Daniel 7 and Acceptance of Scripture – an Open Letter to Bru
You have come to this blog to share what you understand as the truth. You quote Scripture in an effort to demonstrate how the theology that you are espousing is the belief of the Author of Scripture. You are hoping that we will accept your theology on the basis of these Scriptures that you quote.
If you expect us to change our theology on the basis of the word of God as recorded in Scripture you should be willing to do the same. You may be thinking that your theology is rooted in the word of God and that you have nothing to change but your lengthy comments demonstrate that your position is NOT rooted in the word of God but in the Christian Scripture as interpreted by the Church of the Seventh Day Adventists.
Allow me to demonstrate. You have interpreted Daniel 7:27 as if it states that all dominions will serve the one who you call “the most high.” The problem with your interpretation is that it is based on a demonstrable mistranslation. The words “kadishei elyonin” do not mean “holy ones of the most high” but rather they mean “holy exalted ones.” Try looking it up in any concordance. The verse is saying that the dominions will serve the nation of holy exalted ones. Since you already correctly surmised that verse 27 is an interpretation of verse 14 you should now realize that the “one like the son of man” is representative of the people of Israel. This would make verse 27 parallel to verse 17 as well as to Isaiah 60:12.
If your theology is truly based on the word of God, you should go about revising your theology now that you realize that you have mistranslated the word of God. But if your theology is based on the Church of the SDA then you will probably stay right where you are.
A deeper question needs to be asked at this point. Who told you to look at these verses in Daniel for the foundations of your theology? Was it the Church of the SDA or was it the Author of Scripture? Which passages does the Author of Scripture point you to when it comes to the question of who it is that we are to worship? Is it this passage in Daniel or is it perhaps a different set of passages altogether? If you truly accept the authority of Scripture why then will you not let the Author of the book tell you what is important, what is not and which passages are teachings on which subjects?
Oh, before I forget allow me to address your assertion about the “ability” of God to “become a man.” Do you believe that God could become insane? Could He become confused? Could He become “not God”? He can do anything, can’t He?
I will humbly suggest that you read these articles, not so that you accept the theology that I believe is true but to help you see how you have been misled into thinking that the teachings of the SDA Church are the teachings of the Jewish Scripture.
If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.
Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.
Yisroel C. Blumenthal
Rashi says and Artscroll comments that the son of man in vs 13 is Messiah. Vs. 27 refers to the nation of Israel. I don’t see any contradiction here as the Messiah will rule the nation of Israel Gods holy exalted people is this wrong? I didn’t read Bru so I don’t know exactly what he said.
Forgive my typing error my name is Doovid
Rashi explains in verse 14 that the son of man is Israel – the Messiah as Israel’s king represents Israel – but the son of man is not being served as a divine being but as representative of God’s firstborn son Israel
The Son of man cannot be Israel the nation in that vision, but an actual being (although certainly He is their Prince, the Prince of the Covenant, the Messiah Nagid, and represents them…since He gives the New Covenant, it is evident that His people have to identified themselves with that New Covenant) ///
Why it is so?
The Son of man cannot be Israel the simply because the vision shows and actual interaction between the Son, for two reasons, which are
1) there is a physical interaction between God as a being with another being the Son of Man…if you make the Son of man symbolic you need to do the same with the other person He is interacting with…and the vision itself does not allows that…
2) but also, the vision addresses a coronation of this being, as a heavenly event taking place before the kingdom of heaven is given to His people…and at that time the people of Israel are not in heaven but here on earth…therefore they cannot be the same entity. The Son of man is Jesus, and it is He who receives His kingdom and shares with His people, the Israel of God…
Bru You are arguing with the angel – according to the “cut and paste” that you put up in your previous comment – the end of Daniel 7 is an explanation of the beginning – so the angel explains that the Son of Man is Israel yet here you contradict your SDA teachers please pay attention to the Bible and to the truth
If you are going to say that because the one “like a son of a man” must be a literal person, then you will also have to say that the previous four beasts, which correspond to him, are also literal beasts. You will have to say that an actual horn with human-like eyes exists or will exist and it has spoken or will speak. And you will have to say that it was or will be thrown into a fire. You cannot make it symbolic and at the same time argue that one like a son of man is not symbolic.
Any Christian who is truly confused about how Jews could possibly see the messiah as only a human being, should read about the Ebionites, a group of Jesus’ early Jewish students. Ebionites believed that Jesus was just a man, chosen by G-d, but not G-d. The “one like a son of man” is a metaphor, just like the 4 beasts/kingdoms are a metaphor.
Even if an angelic being were somehow HYPOTHETICALLY beside G-d, or a manifestation of him we NEVER FIND IN SCRIPTURE ANYWHERE AN EXAMPLE OF SUCH A BEING RECIEVING SERVICE THAT THE FATHER ALONE RECIEVES.
Consider carefully also the text of 1 Corinthians 15:24-28. “Then the end will come, when he (Jesus) HANDS OVER THE KINGDOM TO G-D the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign UNTIL he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, IT IS CLEAR that THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE G-D himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then THE SON HIMSELF WILL HE MADE SUBJECT to him who put everything under him, so that G-D may be all in all.
THE PURPOSE OF YOUR JESUS ACCORDING TO PAUL IS NOT TO GE SERVED AND PRAYED TO, BUT TO GIVE THE KINGDOM TO THE FATHER. Jews already recognize the SOVREIGNTY and sole rule of G-d the father, and Christian devotion to Jesus has obscured the fact of G-d’s SOVREIGNTY by making the words of Jesus seem more important than the father’s own clear words. THE NT ITSELF WARNS THAT A MAN SHOULD NOT BE SERVED AS G-D.
BRU’S RESPONSE TO = Daniel 7 and Acceptance of Scripture – an Open Letter to Bru
Posted on May 10, 2015 by yourphariseefriend
You wrote>>>You have come to this blog to share what you understand as the truth. You quote Scripture in an effort to demonstrate how the theology that you are espousing is the belief of the Author of Scripture. You are hoping that we will accept your theology on the basis of these Scriptures that you quote.
Friend, opposite to what you say…I came here I do not even know how I end up here, and neither had I an agenda. As I read what was shared here, it became evident that there were some ideas shared that did not quite match what the Word of God was saying, such I did addressed. I shared the Word of God, because the Word of God explains itself…that is to those that listen to what it says.
It is not my theology I share….and I will not show anything else but what it says there…
Actually I have not even discussed this vision of Daniel 7 in detail, but I did alluded to it in reference to Daniel 9….but concerning Daniel 9. I did say that the Messiah Nagid/anointed Prince, identified as Jesus by the 70 weeks timeline there presented is the same Son of Man seen in Daniel 7 as being crowned King of kings and Lord of lords. As can be understood in the following timeline there shown=
Medopersian decree of 457 bc. for the Post Babylonian Restoration of Jerusalem and temple, as quoted in Ezra 7, as being the starting point to the 70weeks(490 years) timeline shown in Daniel 9 as follows=
Decree/457bc + 7wks.62weeks.1wk(70.WEEKS/490YRS) — > 34AD/End of 70weeks
of those weeks of years, the first 69 weeks to the Messiah..=
Decree/457bc + 7wks.62weeks (sixty-nine weeks/483yrs) — > 27ad /arrival Messiah=Jesus
The Bible describes the decree that was to bring us to the Messiah, and 3 decrees were given, each addressing some aspect of the post-babylonian restoration(Cyrus/534bc,Darius/521bc and Artaxerxes/457bc), but the last decree of 457BC/Ezra 7 was the decree that finally completed all the details for the final restoration, most important of all being the giving to Jerusalem the right to rule itself, magistrates and judges, in so doing giving Israel religious political powers to become once again a nation under God!!! Amen! Another point that was brought in the discusion is that the vision gives the part of the timeline that bring us to the Messiah as being 7weeks 62weeks, truth be told in ancient Hebrew no punctuations marks separated this two numbers (You and others see it as separate and independent time periods addressing different issues), but when taken as representing 69 weeks ( that is sixty nine weeks, same as 483 years ) from the decree, this bring us to 27ad, as the point in time the Messiah was to arrive, which historically speaking this points to the arrival of Jesus as the Messiah. It was in 27ad that Jesus got anointed by the Holy Spirit as a dove, at the time of His baptism and starting point of His ministry, dying AFTER his arrival at the end of the sixty nine weeks, right in the midst of the last or 70th week and in so doing ending the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblation). Any person with the basic knowledge of probabilities will show that this are not random casual events but within the historical parameters chosen (the decree/457bc and the timeline of sixty nine weeks /483 years) but significant realities.
I really do not know what to expect of you, I do not know you and personally I do not know how much you love the truth… but truth is what I am sharing!!!
>>>If you expect us to change our theology on the basis of the word of God as recorded in Scripture you should be willing to do the same. You may be thinking that your theology is rooted in the word of God and that you have nothing to change but your lengthy comments demonstrate that your position is NOT rooted in the word of God but in the Christian Scripture as interpreted by the Church of the Seventh Day Adventists.
I have shown you that I can not accept your understanding of the scriptures and timeline of Daniel 9, of 70 weeks, because as follows:
1) You do something to a continuous timeline of the 70 weeks (including the inner timeline of its initial 69 weeks), and it is that in order to use the parameters you choose as the starting and ending points that you arrive, or vice versa (as going from the ending point to find the starting point), either way you introduce a gap in the 70 weeks timeline which is not present there since this is a continuous time period (you do not even divided in the presented consecutive 7wks. 62wks and 1 week presented there), as such I cannot accept what you present concerning the time periods.
2)You also introduce as the starting point of the 70 weeks timeline the “word” of Jeremiah, which was not the order to get the temple reconstructed, but instead a declarative statement of what was going to happen(the “word” of Jeremiah, only says that the exiles were to return…that’s all). as such ignoring the fact that the words/decrees for the reconstruction of the city and temple had its origin in the MedoPersian kings that did had the power to do so…(Jeremiah and all His love to His people could not avert their judgment of desolation to come and neither could he order the later reconstruction that came under the MedoPersians, and these MedoPersian kings are the ones that give the word/order/decree/commandment for the restoration of Jerusalem, specifically the decree of 457bc of Artaxerxes as the one that finally makes of Jerusalem a functional city, as such Israel a nation under God once again, as such the decree required by the prophecy as the starting point of the 70 weeks (and its inner 69 weeks unto the arrival of the Messiah).
3) Finally concerning your ending point, then …if the starting point is in error, then we can readily admit that the ending point of the sixty nine weeks to identify who is the Messiah which was to come at that point in time or the ending point a week later to the final end of all 70 weeks will be incorrect as well. ( even when allowing for two Messiahs as you say, by using your timelines, the Messiahs arrival according to you come into question because=
1) your first Messiah at the end of the first 7 weeks as being Cyrus and the earlier decree as being that one by Jeremiah 70 years earlier, means that included in the first part of the 70 weeks(490 years) you have the 70 years (or a large portion of it) of the Babilonian Desolation which cannot be part of the 70 weeks probation/mercy that the timeline of Daniel 9 addresses. This 70 weeks addresses the Post Babilonian restoration and functionality of the city and temple of the the later times of the Messiah to come(all periods of relative peace), therefore=
these 70 weeks(490 yrs) of probation/mercy cannot include within themselves any portion or totality of the desolation of the city and temple (whether at the start of the 70 weeks by Babylon or at its end/Rome). Again, none of this desolations can be part of the time of probation/mercy to Israel which was to last 490 years, yet your timeline includes the Babiloniann desolation all or a large portion of it, and after a gap extends to the Roman desolation/70ad as the ending point).
A proper understanding of the 70 weeks as a period of probation/mercy needs to be understood when considering the following =
1)Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,….
