Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Actually, what I wrote challenged his statements and approach and was not based in the talmud, but whatever.Says another Talmud tap dancer.
No we don't. We have all sorts of texts which indicate God has many sonsYou all deny that God has a Son.
Great -- so you accept that King David was God's son! Also, don't forget Ex 4:22 - the entire nation of Israel is God's son. Do you want text showing that angels are also called God's sons? And Solomon?Psalm 2:7 “You are my son, today I have begotten you.”
Can you show me in that psalm any mention of a messiah? Betcha can't. Are you reading from your own "oral tradition" and tapdancing?The Messiah will be a High Priest in the manner of Melchizedek:
Psalm 110:4. The Lord has sworn and will not waiver: “You are a priest forever in the manner of Melchizedek.”
Great -- a ruler will come from a certain tribe and a certain clan within that tribe. No mention of king, just a ruler, and no mention of a messiah. Also, no mention of Jesus. Did you have anything that actually textually SUPPORTS your position?Michah 5:1 But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathah least among the clans of Judah,
From you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler of Israel; whose origin is from old, from ancient times.
Oof, you should read the text. Not only does 31 not mention any messiah or person through which the renewed covenant is delivered, but God speaks in the first person saying HE will create the renewed covenant, using the exact same content as the established covenant but just changing the method of delivery.He will bring a New Covenant, unlike any previous. (Jer 31:31-34)
If you understood the word "messiah" and knew to whom it applied, you would not make this statement.Most of you Talmudic Jews say your messiah is going to be a military/political leader, and yet you provide no actual scripture to back it up.
you have a few problems here -- one is that the verses also talk about a false prophet who tells the people to do things against what God has said or who says things that don't come to pass -- both of those apply to Jesus. Also, Judaism teaches (as Jesus must have) that prophecy ended 300 years before Jesus was born. So I'll stick with dismissing out of hand.There is a reason Christians (who believe Jesus is One with God) stand in awe of this passage in Deuteronomy. Let's take a look at verses 15-18.
15A prophet like me will the LORD, your God, raise up for you from among your own kindred; that is the one to whom you shall listen.
16This is exactly what you requested of the LORD, your God, at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, “Let me not again hear the voice of the LORD, my God, nor see this great fire any more, or I will die.”
17And the LORD said to me, What they have said is good.
18I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their kindred, and will put my words into the mouth of the prophet; the prophet shall tell them all that I command.
The people in Moses' time could actually hear the voice of God, and told Moses if they heard it any more they would die. God told Moses, They have a point, so I'll send a prophet with my Words. The Gospel of John introduces Jesus, starting with, "In the beginning was the Word... and goes onto say: And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, the glory as of the Father's only Son, full of grace and truth.
Moses is known as the lawgiver and Jesus follows in his steps (Let's look at Matthew 5:17)
“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose."
Could there be other prophets as well? Absolutely! Even so, Jesus should not be dismissed out of hand from being a prophet foretold by Moses.
Understandably, the Jewish perspective is not the Christian one. Keep in mind that Jewish Canon was not made official until well after Jesus, and it was after Jesus that leaders of the Jewish religion declared Malachi the last prophet--as it was simpler to ignore Jesus by removing him from their history. This is not a criticism, simple fact and well rooted in the steadfastness of the Jewish people to worship God--and being absolutely convinced no man could be God. No changing minds on that. No worries.you have a few problems here -- one is that the verses also talk about a false prophet who tells the people to do things against what God has said or who says things that don't come to pass -- both of those apply to Jesus. Also, Judaism teaches (as Jesus must have) that prophecy ended 300 years before Jesus was born. So I'll stick with dismissing out of hand.
The Jewish written canon dates to before Jesus' birth, and the fact that prophecy ended at a certain point was taught well before Jesus' birth. If it is easier to deny the entire validity of the Jewish oral law in order to create another religion, then I guess that's what Christians feel needs to be done.Understandably, the Jewish perspective is not the Christian one. Keep in mind that Jewish Canon was not made official until well after Jesus, and it was after Jesus that leaders of the Jewish religion declared Malachi the last prophet--as it was simpler to ignore Jesus by removing him from their history. This is not a criticism, simple fact and well rooted in the steadfastness of the Jewish people to worship God--and being absolutely convinced no man could be God. No changing minds on that. No worries.
