Jump to content

Like Some Comments


Asimov
 Share

Recommended Posts

This was mentioned on a forum in regards to this link:

 

http://www.jewsforjudaism.com/web/handbook/s_messiah.html

 

 

"I'm sure others can give a more detailed response but to me, if Jesus was not the Messiah then Judaism makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If the old testament mandates were not types and shadows then God seems overly concerned with trivial things like the way garments are sewn together or what animals can plow with a shared yoke. Given a spiritual meaning, like the apostles taught, these seemingly insignificant rules can now be applied. Left on their own, these rules seem rather silly.

 

Also, the gospels were circulated in a time and place where geneological records could be accessed by just about anyone. So if the gospel writers were fabricating that aspect of Jesus' life, they would've probably left that out. Just like mentioning the fact that Jesus was buried by Joseph, a member of the Sanhedrin. These kinds of details don't belong in fictional stories because they can be fact-checked rather easily by anyone within earshot. "Hey, those crazy radicals from the Way are claiming one of us buried their leader.... go check it out."

 

I don't have time but there is simply too much to say on this topic. I hope others will chip in here."

 

And:

 

"Dolphin,

 

 

I know what you mean by being in over your head. I have spent the better half of the last few years studying opposing views of Christianity and have encountered that same feeling at points. Whenever I have felt this way I prayed for the HS to give me wisdom and it has always led me to resolving an issue. If you are not strong in your faith this can be a dangerous endeavor. It has only led me to a stronger faith, not that faith is strengthened by knowledge, but because it has allowed me to realize man is confused and the only One I can truly trust is God and the scriptures.

 

Christianity is a powerful force, to me the divisions in the church and the constant bombardment by scholars and skeptics only speaks of its strength. It has faced constant and fierce opposition from the birth of Christ, to the temptation of Christ and has everyday up until this one we have opened our eyes to, and will awaken to until the end.

 

One thing you have to realize is, Jewish people have a vested interest in trying to discredit Christianity and they will try to use any wiggle room in their theology and translations to do so. What you must also realize is, Christianity was formed by Jewish people and my bet is they probably knew the scriptures much better than modern day Jews who use it to discredit Christ. Also, above all, we must trust the words of Jesus himself given to us by the Apostles.

 

To come to the conclusion this skeptic is right, or that Islam and Judaism have a higher teaching than the one we have received, is to hold what we know as sacred, as just another take on history, and ultimately the wrong one. When this line becomes blurry, we have trusted only the faulty logic of man and have rejected what we have been told are the words from God himself, and what we know are the words of God, we know by faith in the scriptures.

 

Be prepared to be blown back when opening doors of this nature, the enemy will throw everything he has at you.

 

Micah provided links to the J4J site which I have always enjoyed, they always provide great articles.

 

Stand firm.

"

 

I just read through a bit of what they are saying and thought you guys would like to offer some comments on it. I'm not in on the discussion at all but wanted to see what some of you people who are obsessed ;) with Jesus have to say about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just dropped e and have no idea. Time to party.

 

Before I do, might be worthwhile to say that biblical judaism indeed seems less spiritual than xtianity. God spake, people listened and were blesed, or didn't listen and were crushed. I don't know what other Hebrew texts such as the Torah say about spirituality. To me, the Beatitudes seem the core of christs true teachings.

that's all I have patience for now. yum yum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I know what you mean by being in over your head. I have spent the better half of the last few years studying opposing views of Christianity and have encountered that same feeling at points. Whenever I have felt this way I prayed for the HS to give me wisdom and it has always led me to resolving an issue. If you are not strong in your faith this can be a dangerous endeavor. It has only led me to a stronger..."

 

Asimov,

Why do you waste your time on such drivel? No Christian would type so much, yet reduce the Holy Spirit to being refered to as 'HS', let alone 'it'.

 

There is no Christianity without the Bible. There is no Trinity without the Bible. To refer to the Holy Spirit as 'it' is tantamount to calling God a liar. If there is no Holy Ghost, then there is no Son either. The whole thing falls apart. All Three must be One. None of Them are an 'it'. If one is He, then they all must be.

 

Obsessed enough?

 

 

:wicked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bump

 

thier culture still holds true to this day.

 

"The Messiah was never meant to be an object of worship. His primary mission and accomplishment is to bring world peace and to fill the world with the knowledge and awareness of one G-d."

