Imagine two schools of medicine. Let us call them “x” and “y”. Each of these schools has their own approach to medicine and each of these schools puts forth students who put their respective school’s theories into practice. As you probably guessed, these two schools disagree on many elements of the study and practice of healing people. Disagree is actually too mild of a word. Each of these schools earnestly believes that the other school is not teaching medicine, but murder.
One day, the faculty of school “x” admit that they made a mistake. Not just a one-time mistake but a mistake that had continuously been taught as truth for years and years. Not just a minor mistake, but an error about one of the fundamental concepts of medicine. Let us say that they had been teaching that the liver and the heart are useless organs. May I remind you that the members of “y” had been preaching for years that the liver and the heart are vital organs – but the members of “x” have always disregarded the opinion of school “y”.
At this point you would expect the members of school “x” to do some soul searching. They should ask themselves how this error came to be preached as truth? What fundamental flaw in their system allowed this error to be perpetuated for years on end? What prevented them from realizing their mistake for so long? Why could they not appreciate the inherent truth of school “y”’s teaching concerning the heart and the liver?
Imagine if the members of school “x” do none of the above. Instead they continue teaching whatever they have taught up until now – without even fully rearranging their medical theories to fit with the “newfound” truths that they learned about the heart and the liver.
Would you begin to take them seriously?
The meaning of this parable should be apparent. School “x” is Christianity while school “y” is Judaism. The mistake that many Christians have admitted to is that their teaching of “replacement theology” – which insists that the Church has replaced Israel – is an error. Let us pause to understand the depth of this error. Israel is the second most important word in the Jewish Scriptures after God. Reading the Bible with an incorrect understanding of the word “Israel” is as bad as reading a book about the earth’s climate without knowing what the word “cold” means. You would expect that the various schools of Christian theologians who have now come to realize the error should pause and take stock. They should ask themselves what lead them to this error. They should ask themselves what flaws are inherent in their system that allowed this error to be perpetuated for so long. They should ask themselves why they could not hear the truth inherent in the claim of the Jewish people when they asserted that Israel is Israel and not the Church.
Finally – you would expect them to open their ears just a little bit when the same Jewish people are arguing that God is God and not Jesus.
Is that asking too much?
If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FEAQ55Y7MR3E6
Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.
Thank You
Yisroel C. Blumenthal
1000 Verses - a project of Judaism Resources 
A lie you hear for the hundredth time you will believe much easier than the truth you hear the first time. If a representative of replacement theology would admit that he was mistaken and that the truth is just the other way round (Israel is the chosen people and the Christians are led astray and will perish) then this behaviour would have devastating consequences for this theologian, e. g. financial consequences. He will be fired immediately. So you see there is a very important reason why they do not admit their own mistakes.
An excommunicated Roman Catholic priest once told me that most of his former colleagues do not even believe in virgin birth doctrine. And yet they preach it for it is commanded so by the Holy See. One fact you may never draw in question: the Holy See is infallible and the Roman Catholic “New Testament” is the infallible Word of God. If someone says so you always have do defend yourself against this heresy. So they hear the same lie on and on and on and they call it spiritual life. They mystically live without liver and heart and they believe they even have a brain. I was one of them and, beleive me, I know what I’m talking about.
Depends upon which teacher or follower (or version) of school X you are talking about. Some believe the only problem is with the Roman Catholic Church version (“Constantine”) of the teacher and not with the original founder (or founding party or fathers) of the school, which is Yeshua (as some who have a vested interest in Jesus, now prefer to call the teacher of x). Those who feel they have been healed or their life was “saved” (changed for the better) by school x, will never give up on x, no matter what. If they believe x is from god, then if they were to give up on x for any other school or opinion, then they have become an atheist who has lost their very soul and will go to everlasting, fiery “hell”. Some have never seen themselves as “Israel”, except in the way that the founder of x is the king of x and he is their king and their can be no other.
Those who know about relacement theology, still believe that x is of god and that x is Israel. To them y is not the true Israel, the followers of x are (if they use a different name, a more Hebrewish sounding name, Yeshua, Yahushua, etc for the “true” founder of school x). To those people, they are the true Israel, and not Jews or definitely not anyone from Y or Judaism. They don’t see themselves as x, but as the true y (or no school, no religion (except maybe z), the true believers of “the messiah” or god).
