations, and stop talking about what G-d "just said", and ditched completely the two-house insanity, and the trinitarian invention, and rejected any ties to Jews for Jesus at all, and stopped calling their congregational leaders "pastors", and stopped compromising with the Protestantism whose very roots are utterly anti-semetic, I guarantee you that within that very week Messianic Judaism would never again be considered a missionary effort or not thoroughly a Judaism again by any large self-respecting Jewish organization, and would be from that point considered valid for aliyah, and almost every Rabbinic would say of MJ: "I don't agree with their views on the Messiah, but it's a Judaism", rather than "It's just Christianity painted up like Judaism / a missionary outreach". Examine:

Melech Yisrael: http://www.cmy.on.ca/index.htm

Beit Avanim Chaiot: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/beit_avanim_chaiot/

Beit Yeshua: http://www.beityeshua.org/first.html

Beth El: http://www.bethelnyc.org/index.asp

Simchat Torah: http://joyofthetorah.org/news.php

Shuvah Yisral: http://www.shuvah.com/

Avahat Zion http://www.ahavatzion.org/

Ohr Chadash http://www.ohrchadash.org/

Please reply 12.65.67.240 03:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The tiny Charismatic branch of Messianic Judaism is not foreign to the Master, for he himself would have ascribed to the charismatic branch of the Pharisees - those who cast out demons, performed miracles, raised the dead, etc. I believe he had a very healthy and very mature understanding of the Ruach, and so did his talmidim - and we should ascribe to be no different in this regard.

The two-house insanity, like any major doctrine, has some basis in reality; but the conclusions their theories bring people too are... well, distracting at best. As Messianic Jews our aim shouldn't primarily be our acceptance in the greater Jewish community, for it was the greater Jewish community that kicked out Messianic Judaism to begin with. Granted there is a LOT of work to be done to undo the damage of 2000 years of man-made, Church-invented traditions and theologies; but the primary goal of this work shouldn't be to make Messianic Judaism more palatable to segments of Judaism, but rather more palatable to God and his Truth, the Messiah, Yeshua. I believe if we make Yeshua-likness the central focus and primary aim of the Messianic movement, all else will follow: the Church will be drawn to the person of Yeshua as the living Truth (Torah), and nonbelieving Jews will be drawn to the Truth (Torah) in the person of Yeshua.

I encourage you to stick out the next two months. Good ideas don't die out in two months. inigmatus 05:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm a realist so I'm not betting my lunch money on it. One of the greatest hopes that Messianic Judaism has is to make the seven-point manifesto of http://www.hashivenu.org/ its practical creed, and generally to model all its synagogues after one the synagogual congregations I have listed above, as I believe these represent a pinnacle of theological and communal maturity in Messianic Judaism, elevating themselves above Protestantism, placing ephramite doctrine in the looney bin where it came from and belongs as it is racist and contradictory and thorougly un-Biblical (see http://www.cmy.on.ca/ephraim/ephraimite.htm), and exhibiting tremendously developed understandings of Jewish traditions and life, and the Messiah. Please examine at least a couple of these if you havn't. As for the Charismatic idea, I'm still not much for it. If you notice, in all the Jewish Scriptures, only the Messiah (Yeshua) was able to accomplish these so-called "charismatic" effects with any level of consistency. Not even Moshe or the Prophets were able to cregularly perform the eviction of demons, miracles, and certainly never raising of the dead, and the Prophets were people of incredible understanding of G-d and faith that we simply cannot approach today. Thus, using Hillelian ethics, if the Prophets could not perform these "charismatic" effects on any regular basis, and we cannot compare to the HaShem's Prophets in this age, HOW MUCH MORE SO does this then apply to the Moshiach, who is far above the Prophets and could? Let me just say it, Yeshua was able to do these things because he was the Moshaich, and they were a means to an end more than an end to a means. Yes, I'll probably be able to wait out the 2 mo. now that I think about it. But I'd like to continue to take to you every now and then here until that time, so that my heart will still be in it. When I come back, there can be no compromise. When I return, I will need YOU. I will need RIVKA. I will need that other person who joined the MJ project as well. We will need each other. We must stand by one another firmly and be outspoken. I must support your edits and you must support mine, making suggestions as to possible holes and improvements in the talk page but for the most part standing firmly in support. The administrators unfortunately aren't moved by the truth when it has no teeth, so we've got to show them the power of our voices. 12.64.114.101 01:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Another important source: the world's first and formost Sephardi Messianic Jewish synagogue: http://www.bethisraeltampa.org/. Please tell me what you think.

For your reference and use, I present a listing of simple and effective answers to eleven of the most common and misinformed accusations against Messianic Judaism.

- "Messianic Judaism is a disguised missionary effort": This is perhaps the most laughable and arrogant accusation perpetrated on MJ of all. Apparently someone doesn't like facts. READ some of the major MJ websites with a nuetral mind, even just for an hour, and you'll understand how wrong you are.

- "Messianic Judaism can't possibly be Judaism": Please, in that case, give me a definition of Judaism that is inclusive to all four of the main denominations (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist), and to make it easy you can even exclude Kabbalah, that is able to exclude Messianic Judaism and is not circular or absurdly arbitrary (I.E. "anything but Jesus").

- "There is no Judaism without Jews": Um, YEAH. Most MJs ARE ethnic Jews.

- "Trinitarianism is incompatible with Judaism": That's why MJs generally aren't trinitarians.

- "The Messiah is NOT G-d!": Which is why MJs generally believe that while the Mashiach, Yeshua, is divine, he is not G-d.

- "Even if he's the Messiah, the NT (Read: B'Rit Chadasha) is not a Jewish book": Really? A work, written excusively by observant Jews, about jews, and foremost for Jews, that teach against no portion of the Torah, or prior Jewish traditions, and focuses mainly on the central Jewish concept of Mashiach? You're being arbitrary.

- "But it's still not really commentary on the Torah, and that defines Jewish Scripture!": Crock. Case 1, over 1/3 of the TaNaKh is histical record, rather than any religious commentary. Case 2, MJs see one of the roles of the Mashiach as that of the "walking Torah" in effect (ultimate human exaple of it in practice and principal). Case 3, the Torah, Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaa'kov, Moshe, and the Nevi'im (Prophets) were all referred to positively and commanded to be ovserved hundreds of times in the B'Rit Chadasha (David Stern's wonderful translation, not the anti-semetic KJV or NIV, lets this shine), absolutely never contradicted / instructed against. Case 4, Yeshua HaMashaich only ever opposed Jewish Custom (Minhag) when it countered common sense (such as ritual washing of hands, which isn't related to any part of the Torah, or that it is entirely ok to save someone's life on the Shabbat, which eventually became universal halakha). Finally Case 5, in the mysterious work of Revelation, the work is properly categorized in the genre of Jewish mustical and eschatalogical literature, almost a fusion of Daniel and the Zohar with MJ concepts.

- "For over 1800 years, the vast majority of Jews have rejected this person as a possible Messiah": That's really irrelevant. What people THINK doesn't necessarily define what is true (even if those people are very wise, such as Maimonides, Akiva, etc.). Whether or not Yeshua of Netzereit is the Jewish Mashiach (as suffering servant of Israel) must be the first and last aspect of the debate on how Messianic Judaism should be classified.

- "You can practice some Jewish customs, the Torah, keep kosher and all the holidays, go to a Hebrew-siddur synagogue, and be an ethnic Jew and still be a Christian as these things are technically Biblical": First, do you realize that you practically just defined Judaism? Furthermore, synagogues, rabbis, and most of Jewish historical culture is NOT Biblical (except for its references of being practiced in the B'Rit Chadasha, such as Yeshua and talmidim celebrating Chanukkah, people teaching in the synagogues, or Rav Sha'ul the Pharasaic Rabbi), nor any of the "minor holidays" (such as Tisha B'Av or Chanukkah), or most minhag, is Biblical. Messianic Jews still observantly celebrate all these things because they are Jews that love Judaism!

