Messiah

[guno]

Jews and Christians use the word "messiah,' the meaning of the word is quite different in each faith. The Christian understanding is that their messiah, Jesus, died for the sins of the people. The messiah, according to this Christian definition, is supposed to be a human offering: a blood sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin. But we are taught in our Bible that no one can die for the sins of another. In Deuteronomy 24:16 it says this unequivocally:

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. [Deuteronomy 24:16]
(Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another,' and Essay #2, 'Jews Believe That a Blood Sacrifice Is Not Required for Forgiveness of Sins').

The Bible is clear, in verse after verse: no one can die for the sins of another. Regarding what the Bible says about human sacrifice, please see Essay #4, 'Gd hates human sacrifices.'

Jews do not believe that after forbidding human sacrifice, Gd had a change of heart and decided to require it; and we certainly do not believe that it was the sacrifice of Gd's own human 'son' that Gd wanted. After telling Israel to stay away from pagan practices and pagan beliefs, did Gd change Gd's mind and say, 'Okay, now go ahead and believe in a human sacrifice, just as these very pagans believe?' No -- as we saw in Malachi 3:6, Gd is constant and unchanging. (Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another').

Gd tells us that any human sacrifice is an abomination, something Gd hates, and so horrible that it would never even come into Gd's mind to demand it of us. Human sacrifice was practiced by the pagans -- those who worshipped and made offerings to one or more imaginary deities -- it was NOT to be practiced by believers in the One Gd.

It should be understood that the Christian definition of the term 'messiah' is pagan. How do Christians define the term messiah? They understand it exactly as the pagans understood their dying-saving man-gods and heroes. The ancient world is filled with examples. Mithra, Adonis, Dionysis, Attis, Ra, and many others were born in the Winter, died in the Spring, and came back to life. This should sound familiar to anyone conversant with Christian theology.

Alongside this, they believed that their followers would have immortal life, since the death of the hero-god acted as the sacrifice for their sins. This should also sound familiar. The pagan world was filled with gods who were the product of a human mother and a god for the father. Heracles had Zeus for a father, and a human mother named Alcmene. Dionysus’s human mother was Semele, and his father was Zeus; Dionysus was considered a savior god. The parallels to Christian theology are plain to see.

When the earliest Christians would come into the synagogues and missionize, they would get kicked out; they were not allowed to stay and preach. They were rejected because their message was pagan and was recognized as such by the Jews. Thus, they were removed and separated from the Jewish people. This shows the real reason why Judaism and Christianity parted ways, dating from the very beginnings of Christianity. It also shows that one cannot be a Jew and a Christian at the same time. (Please see Essay #9 'Jews' for Jesus, Messianic 'Jews', and 'Hebrew' Christians are not Jews').

What Jews Believe: Essay #3: Jesus Not the Messiah

 

[Two Thumbs]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

 

[SassyIrishLass]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

The sad thing is Guano doesn't even understand his lame copy and paste

 

[Tehon]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

another hate christian thread

But what you need is a catchy anti-? phrase so you can succinctly stifle any debate about your religion regardless of the merits.

Where did he go wrong?

 

[HaShev]