No matter which version of the school of x (RCC, Protestant, JW, Mormon, or “messianic followers of “Yeshua”, etc) that they follow, Jews AND/OR Y (Yehuda or Judaism) is the Israel that was rejected, thrown out, has lost it’s way, or corrupted the true teachings, true form of worship of the true god, which is the “founder” of the school of x (whether his name is Yeshua, Jesus, Yahushua, or a dozen other variants of Iesous).
Almost everyone one of the school of x, still believe that they are the true followers (church, congregation, assembly, synagogue, or independent believer) of the founder of x (Jesus, Yeshua, etc.), who is from god or is god, the god of Israel. If there is any error within the school of x, it is from the devil, satan, fallible man, ignorant man (only following traditions of man) or corrupt teachings of man or cult leaders. Very few, of these, see any truth in y, which they see as filled with stubborn, ignorant, “spiritually blinded” (naturally or intentionally by their god), or corrupt teachers. They want to see no Truth in y, nothing of God, that is why there is so much opposition to Oral Torah. They want to see Oral Torah, not as a deeper revelation of God as found in the written Torah, but as a “legalism”. Nor do they Want to see it as expounding on the written Torah (as one admires, appreciates, studies, & expounds upon poetry, music, or beautiful art), but somehow as a rejection or replacement of the Written Torah. If they can show themselves or others Oral Torah is “traditions of man” meant to “replace Written Torah”, they can reject y and stay with x. They can feel good about their beliefs, despite any errors in the teachings of x or even fundamental & foundational flaws of x. I once was a follower of x, myself.
Naaria
well said
The followers of x firmly believe that there is a devil named Satan, that was cast out of heaven and is at constant battle for human souls with G-D.
The fear that is so profound that despite the fact that the word: “devil” which does not exist anywhere in the Tanakh; and the story of a fallen angel named Satan also does not exist.
The followers of x simply diverge from these apparent facts by simply claiming that it doesn’t matter
because they are led by the holy-spirit, then attempt to super impose this same fear they live under
upon anyone who brings these obvious errors to light.
Pingback: Fourth Response to Dalton Lifsey | 1000 Verses
Dear Friends;
Adversarial divinities are almost universal. Jews returnees got the idea from the Zoroaeerians. They had their good and bad gods. However, with us being Monotheistic, their bad god became a mischievous angel in the Tanach. Later, to up-grade it to Pagan acceptance, the Greek idea and name was appended by the Gentile Nazarenes.
Fallen angels are impossible in the Tanach, for the simple reason it would have to have free will to be “fallen.” Angels do not have free will, and you waste your time trying to prove it. All that any angel did was G-d directed, and with His permission or direction. Since no human was involved in the conversation, cannot really tell.
Exploring the Tanach to find proof of x, y, or z is either futile, or in plain sight. Problem I have seen is using the Greek versions, and then saying you have it. You do, but it is Greek to me, and I stay with His word; in the original Hebrew/Aramaic.
Aramaic is as close to Hebrew, as Dutch is to German, so it is virtually the same language, scripturally speaking.
Remember, common sense tells us that we have different faiths because we have different religions/theologies. So let us rspect each other and work together, not argue. OK?
Shalom;
Yechiel
One has to do more than say “respect each other”, especially when there are some who cannot even respect those from different brances or denominations within their own religion. It also rings hollow to first make the argument (which is valid for you and me) that there are no fallen angels, when the idea of fallen man and fallen angels are 2 of the major tenets of most Christian’s belief system, and then to say “we must respect each other”.
Dear naaria;
I agree. All i do here is express history. The rest is commentary.
Shalom;
Yechiel
Reblogged this on 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources.
You are all flailing around in the dark. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Scientologists, Mormons and any other diverse religion, sub religion, sect or cult, you are all either at war or at odds with most of the others and all of you interpret the holly texts and traditions to suit yourselves and your ideologies.
Who is right? You all think you are. Who is wrong? Everyone else but you of course. Many of you also believe the myth of the devil corrupting all other beliefs, but not yours obviously.
There is a massive chance that all of you have it completely wrong and nothing you had faith in is true. There is the more creditable scientific explanation that you have fallen victims to ancient man’s superstitious beliefs of mythical supernatural gods that explained natural occurrences on the planet they did not understand.
Has your god really and honestly spoken to you and have you seen him? Are you sure it is not all happening with the chemical reactions and changes inside your head like the neuroscientists have been discovering this decade?