- "OK, maybe you're right, but how is MJ NOT Christianity? Christianity by definition is believing that Yeshua is Messiah": It's been said that anything millions of people believe cannot ever really be classified in a single-sentence definition. Christianity has always been synonymous with several basic doctrines that are incompatible with any Judaism (including Messianic Judaism). These include a triune G-d, a G-d = human theology, supersessionism, an anti-semitic history, abolishment of the blessed Torah, a totally intermmediary view, seeing faith and tikkun olam (repairing the world through righteous works) as, unScripturally enough, mutually exclusive, and more. The vast majority of MJs don'e hold any of those beliefs, and disagreeing with Rabbinincs about the Messiah doesn't make it non-Judiasm.

- "How can you support these claims? Give me proof!": This is where you cue a list of Messianic Jewish links and examples of synagogues.

Please reply, and tell me if this is decent work. Thank you. 12.64.78.15 20:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Historical evidence for a Suffering Messiah in Judaism:

http://www.bethelnyc.org/sufferingmessiah.asp

http://bethsar.com/10_Reasons.htm

A pleasure as always 12.64.54.144 00:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you reply to my comments anymore? I've taken enough b/s having every one of my edits to factually horrendous MJ articles reverted to last me for a lifetime at wikipedia. Please at least REPLY to my comments, to give me that comfort. Thanks. 12.65.66.168 20:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• I bookmarked the Sephardic MJ. They also run the only other MJ yeshiva that I know of. Your draft is decent work. Also, please keep my user talk page relevant to wikipedia issues. Thanks! inigmatus 06:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		For your dedicated contributions to WP:Messainic Judaism and related articles! In ur base, killing ur dorfs 14:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

New Boaz Michael article.

Inigmatus, I just created an article on Boaz Michael. Check it out, clean it up, and send your suggestions/comments my way. Jamie Guinn 17:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

This might be distressing

I'm beginning to think the whole Messianic Judaism project is about to fall into the gutter. Please see the accuations lifted against you here at http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Jayjg#Messianics_again

Furthermore, the main MJ article is a meandering mess. The whole stupid thing is written from the extreme protestant wing of Messianic Judaism (which happens to be dying out the last I've seen). There are people considering the Boaz Michael and Rabbi Lichtenstein articles for deletion, without cause. People that don't know shit-for-all about Messianic Judaism go in and purposely make POV changes to articles, especially new ones. They add JfJ references everywhere, and have the audacity to plug Moishe Rosen. See the following case, with the new Rabbi Lichtenstein article: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Isaac_Lichtenstein&oldid=90515698 Make sure the rediculous reference to Rabbi lichtenstein being a "Christian" is properly referred to (and cited) as an early Messianic Jew. That's my first request.

My other request is for you to battle for the two above mentioned biography articles to be well-cited and not taken down, as both people are valid and important people in our Judaism, NOT vanity articles. Bring the Messianic Judaism article back to one that represents a center-point in the movement, not the leftover protestant theology of 10 or 20 years ago. And add Rabbis Bruce L. Cohen and Rabbi Dr. John Fischer to the Important Figures page, as both of them have contributed various books and position papers and are celebrities among the Messianic Jewish community. It would probably be best to add Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbock as well, not because he's a Messianic Jew (he's reform), but because he's written a couple of very important books about it. As well as Carol Harris-Shapiro, a reconstructionist Rabbi that has done the same thing.

Lastly, I ask why you lifted me from the members list on the project? Just because I'm temporarily blocked doesn't mean I lost interest in the project.

Reply swiftly, and thanks for your time. 12.64.24.20 01:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Zorkfan, I'm working on it. It's not the end of the world. Truth has nothing to be ashamed of, afraid of, or threatened by. If senseless opposition rears its head for any of these reasons, then the opposition is truly senseless as they don't have the truth. I have faith in the wikiprocess. Messianic Judaism will be a good test of that faith. I believe once people know the issues, people are smart enough to research more and decide for themselves. Misplaced Pages has no tolerance for obvious censorship.

I also removed you from the members list for the simple reason that it was Wikipolicy that removed your access, not specific users (although they may have forced the process to begin with). Also you keep using colorful language in your posts. This does not represent Messiah. As project leader, I have a responsibility to Messiah and NPOV - and that responsibility includes removing people from the members list who are not in good standing with the general wikipedia community; and removing those that I think carry the name of Messiah in a blasphemous way. This doesn't mean that your removal is permanent. Your removal from the list is only as long as you are banned from wikipedia. Once you return, we can deal with your use of colorful language then. Thanks for the heads up though on the recent activity in Messianic Judaism articles. I noticed it within an hour or so - I keep diligent, and yes, the articles have already been responded to by myself, and I've already notified the rest of the Messianic editing team to be on the alert. We dont need VfDs to go unchallenged if we think there is room for improvement. Shalom. inigmatus 04:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Please consider the suggestions I have proposed above while I am AWOL. As for the "colorful language"? I've always tried to keep it to a minimum, but how it's seen as "bad" is mostly societal. There's nothing Scriptural (or in the Talmud, for that matter) that says "thou shalt not say naughty words", but of I generally refrain from it anyway, natch. I have very little if any doubt that the cream will eventually rise to the top, friend. An attempt to expediate the process, unfortunately, sent me to the pen. But please make it something of a priority to effectively represent that a Jew-targeting evangelical Baptist ministry (JfJ) is not affiliated with a general Jewish synagogual movement (MJ). And please refrain from using terms such as "believer" in the future when referring to Messianic Jews, as the NPOV of such is questionable. Best Regards! ;) 12.65.114.243 01:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi there!!!

Thanks for the reply. Actually, I was thinking about talking privately but I see your email isn't turned on. MetsFan76 03:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok...I sent you an email. MetsFan76 03:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. ←Humus sapiens 03:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Messianic religious practice

There is no consensus for Halakha either, which is a disingenuous and improper term to use. "religious practice" is much better, and less POV, in light of the many Christian elements. -- Avi 04:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Messianic Jews actively call it halakha, and you're the only one in over a month to protest deeming it as such, and it was agreed upon by concensus as a matter of fact. I don't know what you mean by "many Christian elements", as MJ halakha is generally 90% Talmudic. Just because you don't like Messianic Judaism, gives you no free license to make it appear as falsely Protestant as possible on Misplaced Pages, sorry. No, no, and no. 12.65.162.119 04:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Template:Messianic Judaism

Just reminding you that you are very close to a 3RR violation on the template. -- Avi 04:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Your next revert to that template places you in violation. I technically do not have any "reverts", as all of my edits were of different points as you piecemeal reverted my changes. Regardless, as a matter of good faith, I have not continued to edit the template with the knowledge that you cannot change anything. I would hope you would do the same. Placing an unnecessary warning on my talk page does not demonstrate that, I am afraid, but perhaps you did not look at the edit history to see whether they were edits or reverts (as yours were to a point prior to my initial edits). Oh well. -- Avi 05:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

No input from Judaism editors.

