A question to all Christians

[Foxfyre]

G-D stated in numerous passages explicitly that there is only him. That no jew should worship anyone other than him. That no jew should place his trust in any one but him.

• Jesus challenged that. How?
  
• By claiming a jew needed jesus to speak to G-D. That's utterly rediculous
  
• By saying that he fulfilled the law. Once again utterly rediculous. G-D said not to diminish or take away from the law. Once again, he is challenging G-D.
  
• By claiming he was a divine entity, when G-D said that he only divine is him.

You are right, but keep missing or ignoring the point though. Yashua is G-d. Therefore he is not violating any of the Torah teachings.

Correct. As we can read that G-d made a covenant with Adam and then later with Abraham and then later still with David, one can only conclude that G-D moves through his own creation and relates to the people of G-D as He chooses. And in the Christian belief, G-D became incarnate in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah and Christ as prophesied, he suffered and died taking the sins of the world upon himself, and he rose from the dead as proof of eternal life available to all.

For Christians, it all was just and is a continuation of the story.

 

[frazzledgear]

These are all christian perversions of the Torah. None of it can be backed up. Christians must use extreme creativity and perversion of jewish sacred texts to validate their beliefs.

Let's cut to the chase on this one since YOU claim Jews and Christians do not worship the same Deity. What you rely upon to prove your point are the errors you think exist in Christian belief which somehow nullifies any possibility they actually worship the same Deity you do.

If Christians have made a mistake about the qualities of Jesus -who urged and implored people to obey, worship and put their full faith in the Deity of His Jewish religion (because Jesus was a Jew and never renounced His religion and only preached about that same Deity He always believed in as a Jew) -then it cannot be a different Deity if Christians worship the same Deity Jesus as a Jew also worshiped.

What you are arguing about and truly wasting your time with when it comes to Christians -is whether Christians are right about the attributes they believe to be true about Jesus which Jews reject. A belief that the same Deity you believe in has attributes YOU reject does not mean Christians must actually believe in a different Deity. Jesus didn't claim to be the Son of a different Deity but of the SAME Deity all Jews worshiped. You reject what Jesus SAID about that -but without rejecting that same Deity. Jesus preached among Jews that their G-d they all believed in had attributes Jews were either ignorant of or ignored. Which, even if Jesus was wrong about those attributes, and even if all Christians believe these attributes exist in G-d, sure doesn't mean Christians must believe in a totally different Deity. THAT doesn't follow when the difference with Jews is about the ATTRIBUTES, not the Deity Himself who is always the one and only true G-d. They believe in this same Deity as practicing Christians -not practicing JEWS, each of whom believes the Deity does and does NOT have certain attributes. Mind you I'm not saying Christians did get that wrong, I am simply pointing out the "even if" here.

I am fully willing to leave it to G-d to pass judgment on both the Jew who knows exactly what is expected of him as a Jew yet deliberately chooses NOT to do it anyway -as well as accept His judgment about me as a Christian who believes this is what that same G-d expects from me as a Christian and imperfectly strives to fulfill that. The REAL questions then are:

1. Is G-d going to be so deeply offended that I believe He can have three distinct characteristics that man has given different names to even while acknowledging at the very same time that ALL are the very same Deity and there IS only one, the same G-d of Abraham Jews worship as well? And even though Jews cannot grasp this concept and insist it must mean we worship multiple gods when we don't, does it means I am damned because Jews don't get this?

2. Is G-d going to be so offended that a JEW told me that even though I was a gentile and not a Jew and not one of G-d's chosen people that I could still have a place in heaven and that my FAITH alone could and would assure my salvation - so offended a Jew told me that it damns me and He rejects my love, my respect, my fear and my worship because He actually doesn't care what is really in my heart after all? What is in my heart doesn't matter and the Jew who told me otherwise was actually lying and it ONLY matters whether I have a Jewish heritage regardless of what is in my heart? In other words, G-d prefers a non-observant Jew who has no respect for G-d and His laws at all - to a Christian with sincere love for G-d in his heart but doesn't practice as a Jew since he isn't a Jew? REALLY?

3. Is G-d going to be offended that I did not reject the Jew who gave me G-d's message of hope, redemption and salvation, told me to turn my life over to G-d and accept His will - and because I did not accept the message of redemption while rejecting the messenger -I am damned? You have to be kidding on this one -without that Jew, this is a message no gentile would have heard at all and ALL gentiles likely damned instead of just many of them.

4. Will G-d reject me and my worship because I don't pretend to be JEWISH and worship as one of G-d's chosen people are called to do to prove they are worthy of that name -even though I will never be counted among His chosen people? Must I as a gentile adopt and practice all the additional rules Jews have placed in their religion in order for G-d to accept my love and worship?

I am willing to place my FULL trust in G-d over these questions. ALL Christians are -the fact YOU aren't and insist on passing judgment on us now - is your own problem. But understand that places G-d under NO obligation to accept your judgment.

 

[CMike]

You are contradicting yourself, I thougth you said that jesus was G-d himself.

These are the intellectual consistencies problems that you face.

1) Jesus is G-D himself. This is rediculous. Jesus said G-D why have you forsaken me? He also said that you must go through him to get to G-D. He also said that he prayed to G-D. Jesus himself thereby acknowledged that he isn't G-D.

I also don't buy the breaking down G-D into different parts.

From Deutronomy and probably the most important prayer in Judaism.

Hear O Israel, The Lord Is our G-D, The Lord is One

G-D himself said he was one.

