Zone1 What is a Jew?

[AsherN]

So you do atone from sins, when earlier you said there is no need. The concept of “being saved” isn’t recognized by Jews?

This is double talk.

"Being saved" is not a Jewish concept. We atone for our transgressions against G-d on Yom Kippur. Transgressions against man can only be atoned by seeking forgiveness from the person you wronged. It is a daily struggle. Judaism places a lot more focus on the day to day living.

 

[Lisa558]

"Being saved" is not a Jewish concept. We atone for our transgressions against G-d on Yom Kippur. Transgressions against man can only be atoned by seeking forgiveness from the person you wronged. It is a daily struggle. Judaism places a lot more focus on the day to day living.

Yes. Judaism requires that WE ourselves atone for our transgressions rather than “hand over” that responsibility to someone else.

Also true about the focus being on day-to-day living. Never once in my fairly observant Jewish household growing up did I hear mention of life after death. The focus is on NOW, and being as good a person as you can, and recognizing and vowing not to repeat when you transgress.

 

[theHawk]

Yes. Judaism requires that WE ourselves atone for our transgressions rather than “hand over” that responsibility to someone else.

Also true about the focus being on day-to-day living. Never once in my fairly observant Jewish household growing up did I hear mention of life after death. The focus is on NOW, and being as good a person as you can, and recognizing and vowing not to repeat when you transgress.

So Jeremiah‘s prophecy of a New Covenant is wrong?

https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16028

30Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will form a covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, a new covenant.		להִנֵּ֛ה יָמִ֥ים בָּאִ֖ים נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֑ה וְכָֽרַתִּ֗י אֶת־בֵּ֧ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה בְּרִ֥ית חֲדָשָֽׁה:
31Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord.		לאלֹ֣א כַבְּרִ֗ית אֲשֶׁ֚ר כָּרַ֙תִּי֙ אֶת־אֲבוֹתָ֔ם בְּיוֹם֙ הֶֽחֱזִיקִ֣י בְיָדָ֔ם לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֖רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֜מָּה הֵפֵ֣רוּ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֗י וְאָֽנֹכִ֛י בָּעַ֥לְתִּי בָ֖ם נְאֻם־יְהֹוָֽה:
32For this is the covenant that I will form with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will place My law in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts, and I will be their God and they shall be My people.		לבכִּ֣י זֹ֣את הַבְּרִ֡ית אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶכְרֹת֩ אֶת־בֵּ֨ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אַֽחֲרֵ֨י הַיָּמִ֚ים הָהֵם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה נָתַ֚תִּי אֶת־תּֽוֹרָתִי֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔ם וְעַל־לִבָּ֖ם אֶכְתֳּבֶ֑נָּה וְהָיִ֚יתִי לָהֶם֙ לֵֽאלֹהִ֔ים וְהֵ֖מָּה יִֽהְיוּ־לִ֥י לְעָֽם:
33And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.		לגוְלֹ֧א יְלַמְּד֣וּ ע֗וֹד אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֜הוּ וְאִ֚ישׁ אֶת־אָחִיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר דְּע֖וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֑ה כִּֽי־כוּלָּם֩ יֵֽדְע֨וּ אוֹתִ֜י לְמִקְּטַנָּ֚ם וְעַד־גְּדוֹלָם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֚י אֶסְלַח֙ לַֽעֲו‍ֹנָ֔ם וּלְחַטָּאתָ֖ם לֹ֥א אֶזְכָּר־עֽוֹד:

 

[theHawk]

"Being saved" is not a Jewish concept. We atone for our transgressions against G-d on Yom Kippur. Transgressions against man can only be atoned by seeking forgiveness from the person you wronged. It is a daily struggle. Judaism places a lot more focus on the day to day living.

What nonsense. Seek forgiveness from ones you wronged? What happens when you wrong God? What if the person you seek forgiveness from doesn’t give it, or is dead?

 

[rosends]

The sacrifice has nothing to do with sin?

So why are there prophesies of a New Covenant in order to forgive their iniquity so the Lord will no longer remember their sins? Or do you consider Jeremiah heretical?

The PASSOVER sacrifice has nothing to do with sin. Note what I was responding to.

 

[rosends]

So you do atone from sins, when earlier you said there is no need. The concept of “being saved” isn’t recognized by Jews?

This is double talk.

Of course we atone for sins. I never said there is no reason to atone. There is no notion of an "original sin" from which we have to be saved. You are confused.