You nominated/voted {{NotJudaism}} for speedy delete yet, without letting me the creator of it know about it, even as you were chatting with me, and that is not called a normal procedure. The only Judaism editor who picked it up voted to keep it. Your motivation to push the MJ line knows no bounds, why do you want to create false impressions that MJ talks for Judaism when it does not and this template would have obviated difficulties in this regard. The discussion will be opened again. IZAK 06:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. After years of service on wiki, it was my first VfD nomination. I think I even forgot to add a couple of bracket references according to policy as well. I know I made mistakes. Please forgive me. I'll remember to post on Talk first, before nominating VfD again. I would only expect the same in return. It's time for maariv now. Shalom. inigmatus 07:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You didn't tag the template for speedy deletion... but you TfDed it... others saw it as the T1 it was and speedied it. IZAK is right though in the sense that it is common courtesy to notify the creator. (→Netscott) 07:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Whenever I nominate anything for deletion I always look at the history of it and I leave a message on the talk page of it's original creator and sometimes even on the talk page of others who have had more recent input (the various Misplaced Pages guidelines advise it.) By the way, who do you pray to when you go to ma'ariv? IZAK 07:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

We pray to G-d when we go to ma'ariv, and G-d only. We do not pray to any being of this world, whether he be the neighbor next door or the Mashiach (Yeshua), as this is idolitry and thus obviously against the Torah, Scriptures, and Talmud. Perhaps I should let Inigmatus speak for himself in this regard, but of course he shares this statement verbatum. 12.65.102.14 23:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I pray to HaShem. Don't you follow a siddur yourself? Who do you pray to? I use the Artscroll Sephard siddur. inigmatus 00:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: JFJ

I never said or implied that discussion would not be a good thing. However, it is clear that the tags are inappropriate. Further, I find it hard to believe that you would try to convince me that WP:3 has agreed with you when it obvious from the message that was left on the talk page that they disagreed with you with this statement-

"But since you can't ever prove a negative like "no Jewish organizations or denominations therefore consider it possible to profess Judaism and also believe in the divinity of Jesus", and especially because there are references that seem to make a good prima facie case for the truth of this statement, it's my opinion that those who contest this statement now have the burden of proof to make their case - e.g. by finding a non-minute Jewish organization that does consider it possible to believe this - before changing the statement.".

Anyways, while I would not characterize the addition of the tags as disruptive the first time you added them, I think that referring to your actions that way after the second time was indeed accurate.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 07:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well if you were in my shoes, you'd want to have someone actually discuss with you what you are disputing, before they go off and revert your dispute notice - or at least if they revert, that they at least make an effort to respond to the request for discussion. I only ask for the same treatment you'd want in regards to following wikipolicies. I'm all for working together and producing good NPOV articles that give readers information that they can decide for themselves. If you are too, awesome! I assume that you are. I look forward to working with you in the future. Shalom. inigmatus 07:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The Template

No doubt you have noticed that the once well-organized and nicely layn-out Messianic Judaism template has been butchered. If these people don't truly hate us, then we are at least definitely being religiously persecuted, and their changes are very POV. The following links should never have been removed, for very simple reasons, but they have been removed as an obvious and very malicious POV attack:

Sanhedrin: The Sanhedrin happen to be one of the most important parties in the Jerusalem Council, led by Rabbi Gamaliel, master of Rabbi Sha'ul ("Paul"). There is no reason to remove them, as their participation was key in the conclusions reached at the Jerusalem Council, which in turn is key to Messianic Jews.

Jewish Services: Messianic Jewish services, especially in the traditional wing, are borderline verbatum Rabbinic Jewish services in style and flow. Why then would you remove it from the template?

Prayers and Blessings: Jewish prayers and blessings are an intrinsic part of Messianic Jewish services at Messianic synagogues. Why would you remove them? They say the Aaronic benediction, bless the children of the congregation, and blow the shofar just like everyone else.

Mitzvot: Messianic Jews observe Torah. The 613 mitzvot comprise the entire body of the Torah's pracical instruction. Thus removing the link is a logical paradox.

Jewish Customs (Minhag): Messianic Jews generally exalt and praise traditional Jewish customs, and more often than that, they practice those said customs. No reason nor concensus for removal.

Jewish Texts Heading: They removed the Jewish texts link, completely disregarding the fact that religious texts written by Jews are generally the only actual ones that Messianic Jews study and consider religiously valuable. Again, an entirely POV edit.

Talmud: One of the most baseless and POV edits of all. The chutzpah. Other than the Jerusalem Council, the Talmud happens to be almost the only other source of halakha for Messianic Jews, and most Messianic Jews consider it either historically valuable, religiously preferable, or even binding and fully normative. There are very few Karaite Messianic Jews (when's the last time a MJ Rabbi taught against wearing a kipa, tying your tzitzit, affixing mezuzot, and praying in a minyan? That's what I thought.).

If these POV removals weren't bad enough, the template, which once had a very intricate quality in how it was organized (props on that, Inig), is now haphazard. You obviously are more inclined to work firmly within the Wiki-system than I am, Inigmatus, so I trust you will bring these issues to the table and stop the blatantly POV removal of those above links. Shalom. 12.65.102.14 00:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Zorkfan talk page

Hi Inigmatus, Zorkfan has agreed to editing restrictions as per here in which his block is reduced to 3 months and he is only to edit his own talk page at User talk:Zorkfan. He has requested that someone notify you and ask for you to put his talk page on your watchlist and check there so he can continue discussion with you. --MPerel 02:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The following is Zorkfan's message to you: "I am not allowed to make edits, even to your talk page. Please go to User_talk:Zorkfan each and every day to check if I left any messages for you. That will be my only way of communication with you, for the greater part of the next couple of months. Thanks, Inigmatus. ;)"

--MPerel 02:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Jews for Jesus Arbitration

There is a Request for Arbitration for the Jews for Jesus article. Please provide your inputs.ParadoxTom 03:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR violation

Template:Messianic Judaism - you have violated 3RR. You can avoid being reported by self reverting quickly. Thanks. Amoruso 19:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You have violated 3RR as well. Please note that you have not responded to the Talk page at all, or to my comments in Talk. But since you want to go this route, I've notified you as well. I don't think this warring is constructive. I've submitted a request for a third opinion. Thanks for your patience. I'm not reverting until we have a third opinion. inigmatus 19:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR is 4 reverts, not 3.... you should self revert. Amoruso 19:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This is pointless. First there are only 3 reverts to my original work. The rv to User:Netscott is not a 4th revert, however a 4th revert on your part would be. You haven't even responded to my comments in Talk. Your reverts and this warning are unfounded. Please lets work together and make the template a consensus effort, and quit reverting without discussing in Talk - such an action could only be constructive. Edit warring is not. inigmatus 19:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

reported for 3rr

Hello. You have been reported for 3rr here. I note that you claim the user who reported you committed the same infraction. I send you this information in case you may wish to countercharge the user so that he will either withdraw his report or at least be assessed a similar penalty should you be blocked. You may wish to act quickly in case a block is imposed.

81.208.95.27 20:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on November 30 2006 to Template:Messianic Judaism

Yes, you have 4R. No, Amoruso only has 3.

Re your mail: you have 4R. If you're prepared to promise not to revert, then you can be unblocked (though probably tomorrow, unless someone else will, as I'm off to bed...) William M. Connolley 22:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I will not revert again. Someone who actually cares about consensus finally did post a revert reason just a few minutes ago that I can work from: I need to create inclusion criteria. If only we could have more peaceful dispute resolutions between Messianics and those that hate us, I think we would see less of these 3RR issues. inigmatus 22:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, then you are unblocked William M. Connolley 09:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

VfDs, Messianics, and More

Ok, to those who like to read my talk page, here it is. A place to discuss how Messianic Jewish and Jewish editors should get along on Misplaced Pages. See for an appeal. Feel free to respond below. inigmatus 09:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Of course it is bad to have unsourced articles. IMHO, you make conmparison where it is not justified: History of the Marranos in England is a subarticle of History of the Jews in England, which has sources - but I agree, should be better. Even if an article such as Jews in England is currently not very well-sourced, it can be easily fixed. Not the case with FFOZ, etc. Cheers. ←Humus sapiens 09:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

graftedin.com

Hey inigmatus! I am back on the scene temporarily; apparently in between my daughter and my newborn son I have NO TIME to get online! Anyway, I wanted to say I visited your congregation's page. LOVE IT! I will read more whenever I have the chance. I saw the MJ page and have to say that it has grown way beyond my expectations... I read the talk page for a while and it seems that people are generally getting along lately... just wanted to drop you a line, and if I haven't already I will sign up for the wikiproject for MJ. Shalom!Rivka 04:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know....

