IsraeLight forum post 1148
This post has been deleted from James Trimm's forum
From: James Trimm <jstrimm@h...>
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2000 10:15am
Subject: Re: Subject: Beit Netzarim Yeshiva Fall Semester
Since this matter of slander is moving into a legal phase I am not going to
say much beyond what I write here:
> What a pleasure it is to have you join our forum.
>In light of the above excerpt from your post,
>I am compelled to ask you to respond to the recent evidence
>of your participation in Book of Mormon forums.
> The information we all received and viewed shows conclusively
> that you have participated in such forums,
>promoting the Jewishness of the Book of Mormon,
>albeit under a pseudonym.
The false claim made is that every post made on the internet regardless of
can be conclusively traced by way of the DNS numbers. This is not true.
DNS numbers are a set of four numbers of up to three digets each. Each set
of 3 digits is refered to as an
"octet". It carries a value of 0 through 255 - giving a total of 256
possibilities or 8 bits of data. There are currently 4 octets in an IP
address. The first two octets being the same is not suprising, it only
shows that two users are using the same ISP. Even if a third octet
matches, then this would only show that they were both dialing into the
(Point of Presence). With most services the DNS numbers are recirculated.
A given user is assigned a new set of DNS numbers every time they dial up.
After they hang up someone else is assigned those same numbers. SO even a
match of four octets does not prove that two emails came from the same
person. In this case the claim is being made that by matching only TWO
octets one can trace an email to a single user. In reality matching two
only narrows a user down to within 65,000 people that are on the net at any
but since most ISP's recirculate these DNS numbers that number can actually
range MUCH higher.
I am not the poster of every message that comes from my ISP.
>Because the information was presented to the Messianic body
>as a last resort, we have all, unfortunately,
>been recruited as jurors in regard to this matter.
>I am not interested in defaming you, nor does anyone here
> wish to jump to any conclusions about the matter.
>However, your loud silence implies that you are without a defense.
Actually it was presented at a time when I was not a member here, as an act
of slander and Lashon Hara.
How can you say "nor does anyone here wish to jump to any conclusions
about the matter" when you just said that the evidence was "shown
and you are about to go on to say that I have a burden to "prove" my
You have not been "recruited as jurors" you have been the victom of slandar
and Lashon Hara.
In fact the issue was delt with by the International Nazarene Beit Din and
dismissed after it was investigated.
> The evidence, while rudimentary in it's presentation,
>nevertheless implies that you are a double minded man in our midst.
> In any trial a defendant is afforded the right to defend himself.
>If he wishes to prove his innocence he presents whatever evidence
> he has to exonerate himself.
I had no idea that I had any obligation to PROVE my INNOCENCE to you.
I had no idea that I was on trial.
> I implore you, Mr. Trimm, will you please tell us if you have a defense?
> You really need to address the most seriously damning evidence;
> the posts you made under pseudonyms, which unequivocally promote
> the Book Of Mormon;
>your initial denial and subsequent refutation
>that you participated in such forums;
I have NEVER denied participating in such forums.
Regarding the Book of Mormon, I do NOT hold a belief that the Book of
Mormon is true. As an accademic with an interest in comparitive theology I
have had many objective and or interpretive discusions about the Quran and
the Book of Mormon on various Muslim and Mormon lists over the years. This
often involved discussions about what the Quran or the Book of Mormon
teaches or what a certain passage means. I have also used the Quran and
the Book of Mormon as tools to reach Muslims and Mormons and other Book of
Mormon believers with Torah and Messiah using a "for arguments sake" type
approach. I am pleased to say that through this approach I have helped
bring a number of Mormons and other Book of Mormon believers to Torah and
Messiah. I can however see how a person might wrongly understand some of
that material as implying that I believe the Book of Mormon is true or that
I believe the Quran is true. Let me make this clear, while I CAN see how
someone might have misunderstood, I do NOT hold a belief that the Book of
Mormon is true. And I do NOT hold a belief that the Quran is true.
I have stated repeatedly that I do not advocate the Book of Mormon.
I have serious problems with a number of things that are IN the Book of Mormon:
* Certain passages at least appear to be anti-nomian:
"...you must keep the performances
and ordinances of God until the law shall be fulfilled
which was given to Moses."
- 2Nephi 25:30 (supposedly between 559 & 545 BC)
(see also Alma 30:3)
"...but I say to you, that the time shall come
when it shall no more be expedient
to keep the law of Moses."
- Mosiah 13:27 (sopposedly in 148 BC)
"...the law in me is fulfilled,
for I have come to fulfil the law;
therefore it has an end."