The Torah is the guidelines that G-D gave the jews to follow. It's goes into extreme detail, even giving the exact measurements and colors that the temple in jerusalem would be built.

If G-D would want the jews to follow such a radical departure from what what he told them to do, he would have said so. In fact, it he made it extremely clear not to follow anyone who tells a jew to worship in a different way.

2) Jesus is the son of G-D or some other divine power. That doesn't work either.

Every sabbos in synagogue a portion of the torah is read. The whole torah is completed in one year and we start over. Since I am a kohen I usually get the first reading of the Torah. The Torah is the highlight of the jewish prayer service. After reading from the books of moses we read a portion from prophets and scripture.

I thought of these discussions during the portions from prophets that we read today.

Isaiah 44

6. So said the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts, "I am first and I am last, and besides Me there is no God. ו.
7. And who will call [that he is] like Me and will tell it and arrange it for Me, since My placing the ancient people, and the signs and those that will come, let them tell for themselves. ז.
8. Fear not and be not dismayed; did I not let you hear it from then, and I told [it] and you are My witnesses; is there a God besides Me? And there is no rock I did not know. ח.
9. Those who form idols are all of them vanity, and their treasures are of no avail, and they are their witnesses; they neither see nor hear, nor do they know, so that they be ashamed. ט. 10. Who formed a god or molded an image, being of no avail? י.
11. Behold, all his colleagues shall be ashamed, and they are smiths-of man. Let all of them gather, let them stand, they shall fear, they shall be ashamed together


3) Jesus is the messiah. That's impossible too. Jesus didn't fulfill any of the messianic prophesies other than being from bethlehem and riding a donkey.

As much as I admire of dividing it into different comings. That is a christian creation to rationalize how you can call him the messiah and he not fulfill the prophesies.

No where in the Torah does it divide it up like that. And G-D said not to add or subtract from the Torah.

Also, no jewish messiah would ever claim to be divine. The greatest of all prophets was Moses, and in the entire ritual reading of Passover, Moses is mentioned only once and that of a humble servant. Why? To make it clear that it was G-D that did it, not Moses.

Look you seem like a decent sort.

The reason that I get irked is that the Torah is very sacred to jews. It's not just a history for the jews, it's the code to guide their lives. It's their constitution in a sort.

So it really is bothersome when people in foreign religions who really don't know much about the Torah, although they think they do, take our holy scripture, and distort it to validate their believes.

It would be similar to muslims using your NT to try and prove that Mohammed is really the 2nd coming of jesus. It may tick you off too.

Yeah...there is a legal right to do, however, I don't have to like it, and I don't have to sit back quietly, while my sacred text is treated with such disrespect IMO.

I do realize that your religion is based on my religion. And you consider the Torah part of your holy scripture. That is the problem. Would you agree with that?

 

[Foxfyre]

You are contradicting yourself, I thougth you said that jesus was G-d himself.

These are the intellectual consistencies problems that you face.

1) Jesus is G-D himself. This is rediculous. Jesus said G-D why have you forsaken me? He also said that you must go through him to get to G-D. He also said that he prayed to G-D. Jesus himself thereby acknowledged that he isn't G-D.

I also don't buy the breaking down G-D into different parts.

From Deutronomy and probably the most important prayer in Judaism.

Hear O Israel, The Lord Is our G-D, The Lord is One

G-D himself said he was one.

The Torah is the guidelines that G-D gave the jews to follow. It's goes into extreme detail, even giving the exact measurements and colors that the temple in jerusalem would be built.

If G-D would want the jews to follow such a radical departure from what what he told them to do, he would have said so. In fact, it he made it extremely clear not to follow anyone who tells a jew to worship in a different way.

2) Jesus is the son of G-D or some other divine power. That doesn't work either.

Every sabbos in synagogue a portion of the torah is read. The whole torah is completed in one year and we start over. Since I am a kohen I usually get the first reading of the Torah. The Torah is the highlight of the jewish prayer service. After reading from the books of moses we read a portion from prophets and scripture.

I thought of these discussions during the portions from prophets that we read today.

Isaiah 44

6. So said the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts, "I am first and I am last, and besides Me there is no God. ו.
7. And who will call [that he is] like Me and will tell it and arrange it for Me, since My placing the ancient people, and the signs and those that will come, let them tell for themselves. ז.
8. Fear not and be not dismayed; did I not let you hear it from then, and I told [it] and you are My witnesses; is there a God besides Me? And there is no rock I did not know. ח.
9. Those who form idols are all of them vanity, and their treasures are of no avail, and they are their witnesses; they neither see nor hear, nor do they know, so that they be ashamed. ט. 10. Who formed a god or molded an image, being of no avail? י.
11. Behold, all his colleagues shall be ashamed, and they are smiths-of man. Let all of them gather, let them stand, they shall fear, they shall be ashamed together


3) Jesus is the messiah. That's impossible too. Jesus didn't fulfill any of the messianic prophesies other than being from bethlehem and riding a donkey.

As much as I admire of dividing it into different comings. That is a christian creation to rationalize how you can call him the messiah and he not fulfill the prophesies.

No where in the Torah does it divide it up like that. And G-D said not to add or subtract from the Torah.

Also, no jewish messiah would ever claim to be divine. The greatest of all prophets was Moses, and in the entire ritual reading of Passover, Moses is mentioned only once and that of a humble servant. Why? To make it clear that it was G-D that did it, not Moses.

Look you seem like a decent sort.