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Messianic_Judaism.23Stepping_down_as_project_lead MetsFan76 23:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Messianic Judaism

Template:Messianic Judaism has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. IZAK 19:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

you're taking this "Messianic Judaism" way too seriously!! Take some time off to learn some Torah and chill out. frummer 21:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Your WP:3O report

I have removed your report, since WP:3O is only for resolving disagreements between two editors. -Amarkov _edits 02:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe

Do you think we should give up? It's clear that IZAK and several others with their hatemongering are intent on being a stumbling stone for us every step of the way. Honestly, we have no business creating, say, a Messianic teffilin or Messianic Menorah article, because such articles would state and provide virtually no information that isn't completely redundant and verbatim with existing articles. In fact, such articles would be illegal to make as the external references for such would be almost nill and the opinions for such a minute topic would literally vary in each Messianic synagogue. Yes menorahs and tefillin are obviously native concepts in Messianic Judaism. You and I both know what the conservative option here is. The 4 main denominations of Judaism reject MJ, IZAK keeps patrolling with that. But would someone tell IZAK that Orthodox Judaism officially believes that ANY other group that calls itself Judaism, that isn't Orthodox, is another religion and apostates? Orthodox Judaism considers even the Union for Traditional Judaism to be apostates, for crying out loud. Maybe he needs to know that a fully legitimate Orthodox Beit Din accepts a sect of Netzarim in Ra'anana, Israel, led by paqid Yirmeyahu ben Dawid. See here at http://www.netzarim.co.il/ And yet Orthodoxy is recognized as the gold standard for what is defined as Judaism, from which all other self-proclaimed denominations (Reform, Conservative, etc.) derive. All in the eye of the beholder. But you did make a solid, factual defense, to which IZAK obviously has no equivelant reply. You've been a hell of a fighter for the truth, friend. Too bad the narrow-minded don't like listening. And just for laughs, the form of the template that IZAK recommended officially sucks. Shabbat Shalom, friend. 12.65.144.232 01:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think at this point that it's pretty well defended. Consensus seems to be in favor of keeping the article and revising it, but the specifics to revision are not listed (and aren't necessary to move the VfD to keep). I expect the VfD to be closed in favor of keeping; and for IZAK to console himself by making some changes to the template before discussing them as per the usual (if he refrains, and instead just starts a debate in the template's talk page, then he will have finally won my trust and we can begin working together to address his concerns and making the template better). inigmatus 06:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Orthodox Messianic Jews -- "Any attempt by Messianic Jews to assert the truth of who they are, what they are, and what they believe, is often met by the Jewish editing community on Wiki with accusations of POV pushing, notability, and wikilawyering." Me? — coelacan talk — 06:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism

Please do not remove content from Misplaced Pages, as you did to Messianic Judaism. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Avi 04:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please assume good faith and don't accuse me of vandalism. I couldn't quite figure out what was wrong with the citation code but the current state it was in was unusable. I posted in the talk page a clear explanation of what I did so someone else could fix it. inigmatus 04:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Messianic Judaism renominated for deletion here

here. As you were an active contributor in the previous tfd, I encourage you to come again. Thanks.--Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 09:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

On the recent AfD (elements that are less germane to the deletion discussion).

Look, I know your opinion about me. I will therefore attempt to point out that 1) I initially argued for keeping the Messianic Judaism template during the first TfD and 2) When new sources were brought up for the Ignatz DRV, I supported recreation. As shocking as this may be, I do have a POV about messianic judaism, the pov is what you think it is, and doesn't alter what I decide to *fD. I suggest you actually read my reason for nominating and if you can respond to that do so. But I really don't need you impugning on my integrity and engaging in ad hominem attacks. They aren't productive and although I have a thick skin, it has limits. Thanks. JoshuaZ 04:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Um, can I catch you before you leave? Having at least one editor with your POV is very useful for these articles and you clearly have a basic knowledge of them that many other editors lack. Your continued presence would be most helpful. JoshuaZ 04:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, you can be assured that you won't be getting any *fDs from me for a while anyways (since I've been looking through the category, and if there were anything else I thought should be deleted, I would have nominated it. I'm generally a fairly inclusive individual, and don't nominate things unless I don't see almost any hope for them). JoshuaZ 04:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Joshua, it's become far too much time consuming on my part. To be honest, it feels like I'm spending too much of my time on Misplaced Pages herding cats that I didn't even let loose nor really care to herd. I don't know at this point. I think I'm going to take a break for a while. Perhaps a long while. I was really hoping I could actually contribute by doing what I do best: draft articles, and provide sources; instead of fighting off VfDs. Just note that if Important figures go, then there is no place to put on the Messianic Judaism template, a list of figures important to Messianic Judaism, and I fear then that that template could then become as bloated as Template:Judaism which does the same thing. Have you wondered why the list of important figures to Judaism in the Judaism template isn't challenged? Has anyone considered that reasoning - if a template can list important figures, why not an article so as to prevent template bloat? inigmatus 04:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Shalom

Just came across your userpage, merely wished to express my regret at reading you are leaving. And I really can see where you are coming from with regards to leaving. Like you said, herding cats. Hope you find your time away from wikipedia to be more productive. Mathmo 11:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

You Leaving

That's pretty bad, as we Messianics get little enough representation on Misplaced Pages as it is (you being the only long-term one active on Misplaced Pages). And I think that one Jamie Guinn person quit being Messianic. I made a public comment on the TfD page for MJ, bringing to light various factors that should be addressed before any decision is made. I also made some improvements to the gartel article, like you asked. Noogster 22:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

In the meantime, if you do decide to leave Misplaced Pages for some amount of time, cool off by visiting Brian Tebitt's blog ( http://rabbiyeshuaswisdom.wordpress.com/ ) and some videos ( http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=okay1010 ). I wish you the best! Noogster 00:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely behind you 100%, Inigmatus. As the old saying goes: "I believe in the sun when it's not shining, I believe in love even when I feel it not. I believe in G-d even when he is silent."

P.S.: The main Messianic Judaism page has become quite a mess, don't you think? I plan a big cleanup and re-factualization of the article in the next couple weeks.

Noogster

My User Page!

Hello, fellow Messianic Wiki editor! I have made some significant changes to my user page, User:Noogster. Please view it and see how you like a few of the changes and sections, and tell me if you think I should add/remove anything important. Shalom and regards. Noogster 01:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The List of MJ Important Figures Article

I saved the List of Messianic Judaism important figures article on my computer before it was deleted. As you could see I was a bit late in noticing that the article was up for deletion, and couldn't defend it as it was right before Shabbat. The fact that it was put up for deletion right after the last Shabbat, and was deleted right after the Shabbat that just occured, only further confirms in my mind that yes, there very likely is an anti-MJ cabal mainly centered around WP:Judaism. I am going to promptly re-create this article and change the article's introduction in a way that is consistent with the ridiculous demands of the people that voted to delete it. Don't worry, on file I have both that article and the MJ Template. Feel free to drop me any relevant information. Noogster 02:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Inigmatus, I'm afraid that without your backup, I'm going to be in a world of hurt. Noogster

Thanks a bunch, Inigmatus. I now understand how much it hurts to have been in your shoes for even a day. I have talked with Jayjg, and we have good news: we are allowed to re-create the list of MJ important figures article, but not like the way it was before. We are allowed to re-create it as a category, in similar fashion to the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Rebbes_of_Lubavitch We are all set to bring it back albeit in a slightly different fashion. Do you need my help on this?

I'm still working hard on that top-to-bottom cleanup of the MJ main article, which I'll post eventually in a single edit.