ALL ok----but----why are there people in the world who try to citeThe Jewish written canon dates to before Jesus' birth, and the fact that prophecy ended at a certain point was taught well before Jesus' birth. If it is easier to deny the entire validity of the Jewish oral law in order to create another religion, then I guess that's what Christians feel needs to be done.
I understand the tradition, but officially... (and who knows by whom). For example, in the 1500s Protestant Christianity tossed out seven Biblical books that were in use during Jesus' time because they were not included in the official Jewish Canon (Decided (I think) in the second or third century. I'd have to look it up, but no time at the moment.The Jewish written canon dates to before Jesus' birth, and the fact that prophecy ended at a certain point was taught well before Jesus' birth. If it is easier to deny the entire validity of the Jewish oral law in order to create another religion, then I guess that's what Christians feel needs to be done.
What things do you see Jesus telling the people that were against what God has said? What things haven't come to pass?you have a few problems here -- one is that the verses also talk about a false prophet who tells the people to do things against what God has said or who says things that don't come to pass -- both of those apply to Jesus.
Here are some resourcesI understand the tradition, but officially... (and who knows by whom). For example, in the 1500s Protestant Christianity tossed out seven Biblical books that were in use during Jesus' time because they were not included in the official Jewish Canon (Decided (I think) in the second or third century. I'd have to look it up, but no time at the moment.
judaism.stackexchange.com
off the top of my head, the 6 antitheses, and changes to the laws of dietary requirements and hand washing were changedWhat things do you see Jesus telling the people that were against what God has said? What things haven't come to pass?
1. Jesus was focused on moral law which is a much higher class than diet. He pointed to instances where moral law eclipses dietary law.off the top of my head, the 6 antitheses, and changes to the laws of dietary requirements and hand washing were changed
and there are websites dedicated to things that didn't come to pass, at least within the "generation" that he references.
There are other issues of truth ( Is it true that Jesus never lied? ) but that's neither here nor there.
great. Those are changes.1. Jesus was focused on moral law which is a much higher class than diet. He pointed to instances where moral law eclipses dietary law.
the text makes claims about "this generation shall not pass" but it did. Nuff said.2. The layout of Matthew's Gospel in regards to 'this generation' is awkward. He combines Jesus' talking about the destruction of the Temple, the Day of the Lord, and even the end of the world into what Jesus said of future events. The destruction of the Temple happened during the present generation. The coming of the Holy Spirit (a day of the Lord) occurred during the present generation. As far as end times, Jesus specifically said that he did not know that...only the Father (the Creator) knew that.
Yes, I had already read that, and more, long ago. It seemed that whether one sees the matter as officially occurring in the second or third century, or whether it been set hundreds of years before, those advocating the later date did agree that if not "official" what had been customary for centuries was now "official".Here are some resources
The Temple was destroyed. The Holy Spirit did come. Texts note this. The text also said only the Father knew the day and the hour of end times. Both need to be weighed for proper understanding. People who are determined to "prove" Jesus/any scripture wrong will naturally overlook any other verse that gives the broader perspective.the text makes claims about "this generation shall not pass" but it did.
"Both need to be weighed for proper understanding." In other words, personal interpretation not based on what the text says. Fine with me.The Temple was destroyed. The Holy Spirit did come. Texts note this. The text also said only the Father knew the day and the hour of end times. Both need to be weighed for proper understanding. People who are determined to "prove" Jesus/any scripture wrong will naturally overlook any other verse that gives the broader perspective.
More like reading the entire text and working from all of it, not part of it."Both need to be weighed for proper understanding." In other words, personal interpretation not based on what the text says. Fine with me.
Do you think that anyone who believes Muhammad was a prophet is a fool?
The Jewish written canon dates to before Jesus' birth, and the fact that prophecy ended at a certain point was taught well before Jesus' birth. If it is easier to deny the entire validity of the Jewish oral law in order to create another religion, then I guess that's what Christians feel needs to be done.
Yes, that is certainly one position on it. So what? Does that negate anything I wrote that you responded to?Daniel was written in 164 BC.
No . They are the biggest Fake . Deliberately mistranslated.Do you think Moses actually wrote the first five books... 800 years after his death???