 

throughout the OT, God continously restored their kindom and land, thier prosperity depended upon thier reliance on God. this was why they rejected Jesus in the first place. if you recall from the old testament, the babylons conquered judah around 600bc, but then were allowed to return to the "promise land" because of the persians conquest. then they were reconquered by alexander the great around 300 bc, whom had a purpose to found an empire united by language, custom, and civilization. which aided in christianity by making the greek language widespread. then around 190 bc they were conquered by the syrians and were treated harshly, in 142 bc they regained there independence during the maccabean revolts. only to be totally conquered again by the romans in 63 bc.

 

then enters Jesus, the jews wanted the holy land restored, but that was not his purpose. his purpose was to provide peace to the world through eternal salvation. His message was widely rejected, on numerous occasions he makes it clear that the costums had become to strict and nonessential. he proclaimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (luke 6) which qualified him to say what honored God and what did not.

 

and lastly. the transfiguration which is in three of the gospels links Jesus to Moses and Elijah. linking him to the Jewish heratige by representing the law (moses), the prophets (elijah) which demonstrates thier approval for Jesus and his new covenant, which was superior than the old covenant. (heb 8:6).

 

i hope this is what you were looking for, if i'm not mistaken, doesn't judiasm and islam beleive Jesus was a prophet, but not the Son of Man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Messiah was never meant to be an object of worship. His primary mission and accomplishment is to bring world peace and to fill the world with the knowledge and awareness of one G-d."

IMO, this is exactly what Jesus tried to do regardless if he was the one their prophecies suggest or not.

 

Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

 

This tells me that Jesus is not claiming their law by the use of the word 'your' or "humon" in Greek. I agree...Jesus never intended to be worshipped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I'm sure others can give a more detailed response but to me, if Jesus was not the Messiah then Judaism makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If the old testament mandates were not types and shadows then God seems overly concerned with trivial things like the way garments are sewn together or what animals can plow with a shared yoke. Given a spiritual meaning, like the apostles taught, these seemingly insignificant rules can now be applied. Left on their own, these rules seem rather silly.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but basically the claim is that Judaism only makes sense if the OT is interpreted allegorically and not literally? If that's the case why is OT read literal then by Christians, it shouldn't be, since literal would mean it doesn't make sense, or do I miss something here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but basically the claim is that Judaism only makes sense if the OT is interpreted allegorically and not literally? If that's the case why is OT read literal then by Christians, it shouldn't be, since literal would mean it doesn't make sense, or do I miss something here?

 

From what I understand, translating it as literal is mostly a peculiarity of the christians in America. Most of Europe translates it allegorically.

 

I could very well be wrong on that though.

 

'His message was widely rejected, on numerous occasions he makes it clear that the costums had become to strict and nonessential.

 

I watched an interesting show on the History channel I think about that a few months ago. Around the time Jesus was born, religious rites, customs, and cleansings had become like a mass societal case of obsessive/compulsive disorder. They discovered a really large number of bathing pits. Taking baths for some piddly spiritual infraction in order to get "clean" and buying lots of livestock to burn so you wouldn't get struck by lightening, was taking up much of everyone's day. So much so that taking baths five or more times a day wasn't unusual. It also made it very convenient for the poor to be excluded or banished from the temples so religion could become only a "rich mans" thing. Especially for the temple priests. Which is what they think led to the story of Jesus and the "money changers" in the temples upturning the tables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but basically the claim is that Judaism only makes sense if the OT is interpreted allegorically and not literally? If that's the case why is OT read literal then by Christians, it shouldn't be, since literal would mean it doesn't make sense, or do I miss something here?

 

From what I understand, translating it as literal is mostly a peculiarity of the christians in America. Most of Europe translates it allegorically.

 

I could very well be wrong on that though.

 

'His message was widely rejected, on numerous occasions he makes it clear that the costums had become to strict and nonessential.

 

I watched an interesting show on the History channel I think about that a few months ago. Around the time Jesus was born, religious rites, customs, and cleansings had become like a mass societal case of obsessive/compulsive disorder. They discovered a really large number of bathing pits. Taking baths for some piddly spiritual infraction in order to get "clean" and buying lots of livestock to burn so you wouldn't get struck by lightening, was taking up much of everyone's day. So much so that taking baths five or more times a day wasn't unusual. It also made it very convenient for the poor to be excluded or banished from the temples so religion could become only a "rich mans" thing. Especially for the temple priests. Which is what they think led to the story of Jesus and the "money changers" in the temples upturning the tables.