And totally unrelated, but how about you cool off and read about this nifty new Messianic congregation I found here in the 'States: http://www.mikvehyisrael.com

My Regards. Noogster 02:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The template being deleted

What a nightmare, man. I'm going to re-create this template pretty soon (which seemed to be the consensus). But seriously, when I do, WHAT WOULD WE EVEN CHANGE? I think that the people who voted to delete our template really know why, deep down, they voted how they did; most of them hate our religion. Would would we add, or remove, or make different, to appease the nebulous demands of the people that voted to delete?. Because, in all fairness, the template as it was seemed quite perfect to me. The situation itself speaks much louder than any words: if our template was made to be "deceptive", or "tried to lend a false Judaic veneer to MJ", or convince a single Jewish Misplaced Pages editor that MJ is something it's not, then it's obviously failed from the very first edit. Messianic Judaism is relevant to every one of the links that was on that template, and not ONE SINGLE PERSON has been able to argue with me otherwise. Noogster 01:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think there's any group on Misplaced Pages that has a tougher lot than we do. But Yeshua (or to be more accurate, YEHOSHUA!: http://rabbiyeshuaswisdom.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/the-rebbes-name-is-the-revealed-name-of-mashiach/ ) pleaded that any talmid of his work within any system, no matter how corrupt, in showing the flaws of such systems. I almost feel apathetic about completing my cleanup of the main article (it's well under way, and I'm endorsing pictures as we speak), because I have a deep-seated feeling that they'll want to revert it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noogster (talk • contribs) 01:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Just do a lot of work so it becomes pointless for them to revert it all, substantiate it your work with sources, and you'll be fine. Trust me, I have and to be honest I think the Jewish editing community are getting a little tired in policing our work, and when they do, they hardly touch the MJ article any more (thank God). It's the fringes (like extra articles and templates) that they've been attacking recently. inigmatus 02:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You've been here much longer than I have, so I have every reason to be behind your advice 100%. Thanks for your advice, Inigmatus! Noogster 02:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Replied at my talk page. — coelacan talk — 02:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Guys, this is a bad idea. Noogster: the fact that you don't accept the arguments put forward by others does not mean those arguments are invalid. You need to recognise your own personal bias. This is not about opposition to your religious beliefs, it's about article space and use of templates within article space. Guy (Help!) 20:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• • Guy, you have never been a part of our Wikiproject and thus you are only speculating; even in my short time I can attest that it's been hell, and that we're clearly one of the most bullied groups on the website. Noogster 21:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

A boatload of work on Messianic Judaism

Just do a lot of work so it becomes pointless for them to revert it all, substantiate it your work with sources, and you'll be fine. Trust me, I have and to be honest I think the Jewish editing community are getting a little tired in policing our work, and when they do, they hardly touch the MJ article any more (thank God). It's the fringes (like extra articles and templates) that they've been attacking recently.

— user:inigmatus, 02:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I find the above somewhat offensive, but what can I say. Regardless, I spent hours today going over around 20 citations, updating them, placing them in cite templates, combining multiply-cited ones into refs, finding SOURCED Judaic opposition, as opposed to the unsourced OR that was there, and other copyediting and layout arrangement. While there is a significant amount of work to be done, especially in merging the theology section into its own article and applying summary style, I think the article looks a heck of a lot more professional now, especially the citation templates. There are some waesel word issues, which should not be too difficult to solve, and there are a large number of statements without sources, for which it would be great if you could provide them. Thank you. -- Avi 21:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

My top-bottom cleanup of the article will be out in a few days. Hold off work until then, Avi. Then after it's posted we can continue to work together on it to make it more professional! Noogster 00:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

That's not how a Wiki works. You don't get other people to hold off while you completely rewrite the article, you work on what is now (following Avi's changes) a much cleaner article and fix it bit by bit. Guy (Help!) 11:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

you recently stated in the TfD of the certain template:

I think it would be refreshing if there could be a delete vote from just ONE non Jewish editor.

I'm not Jewish, I'm an atheist, I have no Jewish background. I am Iranian. I believe that God is a Santa Claus for grown-ups. Thanks. --205.155.225.1 03:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Woops, forgot to long in.--Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 03:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

inigmatus, I think that as others have pointed out in the DRV, the route you really need to take is Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution. You are probably wasting your breathe (or fingertips, rather) by calling "bandwagoning". This is not really the sort of conflict within the purview of DRV. If you're unable to have articles named as you believe they should be named, then this is a longer, more ongoing problem that may need formal processes. I would suggest RFC but if you think you want Mediation, you should listen to some relaxing music and try to express yourself with as few accusations of cabalism as you can manage. The "Jewish editors" thing is self-defeating. You just come off as shrill, and it's really hurting your arguments. Please don't take this as an insult, I know it sounds blunt but I don't know how else to put it. — coelacan talk — 06:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's always Misplaced Pages:Association of Members' Advocates. And ARBCOM, your last resort, if you're willing to abide by whatever ruling they may give. — coelacan talk — 06:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Inigmatus is himself Jewish. When he says "Jewish editor" he is casually referring to active members of Wikiproject: Judaism. I'd rather he not attempt to segment groups on Misplaced Pages, though, with all respects due. Noogster 00:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Inigmatus is a Messianic Jew, I'm not sure he would appreciate being referred to as following the same religion I do, for example. -- Avi 13:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I am referring to race. Noogster 21:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Jews aren't a race. --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 01:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Death threats

Hi inigmatus,

In your AMA request you stated that "death threats have been issued to MJ editors." This is obviously extremely concerning, and should be examined quite thouroughly. I've created a section on the project Judaism talk page regarding the issue - if you could comment there it will be looked into immediately. Daniel/_T+ 10:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Why do I get the feeling that you're monitoring my contributions? Do I need to be policed? Do you have to publish to the rest of the Jewish editing community my attempts to seek redress? Am I that much of a threat? Before I can even get a third party opinion, a mass of Jewish editors show up to downplay my concerns. Before an advocate has been assigned to a request that doesn't concern your involvement initially, you inform all your friends. And for what purpose? Whatever "help" you're offering by publicizing my redress attempts to the rest of the Jewish editing community before third parties even look at the issue, is not appreciated. Are you my parents that I need to be reigned in? I appreciate your concern regarding death threats, but to be honest, I don't sense any true concern based on your comments elsewhere. Your "work" is the kind of thing we need an advocate to look at; to determine if it is indeed harassment - I can't make that call without being accused of violating AGF. So I'll let someone else make that determination. inigmatus 15:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi inigmatus,

I'm sorry that you feel that my attempt to address this worrying situation is somehow an attack on you personally. I fully support your public application for advocacy and think that it's a very good idea - as I said on the project Judaism talkpage, "normally this wouldn't concern me - if advocacy is what he feels is needed, I believe we all would be quite happy to work with an advocate." I wouldn't have given it a second thought, but death threats are a completely different matter, and if they were coming from a member of the project he or she would have a lot to answer for to other members, just for a start. If is the edit that you were talking about, it's relieving that that editor has been banned. Following the situation and expressing concern about your predicament is an act of goodwill and cooperation; please don't twist it into an attack. Daniel/_T+ 16:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Death threats are a very serious issue. I just indefblocked someone last night for that. Please let me know the where, when, and who of the death threat, and I will look into it. -- Avi 17:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The deletion discussion

The AfD discussion review has just gone way out of hand, to a rather laughable point. I'm not sure why it degraded into POV assaults and irrelevant theological debate (due in no small part to User:IZAK. I'll make a comment on that page and give a piece of my mind. My suggestion is that an admin re-create the template and we take the debate for improvements to the talk page there; I feel that that is the only shot of settling this template debate neatly. My regards, Inig. Noogster 00:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Inigmatus, you have made personal attacks against me and miscast and misconstrued my intentions on the template debate page, the DRV page, and talk:Messianic Judaism. That is not allowed in wikipedia. For the record: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -- Avi 02:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

My cleanup of the article will include the Orthodox MJ section, with better sentencing, citations, and examples of actual Orthodox MJ synagogues (with mechitzas, mikvahs, men in dark suits, and the whole nine). So no need to get angry, my friend! :) Noogster 21:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup of the main Messianic Judaism article

It's finally finished! New pictures, new citations, better sentencing, new sections, deletion of redundancies, shorter and more professional. Come see it and tell me what you think! Noogster 15:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice work! inigmatus 17:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yucko!