2)Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: (ENDING THE OFFERING IN FORCE OF THE COVENANT AT THE END OF THE 70TH WEEK, SAME AS THE END OF THE 70 WEEKS)
THE ABOVE MEANS, that the 70 weeks(490 years) was in fact a total period of probation/mercy, which end at the end of the 70th week was to be marked by the ending of the offering in force of the New Covenant by the Messiah to the nation of Israel. We all know what happened by this point.. The New Covenant was ratified by the Messiah Jesus that last week in 31ad at the same time the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblation ended, all this happening in the midst of the last/70th week as the prophecy in Daniel 9 foretold, certainly as identify in the prophecy as understood and described above. Yet, Messiah’s Jesus New Covenant was rejected by the nation of Israel by the end of the 70 weeks in 34ad. Thanks to God, He provided this New Covenant to all believers, original believer Jews and grafted believer gentiles. A few years later by 70ad the abomination desolation of the city and temple took place once again, this time by the Romans. This re-abomination.desolation of the city and 2nd temple as foretold in the same prophecy of Daniel 9 to take place, sometime AFTER the 62 weeks when counting from the end of the initial set of 7 weeks (same as after the 69 weeks when counting from the decree itself). AFTER 69 (sixty nine) WEEKS, is a nonspecific time period, which means any where thereafter..
since the Messiah was to arrive at the end of the 62 weeks (same as the end of the 69 weeks depending from where one is counting), this means that the AFTER 62 WEEKS actually means AFTER THE MESSIAH ARRIVED, as such the prophecy is saying that the abomination.desolation(by the Romans/70ad) was to take place AFTER the arrival of the Messiah, as such=
Messiah arrives at the end of 62 weeks (DIES AFTER 62 WEEKS)…
The abomination desolation takes place after 62weeks,
therefore means the abomination.desolation/Roman was to take place AFTER the Messiah arrived and so it did…first came Jesus in 27ad, died in 31ad, and the AFTER the abomination desolation by the Romans took place in 70ad. It is this abomination.desolation of the Jewish temple in 70 ad as documented in history which tells us that the Messiah already came well before 70ad… a sobering thought indeed!!! An if the Messiah already came, this means that He already confirmed the New Covenant and in so doing annuled the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblation, as the prophecy itself also tells us! Which bring us to the ultimate question…Why then set up a new temple and sacrifices since these were already abolished by the Messiah as foretold in the prophecy of Daniel 9?
2)Speaking of your second Messiah at the end of the 62weeks period, you said that he was to arrive in 70 ad which is the starting point of the roman abomination.desolation, and I wonder which Messiah is going to have 7 years to confirm his covenant if arriving in 70ad while the city and temple is being destroyed(time that you said the second Messiah was to arrived) and better yet did anybody at that time, while the desolation was taking place, saw that Messiah doing so?
And even more yet, did your people proclaimed him and accept Him as such, as their Messiah that in 70 ad was to arrival and thereafter confirm his covenant, as you said?) H Not identifying who is the Messiah
Since that is the vision, Daniel 9, the one that I had discusses in your group, the above are the reasons why I can not accept your explanations, for me they do not make sense, they divide the timeline into and its ending and starting points bring difficult problems to deal with as discussed above, this has nothing to do with my Christianity, because if you would have proven me that your two Messiahs were the ones, then I would accept them, but no…I do not believe you have, even following your line of reasoning, frankly I see too many holes in it!!
Now moving on, (the above for those that have not read my comments in the other letter and original post, so that they understand where I am coming from). Now addressing the rest of your comments about Daniel 7=
>>Allow me to demonstrate. You have interpreted Daniel 7:27 as if it states that all dominions will serve the one who you call “the most high.” The problem with your interpretation is that it is based on a demonstrable mistranslation. The words “kadishei elyonin” do not mean “holy ones of the most high” but rather they mean “holy exalted ones.” Try looking it up in any concordance.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdomH4437 and dominion,H7985 and the greatnessH7238 ofH1768 the kingdomH4437 underH8460 the wholeH3606 heaven,H8065 shall be givenH3052 to the peopleH5972 of the saintsH6922 of the most High,H5946 whose kingdomH4437 is an everlastingH5957 kingdom,H4437 and allH3606 dominionsH7985 shall serveH6399 and obeyH8086 him.
The issue above h5946…most high= that is the people of the most high
(Chaldee); corresponding to H5945; the supreme: – Most high.
Another point, is that the prophetic Message presents a Messiah ben David, with multiple verses foretelling of this King that was to rule the saints, …as such ben David as the people of the Most High.. the Son of man shown in the same prophecy as being crowned in heaven, of the line David, as such ben David=
BEN DAVID…HE IS THE SON OF MAN THAT IS TO RULE HIS PEOPLE/THE MESSIAH/JESUS=
Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
>>>The verse is saying that the dominions will serve the nation of holy exalted ones. Since you already correctly surmised that verse 27 is an interpretation of verse 14 you should now realize that the “one like the son of man” is representative of the people of Israel. This would make verse 27 parallel to verse 17 as well as to Isaiah 60:12.
THE MESSIAH BEN DAVID, does identifies with His people, and what is His is theirs, as such the verse in question. But that does not deny that Daniel 7 present two beings God and the Son of Man, one being crowned by the other as King of kings and Lord of lords, this “Ben David” is spoken of through out the OT books, in the prophetic message as the one to come and rule, of the linage of David… multiple prophecies about Him, and He is the Messiah, the Prince of the Covenant which is described in Isaiah 53 as the suffering servant, which is crowned by the end of time as shown in Daniel 7 and there identified as the Son of Man, and who is to rule.
The problem I see with the prophetic understanding of the Jewish people, is that although the New Covenant has being confirmed and ratified by the Messiah (as Daniel 9 confirms, by saying that the Messiah arrives first and then AFTER comes the desolation/70ad of the city and temple took place) they still remain in the old paradigm of the Old Covenant. This mean that we are in fact living during the times of a new paradigm which is the New Covenant, and since the Jews did not accepted the New Covenant (as far as I know, of any messiah that might had come…they according to themselves are still in the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblation, which according to the prophetic message of Dan. 9 was annulled), this means that they do not see the prophetic message within the context of the New Covenant showing that where Israel failed, Jesus their Messiah ben David triumph, and it is within this context that the prophetic message needs to be understood (especially when He has open this New Covenant to all believers, original Jews and grafted gentiles alike, as such introducing a new context to what is to come).
>>If your theology is truly based on the word of God, you should go about revising your theology now that you realize that you have mistranslated the word of God. But if your theology is based on the Church of the SDA then you will probably stay right where you are.
No, I am basing my understanding in the fact that the Messiah ben David, is the same Messiah Nagid that was to come (and did come) and confirmed the New Covenant, and ratified it in the midst of the 70th week as foretold, all fulfilled according to the fact that the same ruins of your temple today tells us that He did came as foretold (since according to Daniel 9 the Messiah was to come before the destruction of this temple, as such its ruins still attest to the fact that the Messiah did com and since He promised that He was to return in glory, as such I expect His soon return.)
>>>A deeper question needs to be asked at this point. Who told you to look at these verses in Daniel for the foundations of your theology? Was it the Church of the SDA or was it the Author of Scripture?
Daniel himself… he explains himself, and his message is from God. If anybody takes the time to study Daniel prophecies all as complementary, as such within the complementary approach that all when place together tell the whole story, then this same understanding I have shared will be theirs.
Daniel 2 and 7 gives an all inclusive Basic historical prophetic timeline starting from the times of Babylon~600bc, then MedoPersia, then Greece to the end of the last or 4th empire/Rome, at the end of time, 2nd coming, to our future. It also provides historical and spiritual events taking place in this earth, and Daniel 7 even shows some heavenly events (judgment, coronation of the Son of Man) as they relate to this earth history, shown as taking place during the time of the end, just prior to His return to this earth.
But the symbolic prophetic vision of Daniel 8 shows a limited prophetic timeline, starting from the times of MedoPersia the ram, onwards to the time of the following Empire of Greece as the goat, and the Little Horn (believe it or not) symbolizing Rome to its end (scheduled to take place at the end of time).
Again a comparative study with Daniel 2 and 7 re-affirming this Basic historical prophetic relationship of empires from the times of Daniel forwards..
Daniel 8 shows a partial basic prophetic historic timeline, (divided into two periods, an initial 2300 years and later “time of the end” extending to the end of the 4th empire(at the end).
This partial basic prophetic historic Timeline=
starts from =
the 2nd empire as the “two horned MedoPersian ram”,
then the 3rd empire as the “1->4 horned-goat of Greece”,
and finally the last/4th empire as “the Little Horn as Rome”(Imperial and later Papal phase)
to the end of time,
that anchor lacking, the unknown little horn’s identity will be at the whimp of humans, move with the waves of human ideas, and various agendas..
Moving further to understand Daniel 9 one needs to take in consideration that Daniel 9 is an explanatory vision of Daniel 8 and related prophecies, which shows the post-Babylonian restoration and functioning of the nation of Israel as it relates to those empires =from Medopersian times, to Greece and initial times of Rome inside the timeline there presented of the 70 weeks, and times thereafter as it continues outside this timeline, when alluding to the later Romans abomination desolations to take place..
Therefore….Daniel 9 and Daniel 11-12 are both angelic explanatory visions of Daniel 8’s symbolic vision which starts with the MedoPersian Ram, as such it is logical to understand that Daniel 9 explaining Daniel 8 starts with what Daniel 8 is talking about, which is MedoPersia as the power to give the order/decree to restore the city and temple. This simple comparative knowledge that Daniel 9’s vision as explaining Daniel 8 starts which MedoPersia, will nullify the idea that the 70 weeks timeline presented in Daniel 9 includes the Babylonian desolation when it does not!
>>>Which passages does the Author of Scripture point you to when it comes to the question of who it is that we are to worship? Is it this passage in Daniel or is it perhaps a different set of passages altogether? If you truly accept the authority of Scripture why then will you not let the Author of the book tell you what is important, what is not and which passages are teachings on which subjects?
I worship God…
the one God that defined Himself as “US” at the time that HE created our forefathers..
I cannot explain to you how God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one, one God,
I only know that in his prophetic message He has shown Himself as such=
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let “US” make man in our image,
>>>Oh, before I forget allow me to address your assertion about the “ability” of God to “become a man.” Do you believe that God could become insane? Could He become confused? Could He become “not God”? He can do anything, can’t He?
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
He is God, He is the Son of man.. He is God made man..so that He could save us, so that he could die like a man…(and remember that no all man become insane, confuse, why then should He being God at the same time want to become that…)
He is the Messiah Prince/suffering servant that did come before 70ad (before the abomination desolation of your city and temple which did take place at that date), as Daniel 9 tells us
that He was to come…
He is the Messiah that died for you and me as foretold that He was to do…
He is Prince of the Covenant THAT CAME AND RATIFIED THE NEW COVENANT..
He is your Prince, the Son of Man, which is to be crowned as Daniel 7 tells us.
He is the Davidic king that one day will return in glory….of whom all your prophetic message speaks about..
HE IS JESUS!
>>>I will humbly suggest that you read these articles, not so that you accept the theology that I believe is true but to help you see how you have been misled into thinking that the teachings of the SDA Church are the teachings of the Jewish Scripture.
I will study them, we all learn from each other….
It is the Bible the one that I have shared…
The teachings of the SDA church are all in the Bible…
And you know why I believe your Messiah already came …simply because the destruction of your city and temple in 70 ad is a testament to the truth of the danielic prophetic message, which foretold of this desolation to come, and this same prophecy of Daniel 9 tell us that the Messiah was to come before that desolation(Roman) was to take place…and as such He did come… Jesus came as foretold, anointed and starting His 70th week ministry in 27ad, dying in the midst of the 70th week/31ad….all these before 70ad…
The Messiah, your Messiah, came to succeed for Israel, and He did..