The reason that I get irked is that the Torah is very sacred to jews. It's not just a history for the jews, it's the code to guide their lives. It's their constitution in a sort.

So it really is bothersome when people in foreign religions who really don't know much about the Torah, although they think they do, take our holy scripture, and distort it to validate their believes.

It would be similar to muslims using your NT to try and prove that Mohammed is really the 2nd coming of jesus. It may tick you off too.

Yeah...there is a legal right to do, however, I don't have to like it, and I don't have to sit back quietly, while my sacred text is treated with such disrespect IMO.

I do realize that your religion is based on my religion. And you consider the Torah part of your holy scripture. That is the problem. Would you agree with that?

Cmike, I don't argue the Jewish religion with Jewish scholars because, as a Christian, it would be highly arrogant and presumptious of me to do so.

But the fact that Christians embrace the Old Testament, including the Torah, along with the New Testament does not take anything away from the Jews. For most of us it signals our sense of relationship to or even a kinship with the Jews. It was after all the Hebrews/Israelites/ancient Jews who gave us our sense of holiness, religious culture, understanding of ritual, sacrifice, creation, righteousness, judgment, and redemption.

There was a story of a woman who took pity on the birds following a deep snowstorm. She put out food for them on a tray, but they were afraid to approach this srange apparatus. She thought if she could just become one of them to show them what they could not understand. . . .and she realized she was thinking a metaphor that beautifully illustrates why G-d would become incarnate.

So it was that Christians believe G-d became incarnate in the person of Jesus. Jesus was fully human, became weary, tired, frustrated, hungry, thirsty, was tempted as any other human. And Jesus, even though he was G-d, being human needed G-d as much as any human needs G-d. This is not an easy thing to understand. Even Jesus's own disciples who were with him constantly for years did not understand. G-d did not stop being G-d even though he became human.

The Apostle Paul, a staunch and devoutly religious Pharasaic Jew who came to know Jesus and thus became a Christian as well as a Jew explained it that using only human reason and logic, it was impossible to understand. But by the power of the Holy Spirit that Jesus sent in His stead, it is possible.

G-d will not be defined, explained, known, or compartmentalized. He is after all G-d. One G-d but different manifestations.

 

[CMike]

I am a little behind I will get to the in depth points a little later.

Please understand that it's not my intention to put down anyone else's religion.

My only point is the Torah, and the changing of the meaning to make it validate christian beliefs.

 

[Foxfyre]

I am a little behind I will get to the in depth points a little later.

Please understand that it's not my intention to put down anyone else's religion.

My only point is the Torah, and the changing of the meaning to make it validate christian beliefs.

That's cool. You may be excused to attend to tasks that might be more important than expounding on USMB.

Seriously though, it isn't that Christians change the meaning of the Torah to validate Christian beliefs. It is because Christians believe that G-D himself, in the person of Jesus and subsequently the Holy Spirit, moved us on down the road to new understandings that may or may not be in keeping with the strict interpretation of the Torah as you understand it. But perhaps we can discuss it later.

The New Mexico Lobos are getting beat up by the Washington Huskies right now, and I must go attend to that.

 

[CMike]

You are contradicting yourself, I thougth you said that jesus was G-d himself.

These are the intellectual consistencies problems that you face.

1) Jesus is G-D himself. This is rediculous. Jesus said G-D why have you forsaken me? He also said that you must go through him to get to G-D. He also said that he prayed to G-D. Jesus himself thereby acknowledged that he isn't G-D.

I also don't buy the breaking down G-D into different parts.

From Deutronomy and probably the most important prayer in Judaism.

Hear O Israel, The Lord Is our G-D, The Lord is One

G-D himself said he was one.

The Torah is the guidelines that G-D gave the jews to follow. It's goes into extreme detail, even giving the exact measurements and colors that the temple in jerusalem would be built.

If G-D would want the jews to follow such a radical departure from what what he told them to do, he would have said so. In fact, it he made it extremely clear not to follow anyone who tells a jew to worship in a different way.

2) Jesus is the son of G-D or some other divine power. That doesn't work either.

Every sabbos in synagogue a portion of the torah is read. The whole torah is completed in one year and we start over. Since I am a kohen I usually get the first reading of the Torah. The Torah is the highlight of the jewish prayer service. After reading from the books of moses we read a portion from prophets and scripture.

I thought of these discussions during the portions from prophets that we read today.

Isaiah 44

6. So said the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts, "I am first and I am last, and besides Me there is no God. ו.
7. And who will call [that he is] like Me and will tell it and arrange it for Me, since My placing the ancient people, and the signs and those that will come, let them tell for themselves. ז.
8. Fear not and be not dismayed; did I not let you hear it from then, and I told [it] and you are My witnesses; is there a God besides Me? And there is no rock I did not know. ח.
9. Those who form idols are all of them vanity, and their treasures are of no avail, and they are their witnesses; they neither see nor hear, nor do they know, so that they be ashamed. ט. 10. Who formed a god or molded an image, being of no avail? י.
11. Behold, all his colleagues shall be ashamed, and they are smiths-of man. Let all of them gather, let them stand, they shall fear, they shall be ashamed together


3) Jesus is the messiah. That's impossible too. Jesus didn't fulfill any of the messianic prophesies other than being from bethlehem and riding a donkey.

As much as I admire of dividing it into different comings. That is a christian creation to rationalize how you can call him the messiah and he not fulfill the prophesies.

No where in the Torah does it divide it up like that. And G-D said not to add or subtract from the Torah.