 

i have heard that too, but i feel sure it was a "rich man" who made that claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was mentioned on a forum in regards to this link:

 

Also, the gospels were circulated in a time and place where geneological records could be accessed by just about anyone. So if the gospel writers were fabricating that aspect of Jesus' life, they would've probably left that out. Just like mentioning the fact that Jesus was buried by Joseph, a member of the Sanhedrin. These kinds of details don't belong in fictional stories because they can be fact-checked rather easily by anyone within earshot. "Hey, those crazy radicals from the Way are claiming one of us buried their leader.... go check it out."

So, what? Did they have Gen-Web, or RootsWeb?

Every word of this presumes the writers to have been Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, and Jude. What if...as history appears to confirm...none of these (except, perhaps, someone whose name could have evolved into Mark, and one attribution to Paul) "witnesses" wrote any of the New Testament?

If you're the Emperor of Rome...and are instituting a new state religion...where you and your Church-minions have the authority to whack heads off, burn at the stake, and confiscate and burn any writings that would cast shadows on the integrity of your religion...and there actually was an office for The Bureau of Vital Statistics...where more of your minions were in control... Why would you give a second thought to contriving a story? Especially if, in your story, immediately after the birth of God the Son, you whisked him away to Egypt...until years later, when he (with his parents) return to another town...then have to journey to another town, for Joseph to register...?

Another thought to consider... When someone talks about how idiotic it would have been to fabricate any part of the story...it causes me to wonder...if they ever read the story...to see if "Matthew, Mark, Luke and John" each got it right. If they differ (such as - one saying "The next day" and another not showing that next day's events until many many many next days' events have transpired)...perhaps it was just a failing memory... Think so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hroughout the OT, God continously restored their kindom and land, thier prosperity depended upon thier reliance on God. this was why they rejected Jesus in the first place.

They rejected Jesus, because he did not have the genealogical credentials. Please read the site, before commenting

 

then enters Jesus, the jews wanted the holy land restored, but that was not his purpose. his purpose was to provide peace to the world through eternal salvation

Where is the purpose stated in the Old Testament

 

n numerous occasions he makes it clear that the costums had become to strict and nonessential

You mean that the pharisees should have not been following the Sabbath on saturday despite the fact that their God told them not to, or that they should have eaten pig, despite the fact that God declared that doing so is an abmonimation just like Homosexuality?

. he proclaimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (luke 6) which qualified him to say what honored God

Just Joseph Smith proclaimed that he got the book of Mormon from Angel Moroni, therefore that actually hapenned, right?

 

He can claim all he want, but he had prove it. Jesus was NOT the Jewish Messiah

 

hich demonstrates thier approval for Jesus and his new covenant, which was superior than the old covenant. (heb 8:6).

 

Psalm 119, says the law is perfect and eternal?So what can be more superior than "perfect"

 

Read Jer 31, where does it mention anything about the law being superceded by a human sacrfice?

 

BTW Heb 8 misquotes Jer 31 and quotes it out of it context. If Jer 31 of New Convenant has come to pass, then there is no need of Jesus, because it says right that that "each man would die for his sins"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest VorJack

 

"I'm sure others can give a more detailed response but to me, if Jesus was not the Messiah then Judaism makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If the old testament mandates were not types and shadows then God seems overly concerned with trivial things like the way garments are sewn together or what animals can plow with a shared yoke. Given a spiritual meaning, like the apostles taught, these seemingly insignificant rules can now be applied. Left on their own, these rules seem rather silly.

 

Yes, ancient Judaism seems 'silly' today, but at the time of it's writing, the Hebrew Testament was on the cutting edge of theological thought. Remember that religion wasn't just look different back then, it had a very different purpose. All these rules and laws were not to make the people more moral. They were ritual laws, laws intended to keep YHWH happy. So one did not mix things in one catagory with things of antoher catagory, be they crops, fabrics or types of food. This had not moral content at all, as we understand it. They were because YHWH had created the world in types and catagories, and thes had to be kept seperate and distinct to keep YHWH happy.

 

By 0 AD, these ideas were starting to get tired. Thus Paul dropped these laws when dealing with gentile converts. Prompted by the destruction of the Temple, Jews shifted away from these ritual requirments and produced Rabbinical Judaism, the Mishnah and the Talmud. Modern Judaism, in all of its forms, is very diffrent from the Judaism of ancient history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VorJack, I haven't said it before, so I do it now, Welcome to our site. :wave:

 

Just a little friendly pointer, 0 AD doesn't exist. :)

From what I understand you have 1 BC or BCE, and then 1 AD or CE. But 0 BC/AD doesn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.