In him all the promises to the Israel of God, are fulfilled and will be fulfilled…
because He died, and in so doing atone/reconcile us back to God,
the women/the church reconcile back to God….
All in the blood of the Messiah…Jesus, the Lamb of God which takes our sins away!!
Bru Please do not write these lengthy responses – get to the point I will limit myself to one detail – the word in Daniel 7:27 is “elyonin” which is the plural form of “elyon” – it seems that you don’t understand that a concordance is only giving you the root and not the word as it is used in the verse. Please look up the verse – and admit your mistake and revise your theology
Since you want to repeat yourself I will do so also. Answer THIS!
Everything you have concluded is based upon the year 457 and NOW the date of 1844.
You have ignored the repeated question regarding Cyrus. I cited many references and the one of G-d Himself calling Cyrus His Mashiach and that he would perform His pleasure in building the Temple. In Isaiah it doesn’t just say the above, being Mashiach, but that G-d Himself would PAVE THE WAY for Cyrus to do G-d’s will. G-d says that He called Cyrus BY NAME for the sake of Jacob, My Servant and Israel My Chosen. Surely Cyrus warrants much more than that footnote.
Given the emphasis placed upon Cyrus by Hashem why do Xtians only place him as a footnote in history. Certainly G-d wanted him to be more than a footnote. Instead, you and your fellow Xtians have elevated Artaxerxes as preeminent and the entire purpose of all the visions of Daniel. If G-d’s purpose in all this was as you say WHY did G-d NOT give this Artaxerxes the stature that He DID give to Cyrus. A person would have to have the heart of Pharaoh not to see this as obvious.
Bru, again you misunderstand. THE TERM MESSIAH SIMPLY MEANS ANOINTED. ANY PERSON WHO IS ANOINTED WITH OIL IS CALLED A MESSIAH. DANIEL 9 doesn’t refer to just one single person, but many people. it’s not a prophetic timeline the way you are understanding or presenting the verse.
Bru I also told you several times that there is no gap in my timeline but you don’t listen to what I say
The concept of a new covenant to the gentiles totally contradicts what Jeremiah says. First the covenant is directed to the re-united people of Israel. It is a renewal of the original covenant wherein Israel was directed to teach their children. The only difference is in the messianic age such teaching will not be required because Hashem tells us that the Torah will be put into our minds and written on our hearts-in other words it will be an intrinsic part of our being and with universal knowledge- teaching will not be required. This event never happened at the time of Jesus and has still not happened. Hashem tells us “No longer will they teach their neighbor or say to one another, “Know the Lord”- but that is exactly what happens everyday when missionaries try to convert Jews. Your attempts to pervert the true meaning of the Jewish Bible and trying to tell Jews to recognize Jesus as Lord is ironically proof of the validity of the prophetic words of Jeremiah-we still await mashiach and the messianic time.
I agree the cove at is a renewed on with reunited Israel, however; the Rabbonim say Moshiach will teach the Torah.
a testament to the truth of the danielic prophetic message, which foretold of this desolation to come, and this same prophecy of Daniel 9 tell us that the Messiah was to come before that
IT DOESNT REFER TO THE MESSIAH THE SON OF DAVID. IF IT DID, IT WOULD MENTION DAVID.
Scripture interprets scripture.
Which is why the Christian interpretation of Daniel 9 doesn’t work.
yourphariseefriend, Sorry to jump in in that conversation.
Doovid said it right;
“Rashi says and Artscroll comments that the son of man in vs 13 is Messiah. Vs. 27 refers to the nation of Israel.”
Rashi recognises the King Messiah (according to Tannah Artscroll ) and there is no way somebody can overlook the logic of v 14 following the same subject being addressed which is the Messiah. v 14 continues” He was given…” dominion …” while reading you could ask the question ;who was given the dominion? the same subject addressed in v 13 ” one like man” refering to the Messiah.
You said something like that’ “Rashi explains in verse 14 that the son of man is Israel – the Messiah as Israel’s king represents Israel ”
-First of all Rashi doesn explain it that the son of man is Israel in that verse at all.
-The messiah – as Israel’s king representing Israel – is shown as a person, son of man, the king, NOT the nation.
– representing the nation doesn’t make somebody the nation ( the messiah is one person even though he represents his people.
– to support your interpretation; Rashi should have to address v.13 as being spoken about the nation.
v. 27 doesn’t contradict v. 13 . Just because the people ( nation ) are given dominion and kingship ( that we read v in v 27) doesn’t mean that the king ( the Messiah ) is not adressed first v.13 . He is mentioned as the FIRST ONE who is given the kingship, dominion and honor.
so that ” all peoples, nations and languages would serve him.”
According to Jer 30;9 Israel is not just described as the one whom ALL will serve but Israel himself will be the one serving also another authority – their leader ” They will serve their God and David their KING , whom I will establish OVER them.”
That makes it clear that actual ‘superior’ being served by all nations is the Israel’s king. ( which also goes with Is 11;4-5)
Bru Ram said it correct;
“the vision addresses a coronation of this being, as a HEAVENLY EVENT taking place before the kingdom of heaven is given to His people…and at that time the people of Israel are not in heaven but here on earth…therefore they cannot be the same entity.(…)”
P.S Before any nation is given any kingship, you first have a ‘coronation’ of their king that is what v.13-14 is talking about. But the ‘heavenly coronation’ supports Jesus, so I understand you won’t see that.
Eric It is obvious that you cannot read Rashi – nor can you read Scripture. The angel clearly explains that the son of man IS Israel and Rashi says so explicitly in his commentary to verse 14. Rashi would not contradict the angel. Eric – just to demonstrate for all of us how you disregard the Scriptures can you please answer these questions – Who is the lion of verse 4? who is the bear of verse 5? and who is the leopard of verse 6? And don’t try to tell me that these are nations because how could the nations exist in Daniel’s vision and be here on earth at the same time?
ypfriend, Interpretation of 4 metaphorical beasts is based on chapters 2 ,8 and 11
where you see the course of the nations from Nebuchadnezzar’s own time down to
the setting up of the final Messianic kingdom. So they are referred to as kings ( Daniel 7;17) or kingdoms. I don’t know what you are trying to suggest by your strange statement; “And don’t try to tell me that these are nations because how could the nations exist in Daniel’s vision and be here on earth at the same time?” Then go to Daniel 2;37-39 where one of the kindgoms in Daniel’s vision was already existing kindgom of Nebukadnesar.
What you are trying to show me is that an existing kingdom can be in Daniel’s vision as a metaphor and the metaphorical beings in the vision can relate to both kings and kindgoms ( as kings represent their kindgoms.
As far as the vision in Daniel 13, the “Ancient of days” (verses 9, 13, 22)
is identified with the “Most High” (verses 18, 22, 25, 27), that is, with God himself. God in the vision is God himself and He is shown in a special interaction with the one who is granted the dominion and is granted a close approach like nobody else ( predicted about Israel’s king in Jer 30;21) . Then the vision itself makes a clear distinction between the “son of man” and his
people in further verses. In v. 13 the “son of man” is portrayed as coming from heaven, not earth,
on clouds before God himself ( you would say it is a metaphorical place) but ‘he’ is crowned king over all the earth
without any prior WARFARE. By contrast, in v. 21 the “saints of the Most High”
receive this kingdom only after fierce warfare on earth. And that goes along with Zeh 12.
‘Also many ancient jewish writings meant ‘son of man’; as the Messiah including v 14. as one who is introducing Messianic kingdom.
don’t know what you are trying to suggest by your strange statement; “And don’t try to tell me that these are nations because how could the nations exist in Daniel’s vision and be here on earth at the same time?”
RABBI, SORRY FOR INTRUDING
Eric, rabbi B is making a rhetorical statement regarding the Christian tendency in reading scripture to regard the “one like a son of man” in Daniel 7 in the most literal sense, as a heavenly being sitting beside G-d, even though it is perfectly consistent with the chapter and verse in context to see it as a symbol in Daniel’s vision of the Jewish nation,
The Christian always says, “the one like a man can’t be the nation of Israel, because the verse refers to Israel at the same time as the one like a man.” BUT…. The vision is couched in metaphor to begin with, so it is in fact fully consistent with the context of the chapter to say that just as the beasts are not literal beasts, but are kingdoms, so it is consistent to say that the one like a man is also a kingdom. I hope that clears things up.
Are you sure you said it right or it just doesn’t make sense just to me ;
“The Christian always says, “the one like a man can’t be the nation of Israel, because the verse refers to Israel at the same time as the one like a man.” I am trying to figure what we Christians say, because have never heard that statement.
Eric Daniel 7:17-27 is an interpretation and explanation of the vision described in 7:2-14. This commentary on the vision is provided to Daniel by an angel. I hope you agree with this simple statement. Now that we know that verses 17-27 are simply the commentary of verses 2-14 then we need to ask ourselves – how did it happen that the nation of Israel is mentioned 3 times in this brief commentary and the Messiah is not mentioned even once. Can you explain this?
ypfriend, first I need to ask this question. Do you treat the picture of Judgement in v 9-10 in Daniel 7 as a metaphor ? Where does the judgement take place according to you?
Eric The interpretation of verses 9,10 appears in verses 22 and 26
Eric the issue is one of overall context in Daniel chapters 7-9. There are no literal beasts in Daniel 9, those are metaphors for the gentile kingdoms, so too it is reasonable that the one LIKE a son of man in Chapter 7 is a metaphor for the Jewish kingdom. If this literal interpretation of yours were right, there would be 2 powers recieving glory, but that contradicts the commandments. Even the NT itself says that Jesus will hand the kingdom over, and G-d will not be made subject to him, but will be all in all. G-d does not share glory (Isaiah 42:8) Nowhere in scripture does a theophany, (a manifestation of G-d,) like the burning bush RECIEVE divine service that belongs to the father. 1 Chronicles 29 has Solomon sitting on the lord’s throne, that does not make Solomon a divine being, the same is true here.
concerned R , To adress your last message;
Of course there are no literal beasts in Daniel 9, so is ” the one LIKE a son of man; in Chapter 7 a metaphor for the Messiah.
Most of the things you wrote about are completelly irrelevant to the subject.
You mentioned God is not sharing His glory with anybody. Daniel 7;13-14 is not about sharing the glory of God with anybody nor did I mention any divine being.
There are NO two powers receiving the kingship. The messiah is PART of the nation and he is sharing his kingship with the people as they all will be ruling together but he is the ‘superior one’ to whom Israel will be a subject. The king and his people doesn’t make two powers.
You are bringing up the ‘burning bush’ as manifestation of God. The burning bush wasn’t a person to be granted any service but God spoke for himself and the bush was just a SIGN of God’s presence so I don’t see a reason for you to bring it up in whatever way you meant. Second ; Jesus is not described as receiving divine service in v 13 but receiving honor of a kingship and dominion in the presence of God.
So Eric, I take it you do not believe in Jesus’ deity?
Right, Con, Eric is a non-Trinitarian Christian. Which makes the argument more interesting. In fact, now that Eric has joined the conversation I am very interested in following it.
In other words the judgment appears in Daniel’s vision but its effects will be played out here on earth
ypfriend, Every prophecy book has it’s main focus. Daniel focuses on all ‘beast’ kings and their kingdoms and their fall and the final victory of God’s kingdom. But none of these 4 failing kingdoms are mentioned without their kings, so it would be rather strange to claim that Daniel only speaks about God’s people but no word is spoken about the one righteous king whose kingdom will be everlasting. From other prophecy books we know that many other events will take place that already involve Messiah’ presence and they support our Christian view in NT.