 

[rosends]

So Jeremiah‘s prophecy of a New Covenant is wrong?

https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16028

30Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will form a covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, a new covenant.		להִנֵּ֛ה יָמִ֥ים בָּאִ֖ים נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֑ה וְכָֽרַתִּ֗י אֶת־בֵּ֧ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה בְּרִ֥ית חֲדָשָֽׁה:
31Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord.		לאלֹ֣א כַבְּרִ֗ית אֲשֶׁ֚ר כָּרַ֙תִּי֙ אֶת־אֲבוֹתָ֔ם בְּיוֹם֙ הֶֽחֱזִיקִ֣י בְיָדָ֔ם לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֖רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֜מָּה הֵפֵ֣רוּ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֗י וְאָֽנֹכִ֛י בָּעַ֥לְתִּי בָ֖ם נְאֻם־יְהֹוָֽה:
32For this is the covenant that I will form with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will place My law in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts, and I will be their God and they shall be My people.		לבכִּ֣י זֹ֣את הַבְּרִ֡ית אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶכְרֹת֩ אֶת־בֵּ֨ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אַֽחֲרֵ֨י הַיָּמִ֚ים הָהֵם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה נָתַ֚תִּי אֶת־תּֽוֹרָתִי֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔ם וְעַל־לִבָּ֖ם אֶכְתֳּבֶ֑נָּה וְהָיִ֚יתִי לָהֶם֙ לֵֽאלֹהִ֔ים וְהֵ֖מָּה יִֽהְיוּ־לִ֥י לְעָֽם:
33And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.		לגוְלֹ֧א יְלַמְּד֣וּ ע֗וֹד אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֜הוּ וְאִ֚ישׁ אֶת־אָחִיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר דְּע֖וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֑ה כִּֽי־כוּלָּם֩ יֵֽדְע֨וּ אוֹתִ֜י לְמִקְּטַנָּ֚ם וְעַד־גְּדוֹלָם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֚י אֶסְלַח֙ לַֽעֲו‍ֹנָ֔ם וּלְחַטָּאתָ֖ם לֹ֥א אֶזְכָּר־עֽוֹד:

If you read it you will see that the "new" part is the delivery method, not the content. How will this covenant be new and not like the earlier one? Well, it will still be the same law (the Hebrew reads "my Torah") but it will be placed directly into people's hearts so it won't have to be taught. That's what the text says.

 

[rosends]

What nonsense. Seek forgiveness from ones you wronged? What happens when you wrong God? What if the person you seek forgiveness from doesn’t give it, or is dead?

There is a lot here. Judaism sees two general kinds of wrongs -- those against God and those against man. Prayers for forgiveness, a process of repentance and rites of atonement only cover sins between man and God. For those between people, one must go through a process of asking forgiveness of the other, making recompense and changing.

Apologize to a dead person | Rabbi David Sperling | Ask the Rabbi | yeshiva.co

Question on Apologize to a dead person by Rabbi David Sperling

www.yeshiva.co

 

[theHawk]

Of course we atone for sins. I never said there is no reason to atone. There is no notion of an "original sin" from which we have to be saved. You are confused.

If there is no original sin then why wasn’t Adam’s children restored to Eden? All humans are sinful, that is the “concept”, and that is all throughout the Hebrew Bible. Israel keeps breaking their covenant with God.

 

[theHawk]

If you read it you will see that the "new" part is the delivery method, not the content. How will this covenant be new and not like the earlier one? Well, it will still be the same law (the Hebrew reads "my Torah") but it will be placed directly into people's hearts so it won't have to be taught. That's what the text says.

It will not be ”the same law”, it explicitly says it will be different, “not like”.

And how about the part “and their sin I will no longer remember”?

This explicitly says that sins will be forgiven by God, not other people.

 

[rosends]

If there is no original sin then why wasn’t Adam’s children restored to Eden? All humans are sinful, that is the “concept”, and that is all throughout the Hebrew Bible. Israel keeps breaking their covenant with God.

Adam's actions brought about a change in the nature of what it is to be human -- that instead of there being small and easily external temptations, temptation became internalized and more difficult to resist. That's not sin, itself, but the urge to sin (call it the evil inclination). Israel's committing sins is because of what it is to be human, not an indication of sinfulness a priori.

 

[rosends]

It will not be ”the same law”, it explicitly says it will be different, “not like”.

And how about the part “and their sin I will no longer remember”?

This explicitly says that sins will be forgiven by God, not other people.

No, it says "not like" referring to the nature of the covenant. And yet it uses the exact words "my torah" (my law) which is exactly what was in the first version of the covenant. And once people's nature's have changed and the Torah is inscribed in our hearts, our previous state of sinning will not be remembered for punishment.

The talmud explains the answer to your question about who ultimately forgives -- the answer is God forgives but only after one has apologized/made restitution/sought forgiveness from a person he wronged.