The current state of the new template is downright pathetic...It really is very disappointing. Guess what, I have an idea for what a great MJ template looks like and it happens to look like this, where the template is professional with all links being relevant. Presto!:

Getting serious and past that, though, I would really like some assistance in developing the Nazarenes article (who, if you didn't know were the first Jewish followers of Yeshua to whom we Messianics must claim theological heritage), if you can find reliable information. For such reasons I also think the article belongs on the MJ template. Note that Ebionites don't; they didn't appear until the 2nd century, twisted the Nazarenes' distinctly Pharisaic ways of life to an Essene worldview, incorporated some Gnostic ideas, unlike the Nazarenes they denied Yeshua's virgin birth, his Messiahship, Davidic ancestry, and sometimes even Resurrection, and used a corrupted version of the original Hebrew Matthew / Mattityahu that removed all references to his Messiahship and painted him and John the Immerser as total vegetarians. Noogster 23:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The List of Important MJ Figures is back!

It is here , as a category article! Tell me what you think! Noogster 01:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk pages

While I'm in complete agreement about the likelyhood of the tomb having anything to do with Jesus is very small and I agree that this does come across as ridiculous hype, I would like to remind you that Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox and talk pages are not for the plugging of any religion, be it some variant of Christianity, Judaism, or of Invisible Pink Unicornism. JoshuaZ 01:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks for patrolling my contributions. The attention is appreciated. inigmatus 14:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Um. actually I wasn't "patrolling" your contributions, but was in the process of starting a stub for the article when I saw that one had already been made. JoshuaZ 15:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Too much pressure?

I think editing Messianic articles at Misplaced Pages is really stressful. There are apparently a large number of people that, through their actions, will prevent the Messianic Judaism articles in Misplaced Pages from ever, ever becoming good. I might be leaving Misplaced Pages. I did squeeze enough time to create a new article today, Anshei Sfard. Peer review it if not too time-consuming. Please do reply, and thanks. Noogster 01:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you are doing an awesome job. Don't give up. Maybe if we keep checking in every month or so, we can get a real editing community going. inigmatus 06:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Confused

I'm confused by your edit summary as opposed to what the edit did here. JoshuaZ 07:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not change DIRECT quotes from sources. Secondly, please do not change articles so that they conform with YOUR opinion as to the subject matter; that is POV. There are many scholars and other authors who may differ from your opinion. We bring secondary sources; not editor opinion, in wikipedia. Please re-read WP:NPOV and WP:ATT and edit accordingly. Thank you. -- Avi 13:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Messianic Seal of Jerusalem

The Messianic Seal of Jerusalem article wasn't looking very professional, was it? I've made some changes and added some citations, and made everything look much more professional, which I am sure you'll appreciate. Leave your questions or comments, thanks. Noogster 01:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Some Template Changes

I've made some changes to the Messianic Judaism template that I'm very sure you'll appreciate. There is more work to do but so far things are coming along swell. I am also going to show lots of cited evidence in the talk page for why the Talmud definitely has a lot to do with Messianic Judaism and generally speak my mind about it.

Do you really think that MoazIsrael belongs as one of the organizations? It's really more of a Hebrew Christian organization (or at least as far as Messianic Judaism goes, in the extremely Christian sector of what can remotely be categorized as "Messianic Judaism"; they've affiliated with Joyce Meyer, Pat Robertson, and Benny Hinn, Yuck!) I mean, being a Hebrew-speaking congregation isn't exactly such a big accomplishment either when you live in a country where Hebrew is the native language (Israel)! If they can be categorized as Messianic at all, it represents a brand of MJ that is distinctly stuck in the 70's, with clean-shaven men that don't wear kippahs/talliths to services and the rest. Judging by the pictures, they also blatantly violate the Sabbath by playing instruments and using lots of non-essential electrical devices.

I have also updated the organizations article so that it will more closely match the template. Everything should be looking much more professional now.

Have a good Purim! Noogster 01:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with editing of Misplaced Pages per se, I just thought I'd share it, Inig. So after today’s Sabbath I logged on to the internet to find Jewish sites for insights into Purim, not Messianic ones (you won’t find much Mess. Purim material, actually), but a traditional Rabbinic one. A Wiki search gave led me to the following wonderful RAMB”M-oriented Orthodox Yemenite website, which I am sure you will enjoy: http://www.chayas.com/ I was reading some well-positioned articles about Purim and costumes, and then I was surprised to see the following editorial about Jesus and his early followers, which deals with the subject with incredible respectfulness and accuracy: http://www.chayas.com/state.doc Read it!

Again, have a good Purim, and no getting drunk :) Noogster 02:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Useless category?

I don't think that the article Category:Messianic Judaism important figures has much potential to be good for anything. Should we put it up for deletion? Noogster 02:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

He’s G-d’s Messiah, not G-d!

I read the discussion page for Messianic Judaism and was a bit shocked to see that you actually believe in Yeshua somehow being one and the same as G-d, and that you seem to be representing it as the sole view. That’s how I do religion: I believe that Yeshua is the Messiah based on innumerable consistencies with the Tanakh, his sound Torah message, verifiable resurrection, etc., so logically the core theologies and beliefs of his first followers are absolutely the most correct, and any fundamental deviation from that is a corruption of the truth. Know that the first Jewish followers of Yeshua, the Netzarim Yehudim, the first of which consisted of Yeshua‘s Disciples, would not have been in agreement with you, and considered it idolatry and blasphemy to consider Yeshua ha-Mashiakh G-d. Tim Hegg’s new article about it happens to be filled with inconsistencies and hopeful guesses. One very well-written article in support of true monotheism from within Messianic Judaism is found here and also here with subscribing to UTOM’s e-mail series “Is Yeshua G-d” once the website is fully rebuilt.

And here, Brian Tebitt will also offer a position paper on those that do not affirm Hegg’s expressed beliefs about Yeshua’s nature.

Not trying to hurt your feelings in any way, brother, just making sure you understand that there is another very valid side to this story and that I don’t think yours is correct and is possibly carried over from old religious leanings. Noogster 21:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Willing to Help

Hello Inigmatus, I read your request with the AMA and I would like to help. Please contact me. In Christ, SadanYagci 16:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

the new category

The new MJ categories we discussed earlier is ready to go. Please feel free to use the template where you feel necessary. Kindly provide feedback so I can "finalize" this. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

input appreciated

Please comment on T:MJ as well, thanks. ⇔ ChristTrekker 15:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for all the work you have done with the Messianic Judaism article. Keep up the good! James, La gloria è a dio 14:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Nice to see you editing again. I know that we rarely see eye-to-eye, or even come anywhere close to doing so, but it's good to have a devoted MJ editor taking care of those articles. They've kind of fallen to the Judaism project members lately, which is a recipe for future conflict with no balancing factor. :) Daniel/_T+ 18:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I do my best to stop in from time to time. Thanks for participating in the discussions, your input and contributions are valued. inigmatus 18:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

congrats

Congratulations on the pending (recent?) addition to your family! ⇔ ChristTrekker 17:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion on this

Please don't take this message as canvasing for your vote. I write to u in hopes that u can clarify this problem, since some claims are surfacing that a particular organization isn't notable enough, i, as an orthodox Jew, am not familiar with its issue, and thus could not testify to this regards, Please be so kind to shed your knowledge on this . Thanks.--יודל 12:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I would like to thank u for your honest and friendly words to the main stream Jewish editors, although u voted against me, i do understand your reasoning. I would also like u to express your vies on this problematic article, some claims are indeed problematic that he is only notable for a small group, my research on Google shoes that he has some following but i am not familiar with him, can u clarify his notability factor?--יודל 23:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Cold front heading towards Hades. Film at 11

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FHashivenu&diff=155906429&oldid=155892086 -- Avi 00:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Congrads on the new baby!