I asked about that vision of a judgement in Daniel 7;9. There is a fact that many Rabbis in the past spoke of time of trouble , which is God’s judgement ( Daniel 7;9) coming on the sinful nations , and that time of trouble is not happening without the Messiah. That day is called ‘the Day of the Lord’ and was clearly associated with his coming . That’s way some Rabbis didn’t even wish to see that Lord’s Day as they were aware of the power of God’s wrath which Amos 5;18 foretold. That is the sinful nations’ judgement before God’s kingdom will be established. We also read that this judgement will also effect many Jewish people ( Zeph3, Amos 8, Zech 12).
Again , since that vision in Daniel is about God’s judgement that already involves coming of the Messiah, it is rather sceptical that ‘granting the kingdom ‘ would be mentioned without first the righteous king being granted the power to judge and rule.
According to Ps 110 God is judging the nations on the day of His wrath through His righteous king from Zion.
” Your eyes will behold the King in His splendor, they will see him froom a faraway land.” Is 33;17
And many other places speak about the king being granted the power to rule over all nations. Ps 2;8-9 ( according to Rashi encounter between the nations and the Messiah)
And I am sure what Rashi meant by referring the verse to the king Messiah, he meant him first being granted power.
Another thing is ; the king is already granted dominion and power before the last ones of Israel is gathered ( Is 11). There is already the Messiah before the ‘leftover’ remnant of God’s people is gathered to his kingdom.
Also resurrection takes place at the Messiah’s coming. So he is already ‘ there’ before all ‘bones’ are brought back to life into their land” Ez 37 Those resurrected ones are brought back to everlasting life, so their ruler has to rule also forever. ( many books support his everlasting rule)
P.S . Salvation is not about whether being uni-or trinitarian so I don’t get into that discussion.
Eric I recognize full well that the Messiah will be granted power and dominion – it is clearly spelled out in Isaiah 11 as well as in Genesis 49:10, Numbers 24:17 among others. It is also clear that Israel will be granted power and dominion in the Messianic age as prophesied by Isaiah (60:12). The question that we are discussing here is which of these two powers is Daniel being shown in his vision is it the power of Messiah or the power of Israel. My question to you is – do you agree that verses 17 thru 27 are a commentary on the vision described in verses 2 thru 14? Please answer this simple question. Furthermore – I find your refusal to discuss the error of trinitarian doctrine because it is not relevant to “salvation” – deeply disturbing. Wouldn’t you agree that obedience to God’s law and loyalty to His covenant is far more important than “salvation”?
ypfriend, part 1
“The question that we are discussing here is which of these two powers is Daniel being shown in his vision is it the power of Messiah or the power of Israel.My question to you is – do you agree that verses 17 thru 27 are a commentary on the vision described in verses 2 thru 14?”
I wouldn’t say it there are two powers in the vision although I say there is a vision of the Messiah and the nation being granted the kindgom. Since the king is part of his nation – I don’t call it two powers. 7;13 is the vison of the king claiming his kindgom, ( which involves people being granted the kingdom) . The nation can’t just be granted the kindgom without having their ruler, their king first. The verses 17-27 are commentary of the 2-14, but the whole picture is not just based on one book or one chapter. Verses 2-14 also describe the judgement which ( I showed you before ) involves the Messiah through whom God will do His work and redeeem his people. And the whole picture is also based on NT ( for us Christians) where see that ‘ the same way the Messiah was taken to heaven, the same way he will come back on the day of the judgement to claim his kindgom and rule. So my interpretation will be based on that whole picture, but if you want to stick just to the vision of people ,it’s ok, it is not a ‘matter of death and life’ for me.
“Wouldn’t you agree that obedience to God’s law and loyalty to His covenant is far more important than “salvation”?
What do you understand by ‘our christian salvation’? For us it is being granted grace to have fellowship with God and live with Him forever ( which we call being granted everlasting life, which involves being forgiven and having our quilt wiped off ) And that’s all comes from trusting God and obeying Him. So that question you asked is a wrong statement ” obedience to God’s law being more important than salvation”. One involves the other. There is no salvation without that obedience and trusting God. And as far as obeying God, Jesus is fulfilment of the Torah. The law was his life and was in his life .So us serving Jesus is ‘serving’the Torah.
In general, the main claim agaist Christians is that they worship a man instead of God and that trinitarians make him God. And there is so much misunderstanding and confussion about all that.
First of all, Christians do not worship the humanity of Jesus, nor they worship his body. ( both uni- and trinitarians) For us God ‘dwelt’ in Jesus, in a way analogous to how He ‘dwelt’ in the Tabernacle and Solomonic Temple. His presence and His Name was ‘in’ them. For Christians; God ‘dwelt’ among us and manifested His glory to us in the person and life of Jesus. His flesh was like the curtains of the Tabernacle or like the stone walls of the Temple. Israelites did not worship the cloth of the curtains, nor the stone and timber of the Temple–they worshipped the God who ‘dwelt’ inside those. The same way we do. Nobody can really ‘worship’ Jesus without worshiping God in him.
When God said to Moses; “Have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will dwell among them” (Exod. 25:8). The God whom the heavens could not contain would dwell in the midst of his people in the Tabernacle and Temple. How? He would “pitch his tent” among them.
So just as God “pitched his tent” in the midst of his people Israel through the Tabernacle and Temple—while remaining God in heaven and filling the universe with his presence—so He ‘pitched’ his tent among us through his Son— while remaining God in heaven and filling the universe with his presence. Jesus is like the ancient Tabernacle, the ‘dwelling’ of God’s presence and glory: ‘For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell’
So what followers of Jesus experience– is God’s presence living in him.
John didn’t write , “God became a human being,” wanting us to think that the Lord was no longer filling the universe or reigning in heaven. By ‘the word became flash’ is meant that “what God says- His words” dwelled in that flesh. which means having a person fully filled with God’s word and His Spirit and obeying it.
So that’s why it is said; he is a reflection of God or His manifestation as if God himself was speaking. Instead of voice from heaven or the air we hear Jesus to know what God says. That’s why we say seeing Jesus, we see God, but that doesn’t mean ‘God who fills the universe ‘jumped in’ in a human body or he became a man and He is no longer God who fills the universe.’
So I understnad why even many Christians think Jesus was God. But they still come to God while coming to Jesus because they see God in him.
That is why it is not disturbing to me whether somebody is uni- or trinitarian as the truth stays the truth, but the people might have more or less understanding about it.
Like I said above nobody can really ‘ come’ to Jesus without worshiping God in him.
Eric Let us try to clear up some misunderstandings. Would you agree that Isaiah 11:4 speaks about the power granted to Messiah and does not mention the power granted to Israel? Would you also agree that Isaiah 60:12 speaks of the power granted to Israel and does not mention the power granted to Messiah? Yes – I am aware that the prophets taught that both of these things will happen so when a prophet speaks about the power granted to Israel – I think about Messiah and when they speak of the power granted to Messiah I also think of Israel – but this doesn’t mean that Isaiah 11:4 speaks of Israel or that Isaiah 60:12 speaks of Messiah – so my question to you is how do you understand Daniel 7:14? is it like Isaiah 11:4 or is it like Isaiah 60:12? You also misunderstood my question about obedience and salvation. Let me give you to theoretical questions. Question A – I am considering doing a specific act so the question is if this particular act is a violation of God’s Law that prohibits idolatry. Question B – Will this same act lead to my eternal salvation Eric – which of these two questions is more important? Which of these two questions should I be more willing to talk about? I will not address your arguments about the trinity in this comment – I hope to get to it after I know where you stand on the importance of this discussion.
Eric, the problem with and reason for the Unitarian trinitarian debate is that both views advocate fundamentally different ways of understanding, and therefore serving G-d. It has to be brought up. The commandments are clear that only the father, (not the messiah is to recieve, worship, service, prayers, etc.) If a person is trinitarian, They believe that Jesus (as a manifestation of G-d,) deserves the same divine service that G-d recieves. That’s not monotheism, so it is idolatry. We never find any kings or righteous leaders in the bible being treated as divine, or super human. In Christianities, Jesus is accorded either a partially or fully divine status. That’s idolatry in Judaism. To put any thing from the heavens above, to he earth below, on the level with G-d is idol worship. When G-d is said to walk on earth, the earth in turn walks on G-d, defeating the purpose of the whole notion.
Con, apparently the idolatry inherent in Trinitarianism does not disturb Eric. I wonder why?
con, “We never find any kings or righteous leaders in the bible being treated as divine, or super human. In Christianities, Jesus is accorded either a partially or fully divine status. ”
That is what you call as ‘divine status’ is the authority which is above any other authority that was ever granted to kings based on ps 110.
Rabbi, very sorry to be blunt, (I hope this isn’t inappropriate, ) but I need to say something.
To be honest, I see very clearly where the Christians get their ideas of an immanent manifestation of G-d from, Im Not gonna lie, (in the case of the passages about the angel of G-d’s presence who bears G-d’s name, it’s very easy to confuse the issue, as even Acher had done in the Talmud.) I also understand how reading certain apocryphal texts can give people the impression that this being is somehow identified as the messiah (or the spirit/name of the messiah) (in 1 Enoch 48 for instance,) but 1 Enoch is not Torah scripture, and this being is an angel, very clearly not G-d himself, as is very clear from a close reading of Exodus chapter 33. In the chapter, Moses basically says, “we want you to go personally with us Hashem, we do not want your angel to lead us, if you don’t lead us personally, we will not leave this spot.”) Also,
Nowhere in the canonical books of the Torah is there a divine decree or command from G-d to serve any being, (angel, messiah, or otherwise) other than the father in the sense of divine service. Even the NT itself says that Jesus’ purpose is to hand the kingdom over to G-d the father. I want Christians to know clearly, I truly get and understand where your beliefs are coming from, I see the sources of information that you draw from for your theological foundations, and how you have come to believe it makes sense, but it is not rooted in the commandments, and so, it is not Torah teaching, and is not acceptable for Jews.
Even if you could somehow prove Jesus’ life had a messianic dimension, it doesn’t ratify or make pure any Christian devotion to him any more than any other group of Jews in history have been correct in giving divine status to some rabbis and rebbes of theirs. When you blur those lines, you walk the line so closely to idolatry, because you make G-d, (or any object) your own special friend, (to the exclusion of others.) G-d is unembodied and incorporeal, precisely because, if he were not, it would give men power over him, to patent his name, to sell it, to abuse it as we see always happening. G-d is beyond all, so that no one group, one geographical spot, one brass serpent, etc. has or shows his love more than any other. You do not need to be worshiping the wrong G-d to be guilty of idolatry.
I am not sure why you are apologizing – what you say makes sense. In any case would you mind dropping me a line at email@example.com ?
Con ” I see very clearly where the Christians get their ideas of an immanent manifestation of G-d fro(…).” You mentioned the book of Enoch .
I don’t know anybody relying on that book .
“Nowhere in the canonical books of the Torah is there a divine decree or command from G-d to serve any being, (angel, messiah, or otherwise) other than the father in the sense of divine service.”
what do you mean ‘ by divine service’?
All nations will be serving the Israel’s king in Messianic times including Israel. And OT says that God will be the king over the whole earth and the Messiah will be a king over all. Does it mean there will be two kings? No, but that God will be ruling through His servant whom all will serve. So serving him means serving God. Serving the authority God set , mean serving God himself.
The same for us now; serving Jesus – the Messiah we serve God.
What service do you mean by ‘ divine service’? Christians talk about His ‘divine nature’ which is God being seen in him and his authority that came from God . His ‘ divine service ; is simply him serving in the name of God, on behalf of God.