Damn I wanted them to answer the question, "what is Messiah" without any help. If they are gonna speak on the subject they sure as better know what the word means. And that piece leaves out other key differences between Jewish use and Christian reinvention into deification confused compilation of God and messenger into 1.
MESSIAH means anointed. Very Simple.
What anointed means will be described later.
Rabbis like the Kohanim are anointed, kings were anointed, evangelists on TV will anoint you for $23.95 and throw in a prayer rag to boot.
Persian king Cyrus was even anointed to let Jews 'return' (HaShev) to Israel and rebuilt the Mikdash.
*singing the Dr Pepper song*
"Wouldn't you like to be anointed to?"
Fact:all jews inspire to be Moshiach (anointed) "redeemers" (HaSheva)
for their people,
inspired by a genuine love for their people.
To be "THE Moshiach" is liken to saying the top (arch) anointed or arch messenger reflection (Malakh) or top mediator between God and Man or top priest aka head priest head of the hosts liken to the Popes role in the imposter temple.
The Pope is the top anointed of Baal(satan) worship. To not believe being Moshiach is possible is to say being Pope is impossible. To say you don't believe in a Moshiach is liken to saying you don't believe in a Pope existing.
The silliness stems from Christians confusing their deluded rendition of a deified messiah instead of a son of man.
Thus the Jesus myth messes up their ability to view the reality within their fantasy portrait and expectations.
BUT also exposes that even they donct believe their own nonsense.
Judaic expectations is that Moshiach is of the lineage of Aaron (a Kohanim) who were the priests. I showed the source before in the scrolls: lQS lX, ll which seems to be fragment omitted from 4QSe(4Q259)
but this is common sense the head priest comes out of the gathering of Kohanim which in slang were called clouds for their puffy white robes appeared like clouds when gathered.
Hence Daniel saying son of man comes out or with the clouds(gathered hosts) and Theslonians saying with the call of the arch (top) angel (priest) to come up to zion to the gathering of priests (clouds).
And that gathering of Kohanim is to the temple (MIKdash) in the arch priests name, to the city that carries his and his God's name. People don't put 2+2 together because that name is hidden in the original transliteration not the usage of the name we see today as Shalem. ;-)
describing what anointed means
Anointed is the same as my commentary on song of song Night Dew. It's like an awareness, a connectivity with nature that through retracted physical light (like at night) opens up that pineal gland (Hindus call third eye) giving you more intuitive inspired thought. An ability to see things others can't, a clarity, a vision, a connectivity to a source including that from the world to come through these messages. Basocally the top anointed are your top intuitive thinker, prophet, mediator between that Essence of Shalem and man to being you to focus on Shalem (becoming complete) reflecting that Essence and manifesting it=becoming whole. Hence called the Capstone= the completion. The US dollar put the incomplete pyramid capstone on it, not yet fixated and attached to represent the incomplete still forming colonies and nation.
The eye of the father in heaven (world to come) is the capstone as the watcher bringing you to completion. So even your money reveals Shalem(completion&evening star) the name of the Capstone.

 

[HaShev]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

another hate christian thread

But what you need is a catchy anti-? phrase so you can succinctly stifle any debate about your religion regardless of the merits.

Where did he go wrong?

He didn't do anything wrong.
Talk about Messiah and they call it hate, sort of exposes themselves as the hate mongers, hating any intellectual discource. Proving my point, the fallen one turned them to Wormwood.

 

[Tehon]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

another hate christian thread

But what you need is a catchy anti-? phrase so you can succinctly stifle any debate about your religion regardless of the merits.

Where did he go wrong?

He didn't do anything wrong.
Talk about Messiah and they call it hate, sort of exposes themselves as the hate mongers, hating any intellectual discource. Proving my point, the fallen one turned them to Wormwood.

I know, I see Jews as being no different in that respect.

 

[aris2chat]

Jews and Christians use the word "messiah,' the meaning of the word is quite different in each faith. The Christian understanding is that their messiah, Jesus, died for the sins of the people. The messiah, according to this Christian definition, is supposed to be a human offering: a blood sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin. But we are taught in our Bible that no one can die for the sins of another. In Deuteronomy 24:16 it says this unequivocally:

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. [Deuteronomy 24:16]
(Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another,' and Essay #2, 'Jews Believe That a Blood Sacrifice Is Not Required for Forgiveness of Sins').

The Bible is clear, in verse after verse: no one can die for the sins of another. Regarding what the Bible says about human sacrifice, please see Essay #4, 'Gd hates human sacrifices.'

Jews do not believe that after forbidding human sacrifice, Gd had a change of heart and decided to require it; and we certainly do not believe that it was the sacrifice of Gd's own human 'son' that Gd wanted. After telling Israel to stay away from pagan practices and pagan beliefs, did Gd change Gd's mind and say, 'Okay, now go ahead and believe in a human sacrifice, just as these very pagans believe?' No -- as we saw in Malachi 3:6, Gd is constant and unchanging. (Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another').