Also, no jewish messiah would ever claim to be divine. The greatest of all prophets was Moses, and in the entire ritual reading of Passover, Moses is mentioned only once and that of a humble servant. Why? To make it clear that it was G-D that did it, not Moses.

Look you seem like a decent sort.

The reason that I get irked is that the Torah is very sacred to jews. It's not just a history for the jews, it's the code to guide their lives. It's their constitution in a sort.

So it really is bothersome when people in foreign religions who really don't know much about the Torah, although they think they do, take our holy scripture, and distort it to validate their believes.

It would be similar to muslims using your NT to try and prove that Mohammed is really the 2nd coming of jesus. It may tick you off too.

Yeah...there is a legal right to do, however, I don't have to like it, and I don't have to sit back quietly, while my sacred text is treated with such disrespect IMO.

I do realize that your religion is based on my religion. And you consider the Torah part of your holy scripture. That is the problem. Would you agree with that?

Cmike, I don't argue the Jewish religion with Jewish scholars because, as a Christian, it would be highly arrogant and presumptious of me to do so.

But the fact that Christians embrace the Old Testament, including the Torah, along with the New Testament does not take anything away from the Jews. For most of us it signals our sense of relationship to or even a kinship with the Jews. It was after all the Hebrews/Israelites/ancient Jews who gave us our sense of holiness, religious culture, understanding of ritual, sacrifice, creation, righteousness, judgment, and redemption.

There was a story of a woman who took pity on the birds following a deep snowstorm. She put out food for them on a tray, but they were afraid to approach this srange apparatus. She thought if she could just become one of them to show them what they could not understand. . . .and she realized she was thinking a metaphor that beautifully illustrates why G-d would become incarnate.

So it was that Christians believe G-d became incarnate in the person of Jesus. Jesus was fully human, became weary, tired, frustrated, hungry, thirsty, was tempted as any other human. And Jesus, even though he was G-d, being human needed G-d as much as any human needs G-d. This is not an easy thing to understand. Even Jesus's own disciples who were with him constantly for years did not understand. G-d did not stop being G-d even though he became human.

The Apostle Paul, a staunch and devoutly religious Pharasaic Jew who came to know Jesus and thus became a Christian as well as a Jew explained it that using only human reason and logic, it was impossible to understand. But by the power of the Holy Spirit that Jesus sent in His stead, it is possible.

G-d will not be defined, explained, known, or compartmentalized. He is after all G-d. One G-d but different manifestations.

I appeciate your thoughtful and diplomatic responses.

I just want to make it clear again that I am not trying to attack anyone's religion. My point is that the Torah doesn't support any of it.

I admire your honesty for agreeing about the logical inconsistency and the lack of sense.

For jews there is not logical inconsistency in the Torah. Why? Because it's G-D who told the jews in detail what to do. G-D is capable of explaining things so even a mere jew can understand.

In fact, G-D made it clear that if someone else claims to be god or a divine being to not believe that person and act harshly against that person and/or anyone who gets you to follow that person.

There is another possibilty. I am sure you wouldn't accept this. There is the possibility that jesus was not who he said he was. That he was a mere man, who wasn't doing the right thing.

 

[CMike]

I was going to answer frazzled, but I need some more information, because each poster says something different.

Do you (generic you) believe that jesus:

1. Is god?
   
2. Is the son of god?
   
3. Is part of god?
   
4. Is a divine being?
   
5. Was the messiah?
   
6. A combination of all?
   
7. A combination of some?

Please explain?

 

[CMike]

Frazzled I will say this.

I am not G-D and I can't say and I don't feel comfortable talking about how he may feel.

I can only tell you what G-D said in the Torah.

G-D made it explicitly clear to the jews that there is only him. That you shouldn't rely on anyone else but him in any form. That to do so, for the jews, is a very grave sin. That if anyone tried to get a jew to do this to act very harshly toward him.

So based on this worshipping jesus, for jews, would be a very grave sin. It would be the same thing as worshipping an idol or a golden calf.

The jesus turned into man and all the other stuff is not in the Torah, and therefore, can not be accepted by a jew. G-D told the jews not to add or subtract from the Torah.

So if some follower of jesus or jesus said that jesus can take away all your sins if you worship him, that would be the same thing as idol worship for a jew. It would be one of the few things that a jew could do to assure that he wouldn't get to heaven.

If a jew prayed to god in the name of jesus, that would be the same thing as idol worship too, because G-D said that only he has divine power.

If a jew believed that jesus "fulfilled" the laws that G-D gave tot he jews, that would be idol worship again, and a direct challenge to what G-D told the jews to do.

If jesus truely believed in G-D and feared G-D, he would not have said the things he did. Either that or he was badly mentally impaired.

 

[Foxfyre]

I appeciate your thoughtful and diplomatic responses.

I just want to make it clear again that I am not trying to attack anyone's religion. My point is that the Torah doesn't support any of it.

I admire your honesty for agreeing about the logical inconsistency and the lack of sense.

For jews there is not logical inconsistency in the Torah. Why? Because it's G-D who told the jews in detail what to do. G-D is capable of explaining things so even a mere jew can understand.

In fact, G-D made it clear that if someone else claims to be god or a divine being to not believe that person and act harshly against that person and/or anyone who gets you to follow that person.

There is another possibilty. I am sure you wouldn't accept this. There is the possibility that jesus was not who he said he was. That he was a mere man, who wasn't doing the right thing.