Neuroscientists have proven that prayer and meditation can help individuals through recovery in sickness and stressful conditions, however good that may be, they have not found any supernatural gods directing anything in your brain or your body.
Maybe many of you need a god for many reasons therefore I say stay with it or seek professional help and look after yourself. If you are committed in believing that you will miss out on the pronounced drawcard of eternal life and in some cases a number of virgins or seeing your loved ones in heaven and you are terrified of going to the other reversed incentive of hell, you had better stay put in your beliefs as well for health reasons.
Otherwise, for the rest of you rational thinkers it is about time you all got off your hands and knees, stopped nodding at walls, crossing yourself, dispose the prayer mats, and remove any silly traditional hats, clothing and symbols.
I would say ditch the whole shooting match, save time, money, stress and stop listening to BS every week, take up serious meditational techniques and live a free unencumbered life without thinking you are being judged as a born sinner for the rest of your life.
sklyjd Thanks for your comment. I have a question for you. Why do you assume that the motivation for religion is fear of hell/desire for a better afterlife/ explanation of confusion? Can it be that there is another root motivation for religion?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Thank you for your question. I have not assumed that the desire for an afterlife is the sole motivation purposely and I recognise many others can contribute as motivations to turn to faith, however many of those other reasons are not the primary root motivators to belief and faith in religions and gods.
The first religious roots and the core traditions throughout religious history come from many diverse primitive ancient people, their emphasis on the supernatural worlds has always featured in all religions taking a firm grip on minds through the power of fear, expectation, superstition, ignorance and conformity etc, with the use of indoctrination methodologies generating emotional subservience and unsound ideals as the tools used extensively within religious societies passed down through the centuries and this merits a discussion on its own.
To get back to my main theme, I realise the diversity and confusion of belief within organisations, communities, churches and even in family homes, I also recognise the similarities that exist between all religions through their inherited makeup spaning thousands of years of influential religious history, however these similarities are always overlooked or denied and substituted for exclusivity claims or ignored due to the disposition and animosity between many religious organisations.
The fact that religions are not so exclusive, and because all gods are of a similar disposition should be enough for any rational person to add one and one together. The reality is that faithful theists have one or more gods they may spend their entire life in prayer too, these gods are where they spend their time, money and dedication in faith hoping above all to please powerful life forces that are supposed to exist in another dimension of the supernatural world and are trusting this entity to allow them to enter a heavenly place that in all certainty and practicality does not exist outside of the human mind.
I say the evidence anyone has for any of these gods is only as good as the evidence provided by flat Earthers. They reject contrary evidence as a conspiracy by scientists and often this claim is made by theists when rejecting science.
The ancient religions made sense of everything natural from the sun rising to the volcano erupting that science now explains. The new religious movements in today’s terms such as the hundreds of TV preachers and so called healers have built their financial empires on the backs of today’s religions and the exploitation of common people by utilising superstitions and indoctrination to the full extent.
sklyjd If the hope for a good afterlife is such a primary motivator of all religions, then why is there no explicit mention of the afterlife in the most ancient texts of Judaism? (Five Books of Moses) And on what basis do you say that the similarities between all religions are “always” overlooked or denied? Have you studied the texts of all religions?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
“Have you studied the texts of all religions?”
I have not, and I am not an expert on any religion, nor am I a religious scholar and I have never professed to be one. The information I use is hardly of a technical nature and it can be easily corroborated. My criticism of religions are clear observations and deductions for anybody who takes an interest.
Studying texts of religions in my opinion are not where any answers lie in regard to the credibility of the beliefs or answers to healing conflict between the faiths.
You have highlighted what I have said in the previous post regarding conflict within religions because the Jewish sources are conflicted about what happens after death.
“And on what basis do you say that the similarities between all religions are “always” overlooked or denied?”
These obvious similarities are mostly not recognised or considered.
Most religions have gods or deities of some kind apart from a few such as Secular Buddhism that does not advocate belief in gods and Jainism that believes the universe is eternal and has no need for a creator deity. Most religions with gods promise an afterlife, reincarnation or similar.
Most religious gods and deities even from the Vikings take the shape of the human form, some have heads of animals, wings or similar attachments. Most religions have gods that are creators, gods with various kinds of superpowers and gods that destroy. Most religions have a perception of a heaven and a hell or similar such concepts.