Gd tells us that any human sacrifice is an abomination, something Gd hates, and so horrible that it would never even come into Gd's mind to demand it of us. Human sacrifice was practiced by the pagans -- those who worshipped and made offerings to one or more imaginary deities -- it was NOT to be practiced by believers in the One Gd.

It should be understood that the Christian definition of the term 'messiah' is pagan. How do Christians define the term messiah? They understand it exactly as the pagans understood their dying-saving man-gods and heroes. The ancient world is filled with examples. Mithra, Adonis, Dionysis, Attis, Ra, and many others were born in the Winter, died in the Spring, and came back to life. This should sound familiar to anyone conversant with Christian theology.

Alongside this, they believed that their followers would have immortal life, since the death of the hero-god acted as the sacrifice for their sins. This should also sound familiar. The pagan world was filled with gods who were the product of a human mother and a god for the father. Heracles had Zeus for a father, and a human mother named Alcmene. Dionysus’s human mother was Semele, and his father was Zeus; Dionysus was considered a savior god. The parallels to Christian theology are plain to see.

When the earliest Christians would come into the synagogues and missionize, they would get kicked out; they were not allowed to stay and preach. They were rejected because their message was pagan and was recognized as such by the Jews. Thus, they were removed and separated from the Jewish people. This shows the real reason why Judaism and Christianity parted ways, dating from the very beginnings of Christianity. It also shows that one cannot be a Jew and a Christian at the same time. (Please see Essay #9 'Jews' for Jesus, Messianic 'Jews', and 'Hebrew' Christians are not Jews').

What Jews Believe: Essay #3: Jesus Not the Messiah

Rabbi Kaduri before his death said different

 

[shimon]

Not true aris2chat that was discreded....it is unbecoming of you to grasp for straws like that...

 

[aris2chat]

Jews and Christians use the word "messiah,' the meaning of the word is quite different in each faith. The Christian understanding is that their messiah, Jesus, died for the sins of the people. The messiah, according to this Christian definition, is supposed to be a human offering: a blood sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin. But we are taught in our Bible that no one can die for the sins of another. In Deuteronomy 24:16 it says this unequivocally:

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. [Deuteronomy 24:16]
(Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another,' and Essay #2, 'Jews Believe That a Blood Sacrifice Is Not Required for Forgiveness of Sins').

The Bible is clear, in verse after verse: no one can die for the sins of another. Regarding what the Bible says about human sacrifice, please see Essay #4, 'Gd hates human sacrifices.'

Jews do not believe that after forbidding human sacrifice, Gd had a change of heart and decided to require it; and we certainly do not believe that it was the sacrifice of Gd's own human 'son' that Gd wanted. After telling Israel to stay away from pagan practices and pagan beliefs, did Gd change Gd's mind and say, 'Okay, now go ahead and believe in a human sacrifice, just as these very pagans believe?' No -- as we saw in Malachi 3:6, Gd is constant and unchanging. (Please see Essay #1, 'Jews Believe That No One Can Die for the Sins of Another').

Gd tells us that any human sacrifice is an abomination, something Gd hates, and so horrible that it would never even come into Gd's mind to demand it of us. Human sacrifice was practiced by the pagans -- those who worshipped and made offerings to one or more imaginary deities -- it was NOT to be practiced by believers in the One Gd.

It should be understood that the Christian definition of the term 'messiah' is pagan. How do Christians define the term messiah? They understand it exactly as the pagans understood their dying-saving man-gods and heroes. The ancient world is filled with examples. Mithra, Adonis, Dionysis, Attis, Ra, and many others were born in the Winter, died in the Spring, and came back to life. This should sound familiar to anyone conversant with Christian theology.

Alongside this, they believed that their followers would have immortal life, since the death of the hero-god acted as the sacrifice for their sins. This should also sound familiar. The pagan world was filled with gods who were the product of a human mother and a god for the father. Heracles had Zeus for a father, and a human mother named Alcmene. Dionysus’s human mother was Semele, and his father was Zeus; Dionysus was considered a savior god. The parallels to Christian theology are plain to see.