I understand. And I can REALLY understand when the non-Jews or anti-religionists presume to tell you want you should or should not believe or demean or ridicule you because you believe what you believe.

I can sympathise with the first century Pharisees who were the fundamental literalists of their day where the Torah was concerned. And what they judged to be Jesus' claim of divinity or divine status was so offensive and threatening to them that they demanded that the Romans kill him. Which they did. The Pharisees were acting out against one of their own, a Jew, who they saw as going against the commands of G-D as revealed in the pages of the Torah. He was seen as violating the Torah and leading others astray, blaspheming G-D, and that made him a dangerous man.

So I do understand why you might find the idea of a Jesus, fully human and fully devine, G-D incarnate, not only heresy but possibly offensive.

But the world moves on and we invariably interpret some things differently now than those who were living the story at that time. Do you obey every single command in Leviticus or do you interpret some of those things in modern ways in these modern times? For instance, do you think G-D wants you to stone blasphemers now as is commanded in Leviticus? Do you think anyone would propose stoning a blasphemer to death now?

Likewise, those Christians with strong Jewish roots and heritage also moved on in new understandings and interpretations, The Apostle Paul struggled with it mightily and you can see in his words the dichotomy that was in his heart. Even as he understood that Jesus had fulfilled the demands of the Law and a new covenant was written, time and again He felt obliged to rescue the Law. Some Christians these days are still in conflict in that regard.

Do I expect you to accept Jesus as G-D incarnate, the Messiah? No. I would pray that you do, but I fully understand why you would not do so at this time. As for the possibility that Jesus was not who he said he was, you might as well say that there is a possibility that Abraham or Moses or Joshua were not who the Torah says they were.

Christians have a personal relationship with Jesus. It is not taught by wrote or instruction. It is an experienced relationship. Do we know everything exactly as it was in his day? I don't believe that for a minute. I think we all are going to be really surprised at how wrong we got a lot of it. But he is real. And that we know with much clarity.

 

[CMike]

You are having some historical fact issues.

The jews were in no position to demand anything of the romans. The romans were very oppressive toward the jews. It's the romans that decided to execute jesus and did so.

This is another illustration of the lies and maligning of jews in the NT.

It's impossible to fulfill the demands of the law. The laws are perpetual.

How do you fulfill do not murder?

How do you fulfill keep the sabbath?

Just the mere fact that jesus would say such a thing is a challenge and an affront to G-D. As I said in a previous post, G-D said do not add or subtract from the Torah.

Abraham, Moses, and Joshua, never claimed to be a divine being. They never challenged G-D. They never said that just believe in me and nothing else matters.

They never said that they fulfilled the law. They never challenged G-D in this type of manner.

All of these men today, if they were alive today, would say that they are only mortal men and mere servants of G-D.

It's jesus who made himself a divine being.

 

[Foxfyre]

You are having some historical fact issues.

The jews were in no position to demand anything of the romans. The romans were very oppressive toward the jews. It's the romans that decided to execute jesus and did so.

This is another illustration of the lies and maligning of jews in the NT.

It's impossible to fulfill the demands of the law. The laws are perpetual.

How do you fulfill do not murder?

How do you fulfill keep the sabbath?

Just the mere fact that jesus would say such a thing is a challenge and an affront to G-D. As I said in a previous post, G-D said do not add or subtract from the Torah.

Abraham, Moses, and Joshua, never claimed to be a divine being. They never challenged G-D. They never said that just believe in me and nothing else matters.

They never said that they fulfilled the law. They never challenged G-D in this type of manner.

All of these men today, if they were alive today, would say that they are only mortal men and mere servants of G-D.

It's jesus who made himself a divine being.

I do not presume to tell you how to interpret the Torah or what to believe about it. I can only tell you what the Christian perspective is.

And yet you presume to tell me what is the history of the New Testament? What I should or should not believe about that? What I should believe about Jesus?

Tsk tsk.

 

[CMike]

You are having some historical fact issues.

The jews were in no position to demand anything of the romans. The romans were very oppressive toward the jews. It's the romans that decided to execute jesus and did so.

This is another illustration of the lies and maligning of jews in the NT.

It's impossible to fulfill the demands of the law. The laws are perpetual.

How do you fulfill do not murder?

How do you fulfill keep the sabbath?

Just the mere fact that jesus would say such a thing is a challenge and an affront to G-D. As I said in a previous post, G-D said do not add or subtract from the Torah.

Abraham, Moses, and Joshua, never claimed to be a divine being. They never challenged G-D. They never said that just believe in me and nothing else matters.

They never said that they fulfilled the law. They never challenged G-D in this type of manner.

All of these men today, if they were alive today, would say that they are only mortal men and mere servants of G-D.

It's jesus who made himself a divine being.

I do not presume to tell you how to interpret the Torah or what to believe about it. I can only tell you what the Christian perspective is.

And yet you presume to tell me what is the history of the New Testament? What I should or should not believe about that? What I should believe about Jesus?

Tsk tsk.

I would have rather not comment on the NT, however, I was left with little choice.

Unfortunately, your NT maligns my religion, and says falsehoods about jews.

Also you compared Abraham and Moses to jesus. I pointed out how that was not a comparison.

 

[Foxfyre]

You are having some historical fact issues.

The jews were in no position to demand anything of the romans. The romans were very oppressive toward the jews. It's the romans that decided to execute jesus and did so.

This is another illustration of the lies and maligning of jews in the NT.

It's impossible to fulfill the demands of the law. The laws are perpetual.