All three of the world’s major religions were created in the Middle East Judaism existed before Christianity and then Islam, all have monotheist traditions and are very similar.
The similarities are clearly due to a pattern of borrowing ideas from others, especially when you have conversions of theists from one theology to another particularly in the early days of forming a new religion.
sklyjd You have not studied religious texts, you are not an expert on any religion yet you make pompous declarations about the motives behind all religions and about what religions say or do not say about each other. You claim that your criticism of religions are “clear observations and deductions.” Fine and well. So what have you observed so clearly that makes you confident that “all” religions are rooted in a motivation to believe in an afterlife and that “all” religions overlook or deny the similarities between religions? How do you know what “religions” are saying or why they are saying what they are saying if you haven’t read their texts?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
I have lived on this planet for many years and I do not need to be an expert in religious beliefs or a theist to understand the inconsistencies, the arguments and the hatred that I have seen firsthand.
You do not have to be an expert in political issues to criticise politics or an expert historian to be able to quote history and your response of trying to claim I am unqualified to make comments on religions actually makes you pompous.
“How do you know what “religions” are saying or why they are saying what they are saying if you haven’t read their texts?”
What religions say and do often does not come out of their holly books, it may be on the news and it is easy to find the controversial issues or the arguments on the many web pages of all the obscure beliefs.
“So what have you observed so clearly that makes you confident that “all” religions are rooted in a motivation to believe in an afterlife”
I actually said in my earlier comments that the many diverse primitive ancient people had an emphasis on the supernatural worlds and consequently I was saying that most religions are rooted in the supernatural world, the afterlife is just a part of this.
The only place to observe supernatural phenomena is within the workings of your own brain.
I regret if I have upset you or your readers because I am aware of how deep these ideological issues can be for some theists. I feel if my words have the effect of making people rethink their acceptance of such issues and realise there are neurological answers to superstitions, myths and supernatural events it is well worth the effort.
sklyjd This sounds very scientific. You get your information from the “news” and the “webpages.” And that is how you “know” what the ancients believed. Would you go to a doctor who got his information from the “news” and from “webpages”?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
A doctor has some serious responsibility, such as people’s lives are at stake, quite a difference to the subject we are discussing I believe.
By the way I had quite a handle on ancient history when books were the only rage, were you around then?
Are you saying the internet web pages are something you would never use for information for anything?
sklyjd I was not comparing our discussion to the practice of medicine in the sense of the seriousness of the responsibility – I was just demonstrating that there are preferable and less-than-preferable ways of getting information. If you are going to tell people about why ancient people believed what they believed and you want people to take you seriously it would be a good idea to familiarize yourself – at least a little – with the ancient texts you are talking about – like so that you can give us a quote where in the ancient Jewish texts it speaks about supernatural worlds. To answer your question – I certainly would use internet pages to find out information but I wouldn’t expect people to take my opinions seriously if that was the only source of information I used.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
sklyjd, John
What contrary evidence is there that there is no god?
Clearly, you are not going to believe me Larry, so type into You Tube “debates on god’s existence” to get a balanced review to answer your question.
Sklyjd
I’ve already done that. Some people are so funny there. That I have enjoyed. But you said there was evidence.
The contrary evidence that provides the disbelief that gods exist comes from the discoveries through science.
sklyjd And just how do the “discoveries through science” provide the “disbelief”?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
The Earth is 4.543 billion years old.
Biological evolutionary principles are indisputable and have been tested by science for over 150 years.
Sklyjd
There have been quite a few who have come here and made the same claim. I cannot speak for everyone but based on past conversations science is respected here. Recently I forget the exact words but heard a Rabbi say, the best way to know the creator is through science. It’s a god way to know some things. You may disagree but not all scientist agree and if they don’t you might say their stupid and give a bunch of reasons why. Kinda like what you said when first commenting here. “Who’s right? You all think you are. Who is wrong? Everyone else but you of course”. Anyway, the neurological argument has been presented before. I await the evidence.
Walking the fine line between religious belief and recent scientific discoveries about the human brain, Where God Lives in the Human Brain explores the way humans have evolved to seek meaning in the world, to humanize our environment and to long for connection with the divine. (Google)
“The neurological argument” is well on the way and it should soon be listed along with things such as these below, however it will be disbelieved by many theists just as these are.
The Earth is 4.543 billion years old.
Biological evolutionary principles.