- 3Nephi 15:5 (supposedly quoying "Jesus")
[right after the coming of "Christ"]
"And they did not walk anymore after the performances
and ordinances of the law of Moses..."
- 4Nephi 1:12
"...the law of circumcision is done away in me."
- Moroni 8:8 (supposedly quoting "Jesus")
* The book seems to depict traditional Christian practices
such as Communion [not Passover?] (3Nephi 20:1-9)
* The Book of Mormon calls the followers of the religion
it depicts "Christians" supposedly as early as 73 BC
* The BoM people supposedly came to the New World
and kept the law of Moses (2Ne. 25:24; Jarom 1:5; Mosiah 2:3;
Alma 30:3; 34:14) they supposedly built a Temple "after
the manner of Solomon" (2Ne. 5:16) and made offerings
(1Ne. 5:9; 7:22; Mosiah 2:3) Now how could a group of all
Josephites (1Ne. 15:12; 19:24; 2Ne. 3:2-5; Jacob 2:5 & Alma 26:36)
do that without any Levites? Maybe thay just did it theselves
(1Nephi 2:7) and appointed non-Levites as priests (2Ne. 5:26;
Jacob 1:18) but then who would say that a group of Josephites
who built their own Temple, performed their own offerrings
and appointed their own non-Levitical priests...
"...did observe to keep the judgements,
and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord
IN ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MOSES"
Even IF the Lord had told them to do such things would
it not be WAY beyond the realm of truth to say that
they were done "according to the law of Moses"?
* Also why would a group which kept the law of Moses
in all things build various Temples in various locations:
* "The Land of Nephi" (2Ne. 5:8, 16)
* "The Land of Zarahemla (Mosiah 1:18)
* "the Land Bountiful" (3Nephi 11:1)
And much of this time overlaps The Second Temple Era.
Compare Deut 12:21; 16:16 which teaches only one Temple
in one chosen place. How does that work?
* While the book is longer than the NT and is largely narative
it never mentions a Jewish/Biblical holiday by name. It also
never mentions a newmoon convocation, Nazarite vow etc.
This is suspicious.
* Although its people supposedly kept the Law of Moses until
the time of "Christ" the book places the death of "Christ"
on the "the first month, on the fourth day" (3Ne. 8:5)
though this day would have been Passover, the 14th day
of the month on the Biblical/Jewish calendar. In fact
Passover roughly coresponds with the full moon and would
be within a day of the 15th (on a newmoon based calendar)
or a day of the 1st (on any Fullmoon based calendar) So not only
is this supposed "BoM calendar" not the Biblical newmoon calendar
it could not even be a lunar calendar at all.
>the questionable origins of your PhD.;
There is nothing questionable about it.
It is NOT a PhD it is an STD (SACRAE THEOLOGAE DOCTOR)
It has recently been suggested that my doctorate comes from a diploma mill.
This is just plain not true.
My doctorate is from St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary
St. John Chrysostom
An Ecumenical Seminary
the Catholic Apostolic Church
in North America
Which is the authentic representative
of The "Igreja Catolica Apostolica Brasileira"
(the Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil)
The Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil has over 5 million members
worldwide. It is the largest Catholic communion, not under Papal Jurisdiction.
It split off from the Roman Catholic Church on July 6th 1945.
This split was due to objection to the relationship
between the Nazis and the Roman Church especially regarding
the helping of Nazis to escape Germany to hide in South America.
St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary was established in 1973
by the canons (authorities) of the Catholic Apostolic Church
in North America. The institution's original name was "Saint Charles
College" but was changed in 1983 to "St. John Chrysostom
Like many small religious schools and seminaries St. John Chrysostom
Theological Seminary is non-accredited and operates under the Ecclesiastical
approbation of the canons and constitutions of the Church. This is mostly
due to the cost of becoming accredited.
However St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary is NOT a "diploma mill".
Its degree programs are among the most demanding I have ever seen.
I was awarded the degee doctor by this seminary on June 7th 1995.
Moreover my degree was earned. It was NOT awarded as an honorary degree.
I have a certified transcript with real credit hours. The school also requires
three letters of recomendation from persons who have doctorates in the field
of religion in order to be awarded the degree of doctor. My degree required
real credit hours, as well as three such recomendations. It was NOT the
of a diploma mill.
> and your complete silence in the matter.
I stated at the onset that I would not get into a Lashon Hara contest with
Why do you seek to drag me into one?
Study Torah with SANJ Mitvah Club
Message 1148 of 1355