Yes, we may wish to have God just leading us in person but I am sure – if God was to walk Himself among us- He would say the same what He said in Ex 33;5
” If I ascend among you , I may annihilate you in an instant.”
What did you want to address by ;
“Even the NT itself says that Jesus’ purpose is to hand the kingdom over to G-d the father.”
“Nowhere in the canonical books of the Torah is there a divine decree or command from G-d to serve any being, (angel, messiah, or otherwise) other than the father in the sense of divine service.”
Exodus ch 23, v 20a.
Paul The same commandment is given to Abraham in Genesis 21:12 – so was Sarah divine?
Im not sure why you using your example as an arguement??
The two situations couldnt be further apart!
In Gen we see Sarah being reminded that God did promise and did give her a ( Isaac) son. We see sarah being unhappy with the child Ishmael and Hagar. We see Sarah telling Abraham to cast out the said two. We see God telling Abraham to listen to Sarah.
Well of course it is God who is devine not Sarah. God has a plan for Ishmael and his descendants not Sarah. Sarah is bitter. It is God who is controlling the situation not Sarah. You cannot use somebody who is simply giving some one an order in scripture as a arguement against the devine decree of exodus in this context. Where would it end????
In exodus ch 23 v 20 it states “the angel.. ( Malach). Quite definite and clear. So this Malach is giving the lead through the wilderness. This angel commands abdolute obedience from Israel.
1. He will pardon your transgressions. Something only Jehovah can do.
2. My Name is in Him. Only the Godhead can have this. Isaiah 42:8.
3. There are blessing for obeying Him.
4. He is the angel of the Exodus.
Also see Judges 2.1
My point was that the words “listen to her/his voice” are definitely not an indication of divinity. By the way the angel does NOT forgive sins. And it is clear that God is in control not the angel – It is God who is telling us to obey His messenger because it is His messenger.
Paul, it says “see I send AN ANGEL.” If this angel was really G-d, how do you make sense of the following from Exodus 33?
33 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Leave this place, you and the people you brought up out of Egypt, and go up to the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, saying, ‘I will give it to your descendants.’ 2 I WILL SEND AN ANGEL before you and drive out the Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. 3 Go up to the land flowing with milk and honey. BUT I WILL NOT GO WITH YOU, because you are a stiff-necked people and I might destroy you on the way.”
4 When the people heard these distressing words, they began to mourn and no one put on any ornaments. 5 For the Lord had said to Moses, “Tell the Israelites, ‘You are a stiff-necked people. If I were to go with you even for a moment, I might destroy you. Now take off your ornaments and I will decide what to do with you.’” 6 So the Israelites stripped off their ornaments at Mount Horeb.
If this angel is really G-d himself, (or a being manifesting G-d’s personal presence that is worthy of the adoration due to G-d,) then verse 3 makes no sense. If The angel of the lord is G-d, then the lament of Moses and the people makes no sense. Also, nobody worships manifestations, only the father is worshipped in the Torah.
Yes God is saying that He will not be in midst of Israel as they journey on. His anger is so inflamed that He would consume them. But He does still promise the angle going ahead infront.
It is not until Moses intercedes on Israels part that God says that He will be there.But He never says that the angle will now not go. So the angle is still going beforehand, that is promised at least twice here. Which he does.
As of course I believe that the triune Godhead exist, it doesnt mean that the Godhead are seperated. The Godhead co exist in harmony, equally, but in different offices of function. Each office is no lesser or greater than another.
The only time in history that a seperation occurred was when Messiah cried out” My God My God, why have you forsaken me?”
“As of course I believe that the triune Godhead exist, it doesnt mean that the Godhead are seperated. The Godhead co exist in harmony, equally, but in different offices of function. Each office is no lesser or greater than another.
The only time in history that a seperation occurred was when Messiah cried out” My God My God, why have you forsaken me?”
How can one not see the utter ridiculousness of such statements. Even using the term “Co-exist” is an obvious admission of multiple entities. Separated but not separated, by definition, are not equality. Triune, also, is not a unit of one. Does a “tri-angle” have only “one” side. There is no way to define a singularity as including multiples. A person may as well say what I see when I type is Not black letters on a white background but white letters on a white background. This doesn’t make it reality. The reality is the letters Are black. To say this man, Jsus, is the same or equal with G-d is to deny there are differences in the levels of existence as written of in Kohelet. As G-d is all knowing he made it clear from the beginning, for future reference, that He is One and His Name is One. “One” cannot include “one” G-d and “one Jsus. Each would have to be 1/2 of One, which as the “/” symbol denotes, a “division” of One.
Nobody serves the messiah in the way they serve G-d that’s the point. Messiah is messiah, G-d is G-d. The messiah gets the same honor as any world ruler would get. He’s not supposed to be more than just a man.
No, but that God will be ruling through His servant whom all will serve. So serving him means serving God. That’s not possible, Eric. A person who accords the messiah divine honors due to G-d alone as Christians do is not serving G-d. People sing hymns of praise to Jesus. Nobody sings hymns of praise to Moses, David, or anyone else called a messiah. If Jesus was human, treat him as a human.
Con, for those who don’t see God in Jesus this discussion is worthless.
“God will be ruling through His servant whom all will serve. So serving him means serving God.” -That’s not possible, Eric. Really? then I guess for you there will be two kings in Messianic kingdom; the Messiah and God , as you don’t see that serving one you will serve the other.. God will be the king over the whole earth while the Prince of Peace from Isaiah 9 will be ruling.
Actually the spark of G-d is within everyone, even your Jsus. A person should take notice that until Xtianity became Roman no Torah Jew would have believed in a “godhead”. This belief became known only after the Gentiles put their spin on the matter, notwithstanding the incoherent Eisegesis of the church regarding Tanach.
sharbano, christian basis is ; 1 Corinthians 8;6 “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
Of course the idea of a triune Godhead does seem to be ridiculous, as you put it, You are trying to understand scripture purley on a human level, and by your own reasoning. God is not human, His ways and statutes are not human. The scriptures are devinley inspired Believing in scripture has be on a level of faith.
How can trumpets destroy a city wall. How can a donkey speak, how can a sea be parted??
How can God create the universe by merely saying ” Let it be”? Me as a human cannot understand how that could happen? But it did happen, because the Bible teaches it. I cant explain how to a atheist, there has to be faith in a higher authority. I believe it because it simply , contextually it says so. If it says One 24hr day, then its a one 24hr day. There is no reason to Say otherwise. An atheist could argue all day long and show you a million and one ways that God couldnt create the universe, by his reasoning he would be correct. You would counter his arguements with the hebrew texts. And so it would go, round and round.
All the arguements thus far, from me, are based purley on the text, in context, not on my personal view. My arguements are not just based on Christian teaching, my arguements are based on the hebrew text. You keep focusing on what the text doesnt say.
Paul in the NT only used the Law, writings and prohets to present Messiah
Lets Look at Isaiah again;
Ch 42. V8 I am the Lord, that is My name and my glory I WILL NOT give to another.
Exodus ch 23 v 20 Israel are warned, Beware of him, obey his voice, do not provoke him, he will not PARDON your transgressions, why????? Because My Name IS IN HIM.
Now read the Isaiah passage again.
Who do think the other third man is, and where does he go in Genesis ch 18/19?
Paul, if what the text says is so important to you, then take a good, long hard look at Deuteronomy 4. In that chapter, Moses warns the Jewish people to worship God only according the knowledge of Him that He imparted to them at Sinai. God did not teach them about Jesus at Sinai, ergo we are forbidden to worship Jesus.
While you’re at it, take a glance at Deuteronomy 13, which warns us not to engage in worship that was unknown to our fathers. Jesus was unknown to our fathers, ergo we are forbidden to worship him.
And by the way, I think you forgot your reading glasses in that verse you quoted, because you emphasized the wrong word: “he will NOT pardon your transgressions.” Why? Because only God can pardon your transgressions.
Also, I’m not sure you can do basic arithmetic, because you have not noticed that your godhead is expanding to include various angels. So far, the angel that lead the Jewish people and the angel that appeared to Abraham, that’s two, plus the three original members of the trinity, that makes five; you should call it a quintinity, unless you plan to add a couple more angels. I have some suggestions: the angel that appeared to Hagar, and the angel that wrestled with Jacob. Now you have a septinity!
Reasoning is what G-d gave us in order to gain understanding. Without reason there is no truth.
Since you admit G-d is NOT human then ergo there can be No godhead.
It is Not a “level of faith” but rather a blind faith. It says His WAYS are not human and speaks nothing of His essence. Therefore ALL your examples are His Actions and not speaking to the question of a godhead. So your conclusions are NOT based on text but rather Eisegesis and Contextualization and not context itself. There is No context that supports a triune theory.
Isaiah most certainly disputes your conclusions. You say your argument is based upon “Hebrew” which is contradictory to Ein Od Milvado. What Isaiah Does say is,
“I am Hashem, that is My Name, I shall not give My glory to another, nor My praise to graven idols.”
There is no godhead here. It clearly supports Ein Od Milvado. And so it is with Exodus. There is no mystery here. Do you realize that “Israel” ALSO has His Name In Him. It is the same with Ishmael.
Its a good point Sharbano that Judaism is not obsessed with theology or theological spinning. Even Jesus in the NT always puts an I and Y’all spin on his statements. For instance, he says “my father and I are one,” and then later says “father, let them (his disciples) be one as you and I are one.” So, you are right that the Christians have taken concepts which would have meant one not so odd thing in 2nd temple times, and made it foreign and idolatrous.
Paul Summers, G-d forbids the worship of ANY FORM, be it man made or not…
Deuteronomy 4 tells us not to worship Hashem in ANY FORM. Lets start at verse 9, shall we?
Deut 4:9. But beware and watch yourself very well, lest you forget the things that your eyes saw, and lest these things depart from your heart, all the days of your life, *and you shall make them known to your children and to your children’s children,*
Here we see that G-d is commanding Israel to teach these things throughout their generations. G-d is directly telling Israel to teach their children about the things they saw and the things on their hearts. What are these things you ask? Lets continue reading:
Deut 4:10. the day you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb, when the Lord said to me, “Assemble the people for Me, and I will let them hear My words, that they may learn to fear Me all the days that they live on the earth, *and that they may teach their children.*
Deut 4:11. And you approached and stood at the foot of the mountain, and the mountain burned with fire up to the midst of the heavens, with darkness, a cloud, and opaque darkness.
Deut 4:12. The Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of the words, but saw no image, just a voice.
Here we have G-d explaining to the children of Israel what they “saw.” *Notice that what they “saw” was no image according to G-d Himself!* Moving on…
Deut 4:13. And He told you His covenant, which He commanded you to do, the Ten Commandments, and He inscribed them on two stone tablets.
Deut 4:14. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances, *so that you should do them in the land to which you are crossing, to possess.*
This verse is important to read in context with the next few verses because it reiterates the fact that these commands are not just a “one time deal.” Rather, G-d is commanding Israel not to acknowledge Him in any form throughout all our generations! With this in mind, lets continue reading:
Deut 4:15. And you shall watch yourselves very well, *for you did not see any image* on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire.
Deut 4:16. Lest you become corrupt and make for yourselves a graven image, *the representation of ANY FORM, the likeness of MALE or female,*
Deut 4:17. the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the heaven,
Deut 4:18. the likeness of anything that crawls on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters, beneath the earth.
Deut 4:19. And lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and see the sun, and the moon, and the stars, all the host of heaven, which the Lord your God assigned to all peoples under the entire heaven, and be drawn away to prostrate yourselves before them and worship them.