When the earliest Christians would come into the synagogues and missionize, they would get kicked out; they were not allowed to stay and preach. They were rejected because their message was pagan and was recognized as such by the Jews. Thus, they were removed and separated from the Jewish people. This shows the real reason why Judaism and Christianity parted ways, dating from the very beginnings of Christianity. It also shows that one cannot be a Jew and a Christian at the same time. (Please see Essay #9 'Jews' for Jesus, Messianic 'Jews', and 'Hebrew' Christians are not Jews').

What Jews Believe: Essay #3: Jesus Not the Messiah

Rabbi Kaduri before his death said different

After ten years a rabbi, Singer, from a differing group claim the note is a forgery? Rabbi has been dead for 7 yrs. Is that the only rabbi to debunk the note?

 

[HaShev]

Aris2chat it doesn't matter because 1 Rabbi trumps all Rabbis-Dan 10:21
& by your standard if a Rabbi says Jesus was Lucifer, then your standard and use of argument means Jesus was Lucifer.
Citing a single Rabbi as a source is called an ad homminem tactic. Not gonna fly here.

 

[aris2chat]

Aris2chat it doesn't matter because 1 Rabbi trumps all Rabbis-Dan 10:21
& by your standard if a Rabbi says Jesus was Lucifer, then your standard and use of argument means Jesus was Lucifer.
Citing a single Rabbi as a source is called an ad homminem tactic. Not gonna fly here.

Singer is the founder of Outreach Judaism, in Indonesia. Till today I have not heard about it or him. Rabbi Kaduri was one the best know and globally respected.

I would tend to believe Kaduri over Singer, if I had to judge. A bit more credibility.

 

[HaShev]

Then Jesus was Lucifer. Thank you.
Because you consider Jesus over all The Rabbis and Jesus said he was Baal's son and nemesis of God in Rev 22;16.
Nice Argument!

 

[aris2chat]

Then Jesus was Lucifer. Thank you.
Because you consider Jesus over all The Rabbis and Jesus said he was Baal's son and nemesis of God in Rev 22;16.
Nice Argument!

All the rabbis? I know I respected Kaduri. I don't consider a new fangled judaism as having much authority in jewish community as a whole.
As far as I know only Singer denounced Kaduri's note.


Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

Been a long time since I picked up a bible for anything other than reference in discussions on forums like this. Quran is also reference as are many religious text.

I rare consider anything after the gospels, and revelations has no relevance at all to the here and now, or future, only the past to some in Turkey.

I don't consider Jesus as anything but a teacher and if we are all children of 'god', then he is the son of god as are all people.

I have an eclectic view that for some might be consider rather agnostic, but I follow no organized faith. I prefer logic and science to a old man up in the clouds playing with mankind like chess pieces.

Don't presume to know what I believe or consider at any moment. My interest is as a historian and anthropologist, not as a theologian.

I respect a lot of religious people, past and present, but I don't believe in everything they teach or say, or the faiths they represent.

Don't put words in my mouth or try to stick me in a cubbyhole or label me. You will be wrong.

 

[HaShev]

Yes, sorry I assumed because of the position in the discussion, however that doesn't change the facts Jesus is claiming to be Lucifer. The verse also shows he can't be God since being in the lineage of David is an admission God is not his father, furthermore it shows the NT lies tring to create his lineage. They place him through all the Harlots of the Bible trying to falsely place him in text and in doing so place him through a non Jewish lineage.
Matthew mentions four sinful harlot women of the bible conveniently and coincidentally in the Joseph genealogy:
1) (Genesis 38:12-19) Tamar who was the one who disguised herself as a harlot to seduce her father-in-law Judah.
2) (Joshua 2:1) Rahab who was a harlot living in the city of Jericho. And note wasn’t even of Jewish lineage, she was a Canaanite. The creators of the legend/image icon in trying to create his lineage and plagiarizing the OT goofed this one big time.
3) (Ruth 3:1-14) Ruth who was the one through her mother-in-law Naomi's request, came secretly to where Boaz was sleeping and spent the night with him. Later Ruth and Boaz were married.
4) (2 Samuel 11:2-5) Bathsheba was the controversial one who became pregnant by King David while she was still married to Uriah.