How do you fulfill do not murder?

How do you fulfill keep the sabbath?

Just the mere fact that jesus would say such a thing is a challenge and an affront to G-D. As I said in a previous post, G-D said do not add or subtract from the Torah.

Abraham, Moses, and Joshua, never claimed to be a divine being. They never challenged G-D. They never said that just believe in me and nothing else matters.

They never said that they fulfilled the law. They never challenged G-D in this type of manner.

All of these men today, if they were alive today, would say that they are only mortal men and mere servants of G-D.

It's jesus who made himself a divine being.

I do not presume to tell you how to interpret the Torah or what to believe about it. I can only tell you what the Christian perspective is.

And yet you presume to tell me what is the history of the New Testament? What I should or should not believe about that? What I should believe about Jesus?

Tsk tsk.

I would have rather not commented on the NT, however, I was left with little choice.

Unfortunately, your NT maligns my religion, and says falsehoods about jews.

Also you compared Abraham and Moses to jesus. I pointed out how that was not a comparison.

In your belief, the NT might 'malign' the Jews as you have been taught to believe. Yet how could it do that if the human manisfestation of our Lord and savior was himself a Jew? As were all his 12 hand picked disciples who founded his Church and who are now all named as Christian saints? Or hundreds of others, all Jews, who are included in the story? Or the Apostle Paul who helped spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the Roman Empire--nobody could possibly be more orthodox Jew than he was. And Josephus, himself not a Christian, but rather a Jewish historian, did not confirm all that is contained in the NT, but neither did he dispute itl.

Christians teach that the Jews were the chosen people of God, and of all people on Earth today, it is Christians who have been the most vocal and most staunch in protecting and defending Israel.

The fact that the Jews were not allowed to carry out capitall punishment under Roman Law, but the Pharisees believed they were obeying the Torah by demanding Jesus's death, all makes sense in NT history. If you don't believe that, that is your prerogative. But you have less evidence that it is false than I have that it is true. Does not your Torah teach that he who blasphemes G-D will be stoned to death?

We can agree to disagree amicably. But please understand that Christians have every bit as much basis and evidence for their faith as you have for yours.

 

[CMike]

I do not presume to tell you how to interpret the Torah or what to believe about it. I can only tell you what the Christian perspective is.

And yet you presume to tell me what is the history of the New Testament? What I should or should not believe about that? What I should believe about Jesus?

Tsk tsk.

I would have rather not commented on the NT, however, I was left with little choice.

Unfortunately, your NT maligns my religion, and says falsehoods about jews.

Also you compared Abraham and Moses to jesus. I pointed out how that was not a comparison.

In your belief, the NT might 'malign' the Jews as you have been taught to believe. Yet how could it do that if the human manisfestation of our Lord and savior was himself a Jew? As were all his 12 hand picked disciples who founded his Church and who are now all named as Christian saints? Or hundreds of others, all Jews, who are included in the story? Or the Apostle Paul who helped spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the Roman Empire--nobody could possibly be more orthodox Jew than he was. And Josephus, himself not a Christian, but rather a Jewish historian, did not confirm all that is contained in the NT, but neither did he dispute itl.

I am really trying to not say negative stuff about christianity, but you asked.

In jewish history there have been jews that rebelled against judaism.

During Moses' time there was Korach. Korach challenged the leadership of Moses and Aaron, and him and his followers were destroyed.

Just like in any religion or group there are ones that do bad things.

Based on Judaism, if Paul and the others, focus was on jesus, and not the one G-D of Israel, then he did a really bad thing according to what G-D said in the Torah.

Christians teach that the Jews were the chosen people of God, and of all people on Earth today, it is Christians who have been the most vocal and most staunch in protecting and defending Israel.

I think that christians are staunch supporters of Israel is great. I mean that truely.

If christians believe that you must "accept" and believe in jesus to go to heaven, then aren't all jews going to hell according to christian beliefs? Heck, I don't really care that much. It's a free country, and everyone can believe whatever they want.

The fact that the Jews were not allowed to carry out capitall punishment under Roman Law, but the Pharisees believed they were obeying the Torah by demanding Jesus's death, all makes sense in NT history. If you don't believe that, that is your prerogative. But you have less evidence that it is false than I have that it is true. Does not your Torah teach that he who blasphemes G-D will be stoned to death?

That's because your NT history isn't based on understanding judaism. You are saying what the jews believed, when christians don't have an understanding of what jews believed.

This is what I believe, even though I am guessing, I believe jesus and his minions at that time had a hatred toward jews, because the jews weren't buying what he was selling.

You asked a question about the death penalty in an earlier post that I didnt' get too. Sorry.

Although the Torah gives the death penalty, the criteria for carrying it out is so high, that it made it almost impossible to enforce.

I am lazy so I am going to copy and paste this.

The Death Penalty in Jewish Tradition - My Jewish Learning

According to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 1:4) the death penalty could only be inflicted, after trial, by a Sanhedrin composed of twenty-three judges and there were four types of death penalty (Sanhedrin 7:1): stoning, burning, slaying (by the sword), and strangling. A bare reading of these and the other accounts in the tractate would seem to suggest a vast proliferation of the death penalty. Yet, throughout the Talmudic literature, this whole subject is viewed with unease, so much so that according to the rules stated in that literature the death penalty could hardly ever have been imposed.