So, from this we see two explicit themes:
1. G-d is explicitly commanding Israel not to acknowledge Him in any form. (Deut 4:16)
2. G-d is explicitly commanding Israel to teach this to their children and their children’s children, even after they come to the land of Israel. (Deut 4:9-14)
It is important to note that this is not simply explicit to “man made forms.” Did G-d create Adam, the first man? Yes…But WOULD G-d appear in the form of Adam? Of course not! Same thing with the “first lizard,” or the “first fish.” How do we know this? Deut 4:16! We are not to worship G-d in ANY FORM.
Likewise, your jesus was a man. Your jesus was a form. Hashem explicitly forbids Israel from worshipping Him in ANY FORM.
Thus, your jesus cannot be “god in the flesh.” On the contrary, your jesus is not Hashem. Hashem clearly states that it is idolatry to worship Him in any form. Thus, your worship of jesus is idolatry.
Concerning Genesis 18, Genesis 18 says that the three individuals who Abraham encountered were “men” or “anashim” in Hebrew. (Genesis 18:3) The “man in question” is mentioned on par with the other two men.
So you ask me how I know this man is an angel? In order to come to this conclusion, we need to evaluate the totality of scripture. In Genesis 32, Jacob encounters another “man.” (Genesis 32:25.) This same “man” is referred to as an “angel” in Hosea 12:5, literally using the Hebrew word “malach.” Why is this significant you ask? Well remember the three “men” who Abraham encountered in Genesis 18:3? Two of those “men” are explicitly referred to as “angel” or “malachim” in Genesis 19:1! So if the two “men” who appeared to Abraham can be referred to as “angels” and “men” interchangeably, surely the “man” who Jacob encountered in Genesis 32:25 can also be referred to as an “angel,” just as Hosea 12:5 says! By the same token, the three “men” who appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18 are also understood to be “angels.” It doesn’t say “two men and one godman.” You’re the one who is eisegetically adding that to the text!
My interpretation is consistent with other angelic appearances found within the Tanach. Yours is completely without foundation. You are randomly assigning the title “pre-incarnate jesus angel” to anonymous angels who aren’t even referred to in the same manner in scripture. For example, the angel “in question” in Genesis 18 is not referred to as “angel of the Lord.” Yet you and other christians wish to peddle the title “angel of the Lord” as a code word for “jesus angel.” You have given no effective way to differentiate between these supposed “jesus angels” and “just regular old angels.” Is the “the angel of the Lord” mentioned in Zechariah 3 synonymous with “the angel of the Lord” mentioned in Exodus 3? Why or why not?
Also, jesus never claimed to be “the angel of the Lord” or any other sort of angel who appeared to Moses or anyone else in the Tanach. You claim to be a follower of “yeshua,” yet your “yeshua” never claimed to be “the angel of the Lord” or any other angel who appeared to men in the Tanach. So not only are you following a false messiah and a false god, but you are also following a made up idea that your false messiah/false god never claimed to be!
Sorry, some what late, but what the heck?!
Your last paragraph is inaccurate,
Ok, Jesus never used, as far as the evidence states, the word “angel”, however if you read John ch 8 v 40, and v 58 you can see that Jesus is stating, or showing His pre existence.
You dont believe this, fine….. but to state “Yeshua, never claimed” is wrong because He did. The first few lines of John ch 1 teach this.
This is exactly the reason I have doubts about the authenticity of the Xtian text.
It is unlikely that Jews would have been SO quick to stone anyone for his words. It would be a serious Torah violation to stone him right there.
Also he used the words “before Abraham, I am”. Usually Xtians consider the use of I AM as being G-d name from Exodus 3. The Xtian bible says “That” but Hebrew doesn’t allow, or have the usage “I AM”. It cannot be said. If I say ani beseder, there is no I (am) there. English has that usage but Hebrew does not.
Therefore considering these points I have serious doubts about WHO wrote that Xtian text. It doesn’t sound “Jewish”.
It should be read as “I am he” meaning I am he who was spoken of and written of. The phrase occurs several times in the Geek text and only here is it translated to “I am” by Trinitarians thus promoting (intentionally or unintentionally) the concept of the pre-existence of Jesus.
By the way did you know that all English translations of the bible are done by Trinitarians except one?
No that’s not it either. It is accurately translated as, I shall be what I shall be. It’s a reference to What name in what situation is used. Would He be coming in the Name of Hashem to liberate the Israelites or Elokim. Would He be coming in the Name of Elokim against the Egyptians.
Therefore the Greek text is misleading with its interpretation.
There are several English translations by Jews also, David.
By the way, I left you several responses concerning our most recent dialogue, just letting you know.
Dina the Jew Girl
You have side stepped this one.
My question was based on what you stated about Jesus never quoting or referring to His pre existing nature. You then stated that even Christians believe in something, something that Jesus didnt even believe.
My statement wasnt to argue against your doctrinal beliefs of Judaism, but to argue against what; you said and what the NT says.
The NT clearly, without question, teaches Jesus as devine and has pre existence. Did everyone see this truth, no not at all. The NT shows that. Did some see it, yes. It records it.
We can only read what was,is written.
To say that they wouldnt have stoned Him because of Torah violation is presumptive. Im not stating stoning in this situation is not a violation, but to say they actually wouldn’t have or wanted to is only your opinion, which of course contradicts the written text.
Where did I state about J’sus nature. My only point is, from what the text Does say it causes questions whether or not Jews were took part in the text. Very little shows a Jewish character.
That goes to the stoning question. If these were religious Jews and concerned about blasphemy they wouldn’t be taking it upon themselves. So, of course, it is presumptive. The most glaring example is where Paul says he was a Pharisee yet worked for the High Priest. When one looks at all these it brings questions that cannot be answered. Why is it that Jews educated and observant in Torah will quickly realize the issues with that text. If it could stand on its own a person would see Orthodox Jews converting, but such is not the case.
With all that I forgot to mention that what he said is NOT inaccurate. He speaks of “angel of the L-rd”. Your citations doesn’t mention any angel.
Correct I didnt citate the Word “Angel” as you say.No word appears. However You say, i think?……. He, Jesus, speaks of the Angel of The Lord, not sure where this is?
Or are speaking about John?
Sorry, somewhat late, but what the heck?!
Lets say that you were correct in your understanding of jesus’s supposed “questionable” statements about “preexistence in the form of an angel.” (You admit that jesus never explicitly claimed to be any specific angel who appeared to anyone in the Tanach. Your quote from John 8:40 doesn’t give you enough evidence to say such. Also, saying “I am” doesn’t count either…for obvious reasons…But nice try.)
If what you say about jesus were to be true about him referring to himself ambiguously as “the angel of the Lord”, (Which is HIGHLY doubtful as your evidence is based upon your eisegesis of questionably ambiguous verses in the book of john.) this would contradict the statement made concerning jesus in Hebrews 1:6.
Hebrews 1:6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,**“Let ALL God’s ANGELS WORSHIP him.”**
If ALL of the angels are said to WORSHIP jesus, then where does that leave jesus?
Not an angel!
So Hebrews 1:6 confirms that jesus cannot be “the angel of the Lord” since ALL THE ANGELS are said to WORSHIP jesus…That includes “the angel of the Lord.”
Thus, even according to the NT itself, jesus cannot be “the angel of the Lord!”
There is a divide between the fathers in the Faith (Emounah) and the sons. All these debates and discussions are good for they confronts us to the reality of the Torah. The divide will be vanquish by the returning of Eliyah to put everything in order for the Messiah for it is written by Malachi hanavi 3(4):
“Look! I am sending my messenger
to clear the way before me;
and the Lord, whom you seek,
will suddenly come to his temple.
Yes, the messenger of the covenant,
in whom you take such delight —
look! Here he comes,”
“Remember the Torah of Moshe my servant,
which I enjoined on him at Horev,
laws and rulings for all Israel.
Look, I will send to you
Eliyahu the prophet
before the coming of the great
and terrible Day of Adonai.
He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children
and the hearts of the children to their fathers;
otherwise I will come and strike the land
with complete destruction.”
We are entering the time of Reconciliation before the time of Tabernacles. Reconciliation for all Israel lies in the blessing of the one coming in the Name. He will purify the sons of Levi with fire to make them ready to serve the Elyon in the Ruah Hakodesh for the Shakhinah will only come in pure hearts having been transformed in truth.
Christianity the religion of the children must come back to the fathers by remembering the holy Torah and the fathers must come back to the children by recognizing the one Messiah of Israel. Anti-Torah and Anti-Messiah is the work of the wall of hate having made us blind to each other where reconciliation was made impossible. But the hand of the LORD will intervene for it is prophetised in Ezechiel 37:
21 Then say to them that Adonai Elohim says: ‘I will take the people of Israel from among the nations where they have gone and gather them from every side and bring them back to their own land. 22 I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king will be king for all of them. They will no longer be two nations, and they will never again be divided into two kingdoms.
Yehudah and Israel will be reunited for now is the time that we are confronted to a same enemy (Amalek) and his sons the amaleki who are now destroying the Christians (Messihim) in the land where the are still dispersed…
The Messiah has been appropriated by the Greeks and the goyim but now the time of nations is ending for the glory of Tsyon and the reign of Yerushala’im is coming after the pains of the Rebirth of All Israel.
Mr. Lion, how do you know who the Messiah is? And how did you arrive at your conclusion that Christians need to start observing the Torah and Jews need to accept the Christian messiah? And what happens to the remaining five billion people on earth who are neither Jewish nor Christian?
Now to answer your question one by one dear daughter of Israel:
1) How do you know who the Messiah is? Very simple by His Resurrection. He would not have be the Messiah if he was still dead: For if he was a false prophet it is impossible for him to be resurrected and to reveal himself for only the righteous according to the Tanakh can be resurrected. You will ask how can you know that he is not an illusion? Very simple to test: does he teaches the Torah? Yes! Does he refers only to HaShem? Yes! Was he despised by the people? Yes (Isaiah 53)! Did he healed and still heals the sick? Yes! Does he cares for the despised and the weak? Yes! Does he want us to be true children of the One Elohim, Elohei Abraham Isaac and Yaakov? Yes! Does the fruits of love, kindness, mercy, justice, faith, control of oneself, patience and all virtues accompany him and his union and relation with us? Yes!
2) And how did you arrive at your conclusion that Christians need to start observing the Torah and Jews need to accept the Christian messiah? This I have responded in my other reply. But feel free to demand more explanation dear sister! The only thing I will add is that Yahshuo is the Messiah of Israel the son Beloved as all true tsadik Yehudim are also sons of the Elyon.
3) And what happens to the remaining five billion people on earth who are neither Jewish nor Christian? Only the elect to true sons and daughters of HaShem will have access to the heavens. Not all Yehudim nor Christians will be saved: the wicked friends of iniquity anti-Torah, anti-Messiah will not access the heavens that is not possible for them.
The muslims here the sons of Ishmael, the mercy will save them if they love the Yehudim and the Messihim for no haters of the children of HaShem will enter Paradise.
For the pagans, hindous etc… they will never access the heavens for impure hearts can not access what is Pure and Holy. They will burn in their idolatry unless Us take them out of their idolatry and make them repent and purify. Here you see the necessity for Israel to be light to the world for Tikun Olam.
For the deniers of the Elohim they will die in their sin and in infamy.
For the sons of Amalek they will be destroyed.
For the rest those who live a life of indifference and turn only to this world… they must be shaken to wake up and follow the light of the world to guide them to eternal life.
Baruch HaShem Adonai now and forever!!
For if he was a false prophet it is impossible for him to be resurrected and to reveal himself for only the righteous according to the Tanakh can be resurrected.