B"H Okay -- YES it's been a long time, brother. Congrads on the new baby! What's his/her name? AND the birth date? I hope you come by and read this as I would love to hear! Are you still no longer assisting here? I sure hope not. You're very intelligent. Shalom & yom tov! Rivka 19:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

- Thanks! I still visit from time to time. If I see anything serious happening, I'll jump in. I think I've reached a good working relationship with many of the influential rabbinic Jewish editors to which the disputes of the past are hopefully now seen by all as not very constructive, and as such, the attempt at consensus is being encouraged more and more by all sides. Thanks for the congrats! Jonathan was born on Tishrei 15, the birthday of our Savior, and the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles. Circumcised the 8th day, like Yeshua, Shimonei Azeret, and will be redeemed in accordance with the mitzvah. inigmatus 21:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Zion

If it is possible please write your opinion on my topic on Messianic Judaism page about Daniel Zion. Thank you. Vladislav1968 (talk) 08:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Vladislav1968

A question

Dear Inigmatus!

How can I read this article about Messianic Judaism in English?

http://he.wikipedia.org/%D7%99%D7%94%D7%93%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%99%D7%AA

Vladislav1968 (talk) 21:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Vladislav1968

Read Hebrew. :) inigmatus (talk) 01:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Caution

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Messianic Judaism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Tb (talk) 20:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Third Opinion

The Third Opinion option is for disputes between two editors and you will not get your difference of opinion at Who is a Jew resolved through that route. I tried to insert a neutral perspective into the debate, but a number of editors seem to be blinded by their personal POV and I don't imagine you will have breakthroughs with them any tiime soon as they don't appear ready to negotiate at this point. I recommend informal mediation. Why don't you make a request for mediation at WP:MEDCAB and see if that doesn't help. I think that's your next best option at this point. Mmyotis (talk) 21:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism

Why do some people not consider Messianic Judaism‎ not part of Christianity also?

Do Messianic Jews consider it not‎ not part of Christianity-- or someone else?

Just trying to understand.--Carlaude 13:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Inigmatus. I don't believe that any of us wanted to edit the MJ header, other than the user immediately above, who seems so intent on doing so that they've stated a desire to go for dispute resolution. On another issue, did you notice that a couple of users over the last few days have made some important changes re: MJ doctrine/organizations? Best, A Sniper (talk) 18:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Carlaude, the article has been balanced after years of work. MJs consider themselves Jewish. That they also share a lot in common with Christianity but not all things, causes many to dispute their claim that they are "Christian" though by definition, if belief in Yeshua as the Messiah makes someone "Christian" by that def alone, then of course MJ would fit that def. But the point that the definition of who is a Christian is bigger and inclusive of doctrines and theologies other than this simple definition, has many MJs wondering what connection, if any, they have to Christianity since many of them (including myself) reject many of those theologies and doctrines. inigmatus (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Setting aside the "Christian" issue for now, so why did you wait until now to talk to me?

Why to you think this introduction is "balanced"?--Carlaude (talk) 18:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It's balanced because the original issue was that someone was posting a disclaimer that Messianic Judaism is not Jewish, but Christian. It was reduced by the MJ camp to simply say "All other Jewish denominations do not consider MJ to be a form a Judaism, but to be a form of Christianity." The NPOV compromise was eventually "All Jewish denominations do not consider MJ to be a form of Judaism." This process helped clarify the second intro paragraph's intent as being clearly focused on the Jewishness (not the Christianess) of MJs. That "many Christian denoms view MJ as a form of Christianity" was inserted at the end since it was a neutral position on the Jewish status from a Christian perspective, since it can be read as either "Christian and therefore not Jewish" or just "Christian and still Jewish." Whereas "all Jewish denoms" saying that MJ is "Christian" is an emphatic POV implying that to be Christian is to not be Jewish, thus forcing the Christian statement at the end to be also read that way, and thus skewing the NPOV of the entire paragraph to a POV that if MJ is Christian, it's not Jewish. So that is the reason for the current phrasing as is. It's complicated, but it works to maintain NPOV to the satisfaction of all parties involved. If it isn't broke, please don't fix it. inigmatus (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again inigmatus, and thanks for the compliment. You'll note that users Yoshbrum and GracieRuth made the changes re: doctrine/organizations - quite specific. Their edits may need your perusal... Best, A Sniper (talk) 18:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll take some time to go through the article with a fine-toothed comb, and review some of their edits. inigmatus (talk) 19:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, My concern is not so much with the bit that says "Many Christians consider Messianic Judaism to be a form of Christianity."

It is that the one before implying that Messianic Judaism is not part of Judaism by saying that by saying "Jews of all denominations do not consider Messianic Judaism to be a form of Judaism."--Carlaude (talk) 20:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand that. I too disagree with the "all" part. Vehemently (because we consider ourselves a Jewish denomination!). But to not say "all" is also POV - and would be to force our POV as well. So we give and take. Trust me, I've already tackled the "all" phrasing and to be honest, there really isn't any other acceptable alternative, unless if one listed out every single Jewish denomination, which isn't practical. Even saying "all other" doesn't work. For us giving up "other," and letting them have "all," they are happy to stick with not mentioning that MJ is Christian according to their view. To fight the "all" is rather futile at this point. inigmatus (talk) 20:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

To make the point again-- "However, Rabbinical Jews of all denominations do not consider Messianic Judaism to be a form of Judaism." is totally NPOV. It implies neither that Messianic Judaism is nor is not part of Judaism -- but it is disliked by A Sniper, etc. only for its failure to imply that Messianic Judaism is not part of Judaism. --Carlaude (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

"Non-messianic Jews," or "Traditional Jews," or "Rabbinic Jews" (which I am one, and believe Yeshua is the divine Messiah), amazingly, is still POV to write such in contradistinction to Messianic Jews. It's the emphasis on equality with "Jews" that is in dispute by most other editors. Until even just one other Jewish denomination make allowance for the Jewishness of Messianic Jews, I too see no reason to change the wording away from "all Jewish denominations," provided that concessions in other areas of the document make it clear that MJ's and other groups consider them Jewish - and this is clearly already done with the intro and various sections. After years of working on the article, I have come to the conclusion (as I did when I first re-drafted the article), that the MJ article itself can not conceivably exist apart from an equitably balanced POV, with one side presenting its view, and the other side presenting theirs; as opposed to a truly NPOV presentation. It's just one of those unique articles in Misplaced Pages that require such give and take between sides to present a balanced article that would otherwise cause unbiased readers to conclude absolutely that MJ is Jewish, or conclude absolutely that they are not. WP is not a battleground, and the MJ article (and its related articles) are not exceptions to this WP policy. As long as we work with other editors, give them the benefit of the doubt that they want to actually improve the article's content (regardless of what their own biases are), we get much further (and less edit wars) than staking a personal claim to it (and other articles). inigmatus (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

a template on your user page

It has been decided the template {{Messianic Judaism-stub}} be replaced with {{MessianicJudaism-stub}}. The decision was made here. I have replaced the other uses. What did you want done with the usage on your user page?--Rockfang (talk) 20:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Money

You claimed to have reverted to the last version by me, while, in reality, you have reverted against consensus to a previous revision by you. Please don't do that again. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

3RR Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Messianic Judaism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.-LisaLiel (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Messianic Judaism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Although you have not yet exceeded three reverts today, you are clearly edit warring. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.-SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Um...