For instance, it is ruled that two witnesses are required to testify not only that they witnessed the act for which the criminal has been charged but that they had warned him beforehand that if he carried out the act he would be executed, and he had to accept the warning, stating his willingness to commit the act despite his awareness of its consequences. The criminal's own confession is not accepted as evidence. Moreover, circumstantial evidence is not admitted.
From Practice to Theory

It has to be appreciated, however, that practically all this material comes from a time when the right to impose the death penalty had been taken away from the Jewish courts by the Roman authorities. According to one report in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 41a) the power of the Jewish courts to the death penalty ceased around the year 30 BCE; according to another report (Sanhedrin 52b) it could only have been imposed while the Temple stood and must have come to an end not later than 70 CE when the Temple was destroyed.

This means that, although earlier traditions may be present in the Mishnaic formulations, the whole topic, including the restrictions, is treated in the Mishnah and the Talmud in a purely theoretical way. It is hard to believe that when the courts did impose the death penalty they could only do so when the conditions above obtained. Who would commit a murder in the presence of two witnesses when these had solemnly warned him that if he persisted they would testify against him to have him executed for his crime?

That the Mishnaic material is purely on the theoretical level can be seen from the oft-quoted statement (Mishnah Makkot 1:10): "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: even once in seventy years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death. Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel says: they would have multiplied shedders of blood in Israel."

This Mishnah is a kind of reflection on the whole law of capital punishment. Faced with the clear biblical injunctions, the Rabbis mentioned could not simply have said that capital punishment was wrong. After all, the Bible states that it is right and has to be imposed on the guilty. But the statement seems to imply that the Rabbis welcomed the development by which the Sanhedrin no longer functioned with the power to impose the death penalty and Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon speculate that even when the Sanhedrin did possess this power, various legal means could have been adopted to negate the imposition of the penalty.

 

[CMike]

I am kind of afraid to ask, if you do believe in the Torah, then how can you add an entire other scripture when it says

Deutronomy 4

2. Do not add to the word which I command you, nor diminish from it, to observe the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

 

[Foxfyre]

I would have rather not commented on the NT, however, I was left with little choice.

Unfortunately, your NT maligns my religion, and says falsehoods about jews.

Also you compared Abraham and Moses to jesus. I pointed out how that was not a comparison.

I am really trying to not say negative stuff about christianity, but you asked.

In jewish history there have been jews that rebelled against judaism.

During Moses' time there was Korach. Korach challenged the leadership of Moses and Aaron, and him and his followers were destroyed.

Just like in any religion or group there are ones that do bad things.

Based on Judaism, if Paul and the others, focus was on jesus, and not the one G-D of Israel, then he did a really bad thing according to what G-D said in the Torah.



I think that christians are staunch supporters of Israel is great. I mean that truely.

If christians believe that you must "accept" and believe in jesus to go to heaven, then aren't all jews going to hell according to christian beliefs? Heck, I don't really care that much. It's a free country, and everyone can believe whatever they want.





That's because your NT history isn't based on understanding judaism. You are saying what the jews believed, when christians don't have an understanding of what jews believed.

This is what I believe, even though I am guessing, I believe jesus and his minions at that time had a hatred toward jews, because the jews weren't buying what he was selling.

You asked a question about the death penalty in an earlier post that I didnt' get too. Sorry.

Although the Torah gives the death penalty, the criteria for carrying it out is so high, that it made it almost impossible to enforce.

I am lazy so I am going to copy and paste this.

The Death Penalty in Jewish Tradition - My Jewish Learning

According to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 1:4) the death penalty could only be inflicted, after trial, by a Sanhedrin composed of twenty-three judges and there were four types of death penalty (Sanhedrin 7:1): stoning, burning, slaying (by the sword), and strangling. A bare reading of these and the other accounts in the tractate would seem to suggest a vast proliferation of the death penalty. Yet, throughout the Talmudic literature, this whole subject is viewed with unease, so much so that according to the rules stated in that literature the death penalty could hardly ever have been imposed.

For instance, it is ruled that two witnesses are required to testify not only that they witnessed the act for which the criminal has been charged but that they had warned him beforehand that if he carried out the act he would be executed, and he had to accept the warning, stating his willingness to commit the act despite his awareness of its consequences. The criminal's own confession is not accepted as evidence. Moreover, circumstantial evidence is not admitted.
From Practice to Theory

It has to be appreciated, however, that practically all this material comes from a time when the right to impose the death penalty had been taken away from the Jewish courts by the Roman authorities. According to one report in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 41a) the power of the Jewish courts to the death penalty ceased around the year 30 BCE; according to another report (Sanhedrin 52b) it could only have been imposed while the Temple stood and must have come to an end not later than 70 CE when the Temple was destroyed.

This means that, although earlier traditions may be present in the Mishnaic formulations, the whole topic, including the restrictions, is treated in the Mishnah and the Talmud in a purely theoretical way. It is hard to believe that when the courts did impose the death penalty they could only do so when the conditions above obtained. Who would commit a murder in the presence of two witnesses when these had solemnly warned him that if he persisted they would testify against him to have him executed for his crime?

That the Mishnaic material is purely on the theoretical level can be seen from the oft-quoted statement (Mishnah Makkot 1:10): "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: even once in seventy years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death. Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel says: they would have multiplied shedders of blood in Israel."

This Mishnah is a kind of reflection on the whole law of capital punishment. Faced with the clear biblical injunctions, the Rabbis mentioned could not simply have said that capital punishment was wrong. After all, the Bible states that it is right and has to be imposed on the guilty. But the statement seems to imply that the Rabbis welcomed the development by which the Sanhedrin no longer functioned with the power to impose the death penalty and Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon speculate that even when the Sanhedrin did possess this power, various legal means could have been adopted to negate the imposition of the penalty.