Not so, because Even the wicked can do miracles to deceive many, according to both Tanakh, and even the NT. Pharoah’s magicians copied many of Moses’ early miracles, which is why both books tell you not to place your faith in miracles. “An adulterous generation seeks after a sign.” Even your Jesus says openly only to believe miracle “on the EVIDENCE of the works themselves.” In other words, only follow a godly outcome of a miracle, if it is something that accords with the commandments. (Cf. Mark 3:23-25) as opposed to a miracle in and of itself. Miracles do not establish truth value because even miraculous works of G-d can be twisted into something non beneficial and idolatrous. (2 Kings 18:3-4.)
Dear Con, your claim is anti-Torah for the Resurrection of the dead belongs only to the one Elohim. Your claim of false prophet is without substance but a mere repetition of what you have been falsely taught concerning the one Messiah of Israel the son Beloved. Isaiah 53 is clear also:
Though mistreated, he was submissive —
he did not open his mouth.
Like a lamb led to be slaughtered,
like a sheep silent before its shearers,
he did not open his mouth.
After forcible arrest and sentencing,
he was taken away;
and none of his generation protested
his being cut off from the land of the living
for the crimes of my people,
who deserved the punishment themselves.
He was given a grave among the wicked;
in his death he was with a rich man.
Although he had done no violence
and had said nothing deceptive,
yet it pleased Adonai to crush him with illness,
to see if he would present himself as a guilt offering.
If he does, he will see his offspring;
and he will prolong his days;
and at his hand Adonai’s desire
will be accomplished.
After this ordeal, he will see satisfaction.
“By his knowing [pain and sacrifice],
my righteous servant makes many righteous;
it is for their sins that he suffers.
Therefore I will assign him a share with the great,
he will divide the spoil with the mighty,
for having exposed himself to death
and being counted among the sinners,
while actually bearing the sin of many
and interceding for the offenders.”
Mr. L., this has got to be one of the worst translations I’ve ever seen of Isaiah 53. It’s not so much a translation as a Christian commentary.
You wrote that resurrection belongs only to God. What do you make then of the fact that both Elijah and Elisha performed resurrections (1 Kings 17 and 2 Kings 4)?
Con, but the power of life and resurrection belongs to God Himself, not magicians. And Jesus didn’t perform any magic being risen back to life. Only by God’s authority.
Eric, what do you make then of the fact that both Elijah and Elisha performed resurrections (1 Kings 17 and 2 Kings 4)?
Dina, they were both people of God so God gave them that power to resurrect others. And God kept that power so they could resurrect only those God permitted and neither of them could resurrect themselves or was resurrected .
So what? Jesus didn’t resurrect himself either. Neither did God resurrect him. If that had been the case, Jesus would have kept his promise to the Pharisees.
Dina, Even a resurrected Jesus wouldn’t be a sign to them. They had enough signs and their hearts were closed. Also Jesus didn’t give them a promise of coming to them to show up. They heard about him coming to life after 3 days and made sure to secure the tomb. Jesus doesn’t deal with corrupted heats. Sign of Jonah was a call to repentance – what he meant to be given to them , no more. Without repentance even 1000 signs wouldn’t matter .
Excuse me, but it’s not for Jesus to decide to go back on his word because you say the Pharisees wouldn’t have believed anyway. If he promised a sign, he needs to stick to it, and then the Pharisees could choose to believe or not. His not appearing before them is proof that he failed the sign and therefore is the sign of the false prophet.
So, nothing doing, Eric. Jesus can’t be allowed to get away with failing to keep his word.
But, if he had appeared before them and also claimed to be God (which is what most Christians believe), then they would have known he was a false prophet as per Deuteronomy 13.
Dina, nobody tells you to worship Jesus but God . Those who express honor to Jesus they also worship God and thank Him for His son. And the way they express their honor and gratitude is so various. Some see God in Jesus as His nature so they simply can imagine who God is like seeing Jesus. But that doesn’t mean God ‘jumped ‘ in a human body. He still fills the whole universe even being in a person or being with a person.
You focus so much on other Christians . Whether they see God in Jesus or not and how they see Him it is up to them. Believing that God sent His son for us is part of our trusting God. But you wouldn’t even treat Jesus as God’s son so no sense on focusing on others.
You know Eric, it’s interesting what Tzefanyah says on this matter when speaking Who He will desroy.
“I will cut off from this place the memory of the ministers with the priests, and those who bow down and swear to Hashem and then swear by their King.”
Sharbano; I will complete your verse ” I will stretch my hand against Judah and against all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and I will cut off from this place any remnant of the Baal and the memory of the ministers with the priests (…) and those who bow down and swear to Hashem and then swear by their King.”
I don’t know what you wanted to suggest by the way you quoted that verse? Wrath of God on Christians because of Jesus?
The ‘king’ is peoples’ idols that had nothing to do with following God but doing evil. ( v.9). Swearing by the king of a righteous person was never a crime.
If you want to interpret it out of context to find some more ‘proof’ about who else qualifies for destruction here is another verse;v.9 ” I will deal with officials and the king’s sons and those who wear foreign garments.” Is the foreign garment a problem in itself? Of course not, but the evil done by people.
As with the image the king of Babylon had envisioned which was depicted by a single “man” so it is with all the nations that saw man as a god. By crushing the feet the entire image is destroyed since it will be known that in all of history until this time never has a man been a god. This is the teaching of Xtianity; that has taken idolatry from ancient times and spun it into a new form. That remnant of Baal and all its subsequent incarnations will be destroyed, and yes Jsus if part of that remnant of the ancient world. As the nations will eventually come to conclude, “We have inherited lies from our ancestors”. The Torah warned from the beginning Not to go after the “wood and stone” for salvation and it is quite clear the meaning of wood and stone.
The point is the way you guys use Scriptural verses to support your theology. It’s okay when you do it, Eric, but it’s not okay when Sharbano does it? That’s not fair!
No, no, Eric, Christians worship Jesus directly, they sing praises to him, and they pray to him.
Dina, the same way we sing praises to Jesus as people sang praises to the kings in the past and there was nothing unusual in it. And we can pray to ask God for whatever we pray in His son’s name. And asking God in Jesus name , people get healed, people get faith, people get answers. They don’t get a hand of an angry God upon them because they dared to pray in Jesus name.
Jewish people have never sung hymns of praise or prayed to any kings past or present. Christians sing praises and pray to Jesus in a way that they don’t do or have ever done for any other kings past or present. Stop fooling yourself.
People get healed, get faith, get answers also in Judaism and Islam, so you can’t use that as proof. And God doesn’t strike with an angry hand the Hindus and Buddhists either–does that mean that they are not idol worshipers? What kind of logic are you using?
You are correct here in reference to false miracles etc. The sign or event doesn’t prove its origin from God, but can be originated from satan. The sign has to be authenticated from the word of God, to be aligned in context as it were.
Jesus made the point that even miracles done in His name CAN,WILL be false.
But to say or to totally dismiss a miracle outright would be going to far in the other direction though. All things must be considered in light of the said event, using and always using scriptual guidance.
Jesus did say “a wicked generation seeks a sign”? Jesus isnt stating that signs are wrong all together. But contextual here, it is. Why?? Because no sign here will be enough due to the lack of faith.
Jesus ministry has been thus far, getting the nation of Israel to make a decision on His claims of His Messiahship. The miracle of Math ch 12, should have been enough evidence for the leaders and the people to see and make the correct decision . It was rejected, and then they ask to seek a sign. At this point they will be NO sign, here, apart from the sign of Jonah. The resurrection.
After this point in history Jesus ministry takes a massive change in direction. The nation as a whole have rejected their Messiah. Only now, on a personal , one to one basis, through faith in Him, can a Jew, contextually here, have salvation. Jesus now speaks in parables, not openly. People had to have personal faith, eyes to see, and ears to hear.
The open offer of the Kingdom had been removed from the nation, until somepoint in the future.
The resurrection sign was three fold to authenticate His Messiahship claim.
2. Jesus Himself.
3. The ressurection of the two Jewish witnesses of Revelation. (Future).
Part of the issue comes from the starting point. Xtians have come to their beliefs Starting with their Xtian texts. A Jew comes from a “Knowledge” of Torah and would then come across the Xtian text. Therefore the Jew looks at it through the eyes of Torah. In that way the issues continue to mount up.
When J’sus says a “wicked generation seeks a sign” every Jew would immediately recognize this man if full of himself. He would be speaking unequivocally Against Torah. In only takes ONE instance as this to discount every other thing he has to say.
There is also the matter of history. The man Apollonius who taught almost the same as this J’sus. He, too, is reported to have done similar things. Since he was during the same era why would J’sus warrant any special consideration at the time.
I don’t think you have to bring in the “sign” question in order to point out the blunt fact that the resurrected Jesus only appeared to believers, and according to the end of Matthew some still “doubted.” And according to the end of the fourth Gospel even an apostle doubted. But they were still believers, and Jesus came back to show himself to Thomas in the fourth Gospel, which is a bit strange in itself because an infinite being could have planned to show himself when he knew for sure they would ALL be there, as in Luke.
If it fascinating that your proof that Jesus is the Messiah is his resurrection, although the Hebrew Bible does not tell us that this is the sign of the Messiah. Rather, the Hebrew Bible tells us precious little about the Messiah, other than that he will be a Davidic King who will reign over a united Israel in an era of universal peace and universal knowledge of God, at a time when the exiles will have been gathered in and brought back to the land and returned to full Torah observance, when our enemies will have been punished, and when the sacrificial system will have been restored.
See for example 2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10; Isaiah 11:1-10; Jeremiah: 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-17; Ezekiel 34:23-30, 37:24-28; Deuteronomy 30:3-4; Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 43:5-6; Isaiah 49:12, 18, 22; Isaiah 60:4; Isaiah 66:20; Jeremiah 3:18; Jeremiah 30:3; Jeremiah 31:7; Jeremiah 32:37; Ezekiel 11:17; Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 34:13; Ezekiel 36:24; Ezekiel 37:21; Isaiah 2:2; Jeremiah 33:18; Ezekiel 37:26-28; Ezekiel 43:7; Ezekiel 44:15:-16; Micah 4:1; Deuteronomy 30:10; Jeremiah 31:32; Ezekiel 11:20; Ezekiel 36:27; Ezekiel 37:24; Ezekiel 44:23-24; Isaiah 2:4; Isaiah 65:25; Jeremiah 33:9, 16; Ezekiel 34:25, 28; Ezekiel 37:26; Hosea 2:20; Psalm 72:3; Isaiah 11:9; Isaiah 45:23; Isaiah 54:13; Isaiah 66:18, 19, 23; Jeremiah 3:17; Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 38:23; Zephaniah 3:9; Zechariah 8:20-23; Zechariah: 14:16; Deuteronomy 30:7; Isaiah 17:12-14; Isaiah 25:1-8; Isaiah 30:26; Isaiah 30:28; Isaiah 34:1-35:10; Isaiah 40:1-11; Isaiah 49:8-13; Isaiah 52:7-10; Isaiah 60:1-3; Zephaniah 3:8-20; Zechariah 8:23; Psalm 9.
None of this happened during Jesus’s lifetime, nor did he rule over Israel as king, and neither is he a descendant of King David through Solomon on his father’s side.
Furthermore, if resurrection is the sign of the Messiah, then what is the status of all the other people who have been resurrected? Are they also Messiahs? If not, then why is the resurrection a sign for Jesus and not them?
Shalom Dina you are a fighter for the one Elohim! Bless will you be!