I'm not an admin. And I'm not trying to wikilawyer or to help Jayjg dogpile you. I just happened to agree with him. I made one revert. I know it's frustrating when people are disagreeing with you, but as I've found out myself, that isn't considered a valid reason to keep reverting. It may seem unfair, but when there are several editors who disagree with you, sometimes you have to just let their change stand until you can deal with it either on the talk page or through dispute resolution. I'm not trying to be a pain about it, honestly. But three undos in a row like that isn't okay. -LisaLiel (talk) 21:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 31 hours for edit warring on Messianic Judaism. It is essential that you are more careful to discuss controversial changes with the user in question, rather than simply revert them repeatedly: this applies even if you think or know you are correct. Edit warring helps nobody, and actually harms the page in question, and the encyclopedia. To contest this block please place {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Tiptoety 21:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Inigmawiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Gross abuse of admin power. I'm the only MJ representative of the article, and edits were made to an intro for a hotly contested article without discussion that are completely unwarranted and represent POV pushing at least, adding a disclaimer at worst, by the admin that posted it - to the point that his flagrant insertion in light of the article's dispute history could even constitute vandalism at this point, and this so well after multiple attempts to get him to talk about it first before making the addition, and the change was rightly reverted for this reason. I'm not about to play politics, nor engage in wikilawyering and if you, Tiptoety truly believe in the rule to ignore all rules in which an article could be helped by it, then please add your opinion to the dispute over the intro of the article rather than block me, the only known MJ voice in it that is calling for discussions first, rather than insertions.

Decline reason:

In an edit war both sides typically believe they are right and the other is wrong; this is why edit wars happen. For this reason, believing your version is correct does not excuse edit warring and blocks are usually used to prevent this manner of editing. Furthermore, since you were blocked by a completely uninvolved admin, the allegation of "Gross abuse of admin power" appears groundless. — CIreland (talk) 05:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Additional 3RR Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Messianic Judaism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.-LisaLiel (talk) 22:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

You are a pro at this. First tell me what edits you are referring to that is considered edit warring and I will gladly stop. Second, please don't take this personal but since when does talking ever occur to you as a viable option than just reverting edits and threatening 3RRs and bannings? inigmatus (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

48h (you have form) for, need I say it, Messianic Judaism William M. Connolley (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Preposterous. There was no edit warring. At all, and there was no 3RR or even non-technical edit warring - only additions made to the article that were UNRELATED to any dispute. The consensus on the disputed matter was achieved just as you started to block LisaLiel and myself. Please unblock. inigmatus (talk) 23:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have a problem with reality: of course there was edit warring, and you broke 3RR. As an aside, this comment is particularly hard to understand, given this edit. Or this one William M. Connolley (talk) 23:21, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, not to be technical or prove you wrong or anything, but I posted well after I posted which was the version what Lisa reverted and kept reverting from. If you notice the term "sect of Judaism" is not at all in there, and Lisa just kept reverting my article additions without reading them at all, perhaps thinking that my edits included the phrase. I of course contacted her and explained it did not have the phrase once I realized that is why she did reverted, and then I reverted it - but it took her a while to get the message and she reverted it again. What was I to do? I did everything possible except walk away and re-add my changes back in at a later date. Her 3RR crusade brought this unnecessarily to your attention. Please unblock us. The whole thing was a misunderstanding. inigmatus (talk) 23:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

The reality failures continue. You added sect of Judaism to the article well *before* claiming to LL to have done no such thing. Never mind; perhaps its just a language failure. Meanwhile, you ask What was I to do? to which the answer is easy: stop edit warring. You've reverted that article *at least* 4 times today, and maybe more. Don't William M. Connolley (talk) 23:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

William, I know you're a busy guy, but for a moment can you pause and examine your heavy hand here? There was no language failure, and I never claimed I did "no such thing" as to not add it before. I claimed (and rightly so) that the version I posted DIDN'T have the phrase at all, but Lisa didn't seem to get that message until two reverts later. I didn't revert the article four times over the same content, nor with the same people, nor with the same subject matter. Four separate reverts for 2 separate issues is hardly justifiable as defining an edit war, let alone for any ban, especially when at the end consensus was achieved and we're all happy now except to make that final consensus edit which you are currently preventing either party from making. I don't suppose admins have a rule to ignore all rules if it helps the community to build consensus, and to help articles be written better. If so, please consider unblocking both of us so we can continue improving the article in talk before editing. Next time I won't even bother reverting so may DIFFERENT topics on the same article, in a day, or is that permissible? At what point will it take? Please release your heavy hand this matter and improve community relations of opposing sides, and so help the article in the process. Thank you. inigmatus (talk) 23:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Inigmatus, a lot happened while I was away from the computer. In any case, please consider that it is not the edits you can force in which count, but the ones that will last a year without you. If you have to force an edit in there, it won't last. We all have favorite ideas, but it's the consensus of others that builds wikipedia. It's also the consensus of others that saves each of us from our own blind spots. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Inigmawiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First why do you keep removing this template? Second, please see my note above. I'll respect whatever decision you make, but please understand that I think you are being a bit heavy handed here when you don't need to be (and a bit unfair and insulting calling me not being realistic).

Decline reason:

Which of your notes above? Unblock requests themselves must briefly address the block at issue. Please see WP:GAB and try again. —  Sandstein  05:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Inigmawiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Brief: There was no technical nor non technical edit warring, just a misunderstanding that one editor thought was an edit war, but after review realized it wasn't. The issue was a misunderstanding with a revert-happy editor who incorrectly thought I was edit warring but instead I was adding unrelated irrelevant changes to the article since here , which had nothing to do with the dispute which themselves were being reverted since the other editor thought I was adding in a phrase "sect of Judaism" when in fact I was not at all. In short, the other editor didn't read my changes before reverting them several times after I added them in, to which I promptly reverted each of her revert (2 reverts)) and informed though other channels that her objections had already been met and to examine the result. Adding frustration to consensus, the admin blocked both of us right at the moment consensus was reached and was being drafted by either party. I was accused by that admin as being unrealistic, and though I have been here for years, I am getting tired of the whole wiki powertrip when it comes to getting quality work done on articles and am about ready to just throw in the towel. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Brief: There was no technical nor non technical edit warring, just a misunderstanding that one editor thought was an edit war, but after review realized it wasn't. The issue was a misunderstanding with a revert-happy editor who incorrectly thought I was edit warring but instead I was adding unrelated irrelevant changes to the article since here , which had nothing to do with the dispute which themselves were being reverted since the other editor thought I was adding in a phrase "sect of Judaism" when in fact I was not at all. In short, the other editor didn't read my changes before reverting them several times after I added them in, to which I promptly reverted each of her revert (2 reverts)) and informed though other channels that her objections had already been met and to examine the result. Adding frustration to consensus, the admin blocked both of us right at the moment consensus was reached and was being drafted by either party. I was accused by that admin as being unrealistic, and though I have been here for years, I am getting tired of the whole wiki powertrip when it comes to getting quality work done on articles and am about ready to just throw in the towel. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Brief: There was no technical nor non technical edit warring, just a misunderstanding that one editor thought was an edit war, but after review realized it wasn't. The issue was a misunderstanding with a revert-happy editor who incorrectly thought I was edit warring but instead I was adding unrelated irrelevant changes to the article since here , which had nothing to do with the dispute which themselves were being reverted since the other editor thought I was adding in a phrase "sect of Judaism" when in fact I was not at all. In short, the other editor didn't read my changes before reverting them several times after I added them in, to which I promptly reverted each of her revert (2 reverts)) and informed though other channels that her objections had already been met and to examine the result. Adding frustration to consensus, the admin blocked both of us right at the moment consensus was reached and was being drafted by either party. I was accused by that admin as being unrealistic, and though I have been here for years, I am getting tired of the whole wiki powertrip when it comes to getting quality work done on articles and am about ready to just throw in the towel. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• Requests for unblock