 

[aris2chat]

Yes, sorry I assumed because of the position in the discussion, however that doesn't change the facts Jesus is claiming to be Lucifer. The verse also shows he can't be God since being in the lineage of David is an admission God is not his father, furthermore it shows the NT lies tring to create his lineage. They place him through all the Harlots of the Bible trying to falsely place him in text and in doing so place him through a non Jewish lineage.
Matthew mentions four sinful harlot women of the bible conveniently and coincidentally in the Joseph genealogy:
1) (Genesis 38:12-19) Tamar who was the one who disguised herself as a harlot to seduce her father-in-law Judah.
2) (Joshua 2:1) Rahab who was a harlot living in the city of Jericho. And note wasn’t even of Jewish lineage, she was a Canaanite. The creators of the legend/image icon in trying to create his lineage and plagiarizing the OT goofed this one big time.
3) (Ruth 3:1-14) Ruth who was the one through her mother-in-law Naomi's request, came secretly to where Boaz was sleeping and spent the night with him. Later Ruth and Boaz were married.
4) (2 Samuel 11:2-5) Bathsheba was the controversial one who became pregnant by King David while she was still married to Uriah.

I understand from a different perspective and don't and imposing your own bias on the text.

Righteous people can be welcomed into judaism. There are circumstances where it does not have to be by birth alone. People can convert and repent. People can learn and change their lives to follow "god". At least that is supposed to be the lessons.
The bible or any text should not be read and followed so literally but rather the spirit or intent. We evolve and adapt, life is not stagnant. What was is far from how life is today. A strict reading does not allow for growth and change. It is stuck in the past. It does not allow for progress.

the stories show the evolution of the faith and the people. there is no perfection and people should not be stuck with absolutes but deal with each circumstance separately with understanding not judgement without exceptions.

Like fairy tales, there are morals to learn. Life, is not black and white but billions of shades and hues. Each circumstance stands on its own merits.

I might understand the text on a psychological and anthropological point without caring about the religious aspects. You are putting your own interpretation without real understanding. You are judging without consideration of circumstances or intent. They are stories about people, life and humanity. Not exclusion or hate.

From a religious point of view, all people are god's people. They are judged by their heart, not by how they pray or where they came from.

This is why I reject organized religion. The text are guides, tool to teach, not shackles. People think and feel, they are not slaves or programmed. I don't care for pharisees of any type. I don't like extreme conservatives either. I might agree with some aspects to a point on an individual issue, and disagree on others. I don't like limiting or being part of any single party or group. I don't want to be told, I prefer to learn and evaluate the facts on my own, case by case.

Even what was in the time of noah or abraham changed thought the bible as circumstances and people evolved. Life during moses was not the same as life during david. The bible evolved, but your reading of it doesn't consider that. We don't live in 2000 bce. 1000 bce, 100 bce or even 1 ce.

 

[Two Thumbs]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

another hate christian thread

But what you need is a catchy anti-? phrase so you can succinctly stifle any debate about your religion regardless of the merits.

Where did he go wrong?

go fuck yourself

oh that wasn't christian of me

we go fuck yourself with a splintery cross

oh, and I'm not a christian, guano is just a fucking pussy, like you, that pretends christians are a great horror to the world.

you're a fucking deluded pussy

 

[Tehon]

another hate christian thread by guano

if bat guno had any balls, even for a leftist, he talk some shit about muslims and buddist.

but alas, even leftist males consider him a wimp

another hate christian thread

But what you need is a catchy anti-? phrase so you can succinctly stifle any debate about your religion regardless of the merits.