I do not condemn anyone, however when children who are not old enough to tie their shoe laces are indoctrinated into an adult ideology with the anti-science component of creationism and the Genesis story I feel compelled to speak out.
sklyjd How does the age of the earth and biological evolution serve as evidence that there is no God? BTW – there are several articles on this blog about biological evolution – you can find them under the category “Addressing Atheism”
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
“like so that you can give us a quote where in the ancient Jewish texts it speaks about supernatural worlds.”
I did not particularly reference the Jewish texts, nor did I claim that anything of a particular nature was within any religious texts. I have claimed that many different interpretations and beliefs stem from these texts.
It is clear without referencing the Tanakh that Judaism beliefs are rooted within the supernatural like any other religion because you worship Yahweh. If you disagree with this please explain.
Referencing the web pages is practical, everything and anything you can read in a book including religious texts are accessible on line, you just have to know if you can trust your source.
For example, using the practice of medicine scenario, I would not need to read a medical journal to understand how to treat an ingrown toenail or to treat a paper cut, so I do not need to read every page of a religious text to claim the common aspects of religions. More as to the point most if not all of the medical journals are accessible on line anyway.
“How does the age of the earth and biological evolution serve as evidence that there is no God?”
For the secular world these issues dispelled any notion of a creator, some religions, denominations and theists may accept these as fact by using the god of their personal ideology expanded in time to the designer and creator of the world 4.543 billion years ago, and by starting life with evolutionary processes approximately 360 million years ago. So ultimately they and I understand from your blogs you also agree in principle, but it is still speculating on the supernatural. The science is however outrightly rejected in any shape or form by a vast number of literal theists.
It appears anything science can do, a god can do better, due solely to the supernatural component.
sklyjd
It seems that we were speaking two different languages. To me the words “supernatural worlds” implied a system of worlds something like Greek mythology. Now I see that all you meant was “something beyond nature” and if that is what you meant, then I agree that Judaism is rooted in the belief that there is more to existence than that which could be put in a test-tube, but I wouldn’t have called it “supernatural words.”
Do you believe that a love for truth, justice, kindness and morality are biological developments? Or do you believe that they are realities that exist outside of biology?
“Now I see that all you meant was “something beyond nature” and if that is what you meant,”
“Supernatural (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.” (Google)
A lot of the Christians I have blogged used this term frequently and I have adopted it because the meaning above seems to fit as well as any.
“Do you believe that a love for truth, justice, kindness and morality are biological developments? Or do you believe that they are realities that exist outside of biology?”
I do believe we have evolved biologically with the basics regarding truth, justice, kindness and morality. Homo erectus about 1.89 million years ago would have been closer to the animal characteristics of our ancestors but considering the great apes: chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas had already evolved to a certain standard of social and community skills we as humans then would have evolved further and built upon our morality as man developed his body to suit the environment and grew larger brains.
Of course, we are still evolving quite quickly as far as morals go, but it is the parents who take the rough edge of these basic emotions and hopefully guide us into the future. Religions, politics, education and many social influences have also played their part in later developments of modern human morals.
I understand this science would be in conflict with just about every religion with a Genesis kind of creator God. If this was accepted and faith bows to science and goes to the last bastion such as a god created life on Earth and let life develop on its own evolving biological processes it would only then come down to a god creation verses the big bang because we would agree on the process and progress of life. It is therefore only the last issue about a life after death in that we cannot find a consensus because everything in between is somewhat irrelevant.
Sklyjd
I clicked on your name and :
“Ugly, disgusting, abusive, foul and a f..k..g idiot. Now I will address my bad points……”
Please continue.
Enjoy that did you? I wrote that some years ago and I guess I should make changes as I am using the blogging world, however, it was not supposed to be taken as serious, but you are free to use it against me if you wish.
sklyjd, John
What’s to enjoy about that?
Well, you did bring it up, did you not?
Sklyjd
Yes, out of curiosity.
Sklyjd, cymatics is a recent scientific discovery.
3ooo years ago, King David was already singing the truth more vividly in Psalm 19:4.
Keep searching and exploring in the field of science, i bet you will get there where you find your God who created you and this world.
“Keep searching and exploring in the field of science, i bet you will get there where you find your God who created you and this world.”
I think science has already found all of Earths gods, of course this will become more obvious and firmly established as time moves on. I will gladly take you up on your bet.