Maybe you are trying not to say anything negative about Christianity, but you aren't quite getting the job done are you.

Conversely, I have nothing negative at all to say re the ancient Jewis. I have devoted a pretty good chunk of my adult life, spanning decades, studying ancient history with emphasis on ancient religious history, and as a result spend quite a bit of time using archeological, historical, anthropological, and geological evidence that supports much of the content of the Old Testament. If the Old Testament is pure 'bunk' as the anti-religionists here wish to make it, then so would the New Testament be 'bunk" as it relies heavily on Old Testament history and prophecy for its validity.

I appreciate that you don't see it that way and that's cool. I don't see it your way either, but I don't fault you for the way that you see it.

And no, I don't join with the relatively small minority of Christians who say all the Jews will go to hell. I take my cue from Jesus himself who admonished us to not judge lest we be judged. Who goes to heaven and hell, whatever those two places might be, is G-D's call and not mine.

And as for the passage from Deuteronomy you keep quoting, how do you justify the passages demanding the blasphemer be stoned to death and then quote Rabbis saying that the Sandedrin would never have ordered or consented to a death penalty for Jesus deemed to be a blasphemer by the Jews? Don't you see that the Jewish people too have evolved and learned to interpret some Scriptures differently than those who wrote them saw them? And so too have Christians in our much shorter history thought it now spans well over two millenium.

My hope is that whether or not the Jews and Christians come to interpret scripture the same or agree on finer points of theology or doctrine, that we would come to appreciate and celebrate our common heritage and coexist in harmony and peace.

But then I am an eternal optimist.

 

[CMike]

Maybe you are trying not to say anything negative about Christianity, but you aren't quite getting the job done are you.

Conversely, I have nothing negative at all to say re the ancient Jewis. I have devoted a pretty good chunk of my adult life, spanning decades, studying ancient history with emphasis on ancient religious history, and as a result spend quite a bit of time using archeological, historical, anthropological, and geological evidence that supports much of the content of the Old Testament. If the Old Testament is pure 'bunk' as the anti-religionists here wish to make it, then so would the New Testament be 'bunk" as it relies heavily on Old Testament history and prophecy for its validity.

I appreciate that you don't see it that way and that's cool. I don't see it your way either, but I don't fault you for the way that you see it.

And no, I don't join with the relatively small minority of Christians who say all the Jews will go to hell. I take my cue from Jesus himself who admonished us to not judge lest we be judged. Who goes to heaven and hell, whatever those two places might be, is G-D's call and not mine.

And as for the passage from Deuteronomy you keep quoting, how do you justify the passages demanding the blasphemer be stoned to death and then quote Rabbis saying that the Sandedrin would never have ordered or consented to a death penalty for Jesus deemed to be a blasphemer by the Jews? Don't you see that the Jewish people too have evolved and learned to interpret some Scriptures differently than those who wrote them saw them? And so too have Christians in our much shorter history thought it now spans well over two millenium.

My hope is that whether or not the Jews and Christians come to interpret scripture the same or agree on finer points of theology or doctrine, that we would come to appreciate and celebrate our common heritage and coexist in harmony and peace.

But then I am an eternal optimist.

As far as your question, the answer is no. The oral law is as important as the written law.

The oral law was given to Moses on Mt Sinai too. The oral law is necessary to explain how to implement the written law.

Also, there was no jewish court at the time of jesus.

You still didn't answer my question though?

 

[Foxfyre]

As far as your question, the answer is no. The oral law is as important as the written law.

The oral law was given to Moses on Mt Sinai too. The oral law is necessary to explain how to implement the written law.

Also, there was no jewish court at the time of jesus.

You still didn't answer my question though?

Ah, so you look to Moses to explain how to implement the written law. Do you look Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah et al as deliverers of oral law?

And if you do, is there no room for you to understand that we Christians look to Jesus and those who knew him and learned at his knee for further explanation?

if the question you mean is the passage from Deutronomy 4, did not Moses add the oral law on top of what was written. Have not the others since Moses? So how to you relate "stone to death the blasphemer' alongside "Thou shalt not murder?" Perhaps two different things are intended with these two passage? Is it never possible to interpret it that way. (Which I do.) But so far as I know, nobody has presumed to rewrite or add to any of Deuteronomy or any of the rest of the Torah.

In the New Testament, the Book of Revelations ends with the passage: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy og this book: If anyone adds anything to them, G-D will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, G-D will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

And, while the passages themselves have not been rewritten over the years, they have been discussed and interpreted and wondered about and expounded on and speculated about for most of 2000 years now. No plagues have resulted.

 

[CMike]

All commandments are in the five books of moses. The oral law was given to Moses by G-D as well on Mt sinai. Moses got the written law, and the oral law.

The prophets have no laws.

Without the oral law it's impossible to implement the written law.

For example don't violate the shabbos by creating. What exactly does that mean? Does it mean starting a fire? How about cooking? Can you put food on the stove? Can you drive? Can you carry? How much can you carry? Can you take a shower? Can you take medicine?

Do not murder. What does that mean? What about killing in the military? What about self defense? What if someone is coming to kill you? These questions are answered in the oral law which was also given by G-D.

All these questions may seem petty. However, if a jew is keeping the sabbath he needs the answers to these questions. The answers were given to Moses from G-D on Mt Sinai.