Source for "Ben Adam Lemakom" and "Ben Adam Lechavero"

Where does the concept of Ben Adam Lemakom and Ben Adam Lechavero come from? I know there is a concept of the first five of the ten commandments being between 'man and his friend' and the second ...

judaism.stackexchange.com

 

[irosie91]

If there is no original sin then why wasn’t Adam’s children restored to Eden? All humans are sinful, that is the “concept”, and that is all throughout the Hebrew Bible. Israel keeps breaking their covenant with God.

IMHO---the issue of "the garden of eden" and expulsion therefrom is based on the
conferring upon HUMANOIDS of CHOICE.-------ie the innovation for ADAM (man)
was the fact of CONSCIOUS CHOICE. "choose" is an important word in Bereshit

 

[theHawk]

No, it says "not like" referring to the nature of the covenant. And yet it uses the exact words "my torah" (my law) which is exactly what was in the first version of the covenant. And once people's nature's have changed and the Torah is inscribed in our hearts, our previous state of sinning will not be remembered for punishment.

The talmud explains the answer to your question about who ultimately forgives -- the answer is God forgives but only after one has apologized/made restitution/sought forgiveness from a person he wronged.

Source for "Ben Adam Lemakom" and "Ben Adam Lechavero"

Where does the concept of Ben Adam Lemakom and Ben Adam Lechavero come from? I know there is a concept of the first five of the ten commandments being between 'man and his friend' and the second ...

judaism.stackexchange.com

If it is just like the pervious law, why does he say it will be “not like” the previous? You make no sense whatsoever. This is classic revisionist technique. The law is Jesus, we must accept Jesus in our hearts. His commandments were to love God and to love thy neighbor.

Otherwise where is this new covenant that Jeremiah said would come?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Well, not being religious, these disputations mostly strike me as being founded on silly mythologies, though I do see at least one apparent theological / moral difference.

I can respect the broad idea of being responsible in this world for apologizing and trying to make restoration to those one has personally harmed (if this is really a Jewish principle of right action) rather than simply having “faith” in a god who forgives all and saves one’s soul because one “believes” in Jesus Christ and his Father’s divinity. Perhaps I am missing something here?

 

[rosends]

If it is just like the pervious law, why does he say it will be “not like” the previous? You make no sense whatsoever. This is classic revisionist technique. The law is Jesus, we must accept Jesus in our hearts. His commandments were to love God and to love thy neighbor.

Otherwise where is this new covenant that Jeremiah said would come?

it says it will be "not like" in that it will be written on the hearts and will not have to be taught externally. Why are you ignoring what the text says? There is no mention of Jesus in that, nor has it happened yet.

 

[rosends]

Well, not being religious, these disputations mostly strike me as being founded on silly mythologies, though I do see at least one apparent theological / moral difference.

I can respect the broad idea of being responsible in this world for apologizing and trying to make restoration to those one has personally harmed (if this is really a Jewish principle of right action) rather than simply having “faith” in a god who forgives all and saves one’s soul because one “believes” in Jesus Christ and the Father’s divinity. Perhaps I am missing something here?

You aren't wrong -- all these laws are based on local mythologies. What is problematic (IMHO) is the coopting of a mythology and the insistence that the local community whose mythology it is is wrong in the understanding and application of the mythology. And to do so by inserting a distinct and unrelated mythology which (it could be argued) was only created in order to undercut the earlier one compounds the problem.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

You aren't wrong -- all these laws are based on local mythologies. What is problematic (IMHO) is the coopting of a mythology and the insistence that the local community whose mythology it is is wrong in the understanding and application of the mythology. And to do so by inserting a distinct and unrelated mythology which (it could be argued) was only created in order to undercut the earlier one compounds the problem.

I’m a little confused here. How can an “orthodox Jewish rabbi” like yourself accept that Old Testament Bible stories are just “mythologies,” yet consider them somehow the revealed words of God?

 

[theHawk]

it says it will be "not like" in that it will be written on the hearts and will not have to be taught externally. Why are you ignoring what the text says? There is no mention of Jesus in that, nor has it happened yet.

So how was this new law “placed in their midst”?

How was it “inscribed in their hearts”?

You also did not tell us what this new covenant is exactly. When and where did it happen if it was not Jesus?

 

[theHawk]

If you read it you will see that the "new" part is the delivery method, not the content. How will this covenant be new and not like the earlier one? Well, it will still be the same law (the Hebrew reads "my Torah") but it will be placed directly into people's hearts so it won't have to be taught. That's what the text says.

If the content isn’t any different then why would there be a need for a new covenant?

How is it written in their hearts?