Where did he go wrong?

go fuck yourself

oh that wasn't christian of me

we go fuck yourself with a splintery cross

oh, and I'm not a christian, guano is just a fucking pussy, like you, that pretends christians are a great horror to the world.

you're a fucking deluded pussy

What, you're not christian? You are just fixated on guno, a jilted lover perhaps?

 

[HaShev]

Yes, sorry I assumed because of the position in the discussion, however that doesn't change the facts Jesus is claiming to be Lucifer. The verse also shows he can't be God since being in the lineage of David is an admission God is not his father, furthermore it shows the NT lies tring to create his lineage. They place him through all the Harlots of the Bible trying to falsely place him in text and in doing so place him through a non Jewish lineage.
Matthew mentions four sinful harlot women of the bible conveniently and coincidentally in the Joseph genealogy:
1) (Genesis 38:12-19) Tamar who was the one who disguised herself as a harlot to seduce her father-in-law Judah.
2) (Joshua 2:1) Rahab who was a harlot living in the city of Jericho. And note wasn’t even of Jewish lineage, she was a Canaanite. The creators of the legend/image icon in trying to create his lineage and plagiarizing the OT goofed this one big time.
3) (Ruth 3:1-14) Ruth who was the one through her mother-in-law Naomi's request, came secretly to where Boaz was sleeping and spent the night with him. Later Ruth and Boaz were married.
4) (2 Samuel 11:2-5) Bathsheba was the controversial one who became pregnant by King David while she was still married to Uriah.

I understand from a different perspective and don't and imposing your own bias on the text.

Righteous people can be welcomed into judaism. There are circumstances where it does not have to be by birth alone. People can convert and repent. People can learn and change their lives to follow "god". At least that is supposed to be the lessons.
The bible or any text should not be read and followed so literally but rather the spirit or intent. We evolve and adapt, life is not stagnant. What was is far from how life is today. A strict reading does not allow for growth and change. It is stuck in the past. It does not allow for progress.

the stories show the evolution of the faith and the people. there is no perfection and people should not be stuck with absolutes but deal with each circumstance separately with understanding not judgement without exceptions.

Like fairy tales, there are morals to learn. Life, is not black and white but billions of shades and hues. Each circumstance stands on its own merits.

I might understand the text on a psychological and anthropological point without caring about the religious aspects. You are putting your own interpretation without real understanding. You are judging without consideration of circumstances or intent. They are stories about people, life and humanity. Not exclusion or hate.

From a religious point of view, all people are god's people. They are judged by their heart, not by how they pray or where they came from.

This is why I reject organized religion. The text are guides, tool to teach, not shackles. People think and feel, they are not slaves or programmed. I don't care for pharisees of any type. I don't like extreme conservatives either. I might agree with some aspects to a point on an individual issue, and disagree on others. I don't like limiting or being part of any single party or group. I don't want to be told, I prefer to learn and evaluate the facts on my own, case by case.

Even what was in the time of noah or abraham changed thought the bible as circumstances and people evolved. Life during moses was not the same as life during david. The bible evolved, but your reading of it doesn't consider that. We don't live in 2000 bce. 1000 bce, 100 bce or even 1 ce.

No, because I am saying basically the same thing you are...now you ended up assuming *L*
THE person who posted "Question" I answered to them what the Hebrew God is and what the Text were used for reflecting that Essence to progress. Basically the same thing you just posted, but I used sources as backing for those who disagree with us.

That being said, we can't progress if adults still believe in Santa Claus and rely on auto salvation instead of the progress it takes.

 

[hobelim]

That being said, we can't progress if adults still believe in Santa Claus and rely on auto salvation instead of the progress it takes.

Then you have as much work to do as anyone else. You should probably tend to that before you try to assume the role for which you are not suited for.

If before they can progress Christians need to understand that there is no such thing as a messiah who was 1/3 god made man then before you can progress you too have to learn to accept that the image of God that you worship is just as false and does not correspond to any real living being ever in existence because there never was a man named Moses who spoke for a God who gave detailed instructions about what people should or should not serve and eat for meals.