First the Isaiah 53 chapter that I have quoted was taken in the Complete Jewish Bible Version not from any Christian translation. Yes when you see Isaiah 53 you see the suffering Messiah so truly described that a lot of rabbis were puzzled by it. How long will you deny and despise the Tsadik the one Messiah of Israel. You have been educated on lies and deceits from babylonian torots forgetting what the Prophets foresaw. Late us take another passage from psalm 22 :
Psalm 22 Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
22 For the leader. Set to “Sunrise.” A psalm of David:
My God! My God!
Why have you abandoned me?
Why so far from helping me,
so far from my anguished cries?
My God, by day I call to you,
but you don’t answer;
likewise at night,
but I get no relief.
Nevertheless, you are holy,
enthroned on the praises of Israel.
In you our ancestors put their trust;
they trusted, and you rescued them.
They cried to you and escaped;
they trusted in you and were not disappointed.
But I am a worm, not a man,
scorned by everyone, despised by the people.
All who see me jeer at me;
they sneer and shake their heads:
“He committed himself to Adonai,
so let him rescue him!
Let him set him free
if he takes such delight in him!”
But you are the one who took me from the womb,
you made me trust when I was on my mother’s breasts.
Since my birth I’ve been thrown on you;
you are my God from my mother’s womb.
Don’t stay far from me, for trouble is near;
and there is no one to help.
Many bulls surround me,
wild bulls of Bashan close in on me.
They open their mouths wide against me,
like ravening, roaring lions.
I am poured out like water;
all my bones are out of joint;
my heart has become like wax —
it melts inside me;
My mouth is as dry as a fragment of a pot,
my tongue sticks to my palate;
you lay me down in the dust of death.
Dogs are all around me,
a pack of villains closes in on me
like a lion [at] my hands and feet.
I can count every one of my bones,
while they gaze at me and gloat.
They divide my garments among themselves;
for my clothing they throw dice.
But you, Adonai, don’t stay far away!
My strength, come quickly to help me!
Rescue me from the sword,
my life from the power of the dogs.
Save me from the lion’s mouth!
You have answered me from the wild bulls’ horns.
I will proclaim your name to my kinsmen;
right there in the assembly I will praise you:
“You who fear Adonai, praise him!
All descendants of Ya‘akov, glorify him!
All descendants of Isra’el, stand in awe of him!
For he has not despised or abhorred
the poverty of the poor;
he did not hide his face from him
but listened to his cry.”
Because of you
I give praise in the great assembly;
I will fulfill my vows
in the sight of those who fear him.
The poor will eat and be satisfied;
those who seek Adonai will praise him;
Your hearts will enjoy life forever.
All the ends of the land
will remember and turn to Adonai;
all the clans of the nations
will worship in your presence.
For the kingdom belongs to Adonai,
and he rules the nations.
All who prosper on the earth
will eat and worship;
all who go down to the dust
will kneel before him,
including him who can’t keep himself alive,
A descendant will serve him;
the next generation will be told of Adonai.
They will come and proclaim
to a people yet unborn,
that he is the one who did it.
Psalm 22:17 Or: “They pierced my hands and feet.” See Introduction, Section VIII, paragraph 6, and Section XIV, footnote 70.
Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
Copyright © 1998 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved.
Your “Complete Jewish Bible” IS a Xtian bible; one that was written by a messianic theologian. It’s more of a cosmetic translation than anything else.
What Rabbis were puzzled by Isaiah 53? I’m certainly no Rabbi and the words literally flow from the page. There is no puzzlement in the words when read in context along with an understanding of Jewish history.
Sharbano, no matter what translation you take , even the jewish tannah ( I won’t write it down ) , Is 53 speaks for Jesus.
Not really Eric. You have to apply generalities to ambiguities. If Isiah really wanted to describe a situation such a Jsus it wouldn’t have been written as you have interpreted with your Eisegesis. No, instead there would be actual references to actual events. This is the mark of a prophet. There would be mention of being hung on a tree or all the other events that surrounded it. If Isiah would have mentioned Cyrus by name, among other specifics, he certainly would have made it clear who is referenced. BUT we DO see WHO is referenced. It is written in Isaiah 52;3,4,5,6 etc.
Sharbano,Are you deciding for God how things should have been written? Your disappointment comes from your expectations that don’t go along with God’s way of putting things. God didn’t always reveal every detail but things were getting revealed with more details along with new prophets. Daniel would say some things while Zachariah would complete them with more details. That is just one of examples.
Putting aside the fact that interpretation of Is 53 as a nation is a stretch of imagination going line by line, we might say the same; why wouldn’t Isaiah clearly call the servant by name ; nation of Israel.? That would clear things out, as for you Isaiah mentioning death on the cross to believe it was about Jesus.
Now you are contradicting yourself. You have incessantly been trying to Prove how Each and Every verse is about your Jsus but if the idea was specificity then it would be specific. The beginning of Isaiah 52 says Explicitly WHO is being discussed in this narrative. You wish to ignore what doesn’t fit into Your narrative.
Eric, you wrote: “Putting aside the fact that interpretation of Is 53 as a nation is a stretch of imagination.”
If it is such a stretch of the imagination, then please explain why so many Christian commentators on this passage agree with our interpretation:
1. “The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah” by Christopher R. North, Oxford Univ.Press 1948, has at least 50 Christian scholars taking this approach
2. The New Interpreters Study Bible
3. Harper Collins Study Bible
4. New English Bible -Oxford Study Edition
It requires a stretch to say that this passage speaks of Jesus. Indeed, your need to have this passage be about Jesus has closed your minds to obvious errors of interpretation.
Mr. L., as it happens, I have read Isaiah 53 a grillion times in HEBREW, so I can spot a mistranslation from a mile off. Go learn Hebrew, read the passage in its original language, and then come back and argue with me.
I don’t know why you cited Psalm 22. But save yourself the bother of pasting such long passages. You can cite the references, as I have several copies of the Hebrew Bible at home. Thanks.
P.S. “They pierced my hands and feet” is a bizarre mistranslation. It’s like translating the phrase “joie de vivre” to “soup with bread.”
Shalom Dina! Let us take Isaiah 52:
8 Listen! Your watchmen are raising their voices,
shouting for joy together.
For they will see, before their own eyes,
Adonai returning to Tziyon. (Jewish Bible Version)
How can Adonai the one Elohim that you can not see be seen returning to Tziyon and be seen before their own eyes. Mystery!! With men made interpretations no one can solve the puzzle here… only those filled by the Shekhinah the divine Wisdom can!!
Judaism of today is not the real Moshe religion of yesterday if it were you will not have so much contradictions and interpretations… With Yahushuo the real Messiah of Israel no one can be fooled for He is the Beloved Seed the Davidic seed Himself. His Resurrection is the testimony that He is the true Messiah and Rabbi!
1 Kings 17 and 2 Kings 4… I know Eliyahu he will never claim to have resurrected anybody but give only Glory to the ONE Elohim. Here again the ONE Elohim resurrected the one Messiah of Israel for Him to return as prophesied in Isaiah 52. Be the student of the Messiah and the Prophets ask HaShem for His Ruah Hakodesh to teach you:
O Wisdom Eternal Ruah Emet, Shekhinah treasure of grace and beauty come and stay in us, purify us of every impurities, save our beings O Sublime Beauty! Teach us and show us the whole truth, give us true Emounah and make us worthy to take part in the holy Resurrection for the reign to come to the glory of the One Father the Lord YHWH the BELOVED
If you would read ALL of Isaiah 52 you would understand who is spoken of. “For uncircumcised and defiled will no longer enter you”. “My people went down to sojourn but Assyria oppressed them WITHOUT justification”
This is the theme of the entire narrative that begins Here in 52 and continues throughout 54.
Instead you take one verse from Isaiah 52 and then go to 1 and 2 Kings. Is it any wonder you have confused the clear and open text.
Dina, resurrection is not just a sign for the Messiah but a sign that Jesus was righteous in God’s eyes- a righteous man. And his eternal life of the Messiah is supported in OT. God doesn’t resurrect criminals and false prophets. neither God’s people in OT ever did..
Eric, I obviously don’t believe Jesus was resurrected, but even if he was it proves nothing. First, he never showed himself to those to whom he promised the sign of resurrection. Second, lots of people have been resurrected, so there would be nothing special if he were resurrected. Today we have lots of spontaneous resurrections. People are declared clinically dead: no heartbeat, no brain waves, no breath. Miraculously they come back to life and describe an ultra reality where they encounter deceased relatives, mystical beings (aka angels), and even God. Such stories are a dime a dozen. Many of them are ordinary people, not particularly righteous. The children that Elijah and Elisha resurrected are not described as righteous either.
Dina, ‘ performing ‘ resurrection by Elijah or Elisha – was a sign for others that he ( Elijah and Elisha) were from God . 1 kings 17;.24 Then the woman said to Elijah, “Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of the Lord from your mouth is the truth.”
So did many recognised Jesus that way- as a man of God . The only privilege to resurrect others belonged to God or man of God He chose. In clinical examples of people miraculously recovering we don’t have those who perform resurrection. And jesus rose back to life long dead not somebody in coma.
You are completely missing the point, which is that resurrection doesn’t make you special. And by the way, the near-death experiences I’m talking about are really dead people, not necessarily in a coma (in a coma means there is a heartbeat, brain waves, etc.).
The sign that Jesus is the Messiah is, for Mr. L., his resurrection. In that case, there are a lot of Messiahs running around. Besides, that’s not the sign the Hebrew Bible gives for recognizing the Messiah.
Nice to hear from you again.
First of all you mentioned that Israel were not worship Jesus, or any other god at sinai. Of course that is absolutely true. There is only One Echad God. The God of Israel. Messiah at that point of history was never ever stated to have a name. The promise of a Messiah was well recorded, but no first name, as you will have it.
You say that your forefathers never worshipped Jesus. Of course that is true. The incarnation of the God/Man was still future. But that doesnt mean that Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Moses etc didnt believe in a triune Godhead.
Jesus makes that point in John.ch 8 v40.” Why are you trying to kill me, Abraham didnt do this.”
Nobody new Messiah’s name. However through the Law, prophets and writings the very character, stature, or personage of Israels Messiah were very clearly recorded, so when Messiah did come, there would be no doubt for the believing remnant to see who there redeemer would be.
However Jesus did give a very clear answer to the proverb riddle to Nicodemus in John ch 3.
In regard to my maths. Well im no mathematician, thats true!
The angel appearing numerous times in the texts doesnt mean that the Godhead expands on every visit. By that reckoning everytime the Word, Lord, or God appears the One True God of Israel must also multiply evertime! Is the cloud of glory not the God of Israel? Was the cloud worshipped..followed? Why follow a cloud and not God Himself?
The concept of God manifesting Himself is not a christian teaching.
There is still only One God. One Son, One Spirit. By my reckoning thats still 3. Thats a Hebrew teaching. A scripture teaching. A compound One, a plural, masculine One. Abraham saw this. Its not a new concept. Judges ch 13.v22.
Paul Summers if G-d is one, then why can’t Christians just leave it at that. Is love of the fatter alone insufficient? The minute you mention the son and spirit in prayer you are making a 3 centered in your prayer, in your mind. Christians sing hymns of praise to Jesus, but nobody in the Torah ever sings or lauds a manifestation of G-d. As the verse says, “In that day G-d will be one, AND HIS NAME WILL BE ONE.”
Con, the love of Father is sufficient. What Christians see in Jesus is that love of the Father .
“For the entire fullness of God’s nature dwells bodily in Christ,” Colossans 2;9
Eric, we see love of the Father in a lot of people. There is nothing unique in Jesus’s love of God. Therefore, love of Hashem should be sufficient. Why isn’t it?
Dina, As far as Jesus- this is the love of the Father that He sends His son FOR us because He wants to save us. Jesus does something in the name of God on our behalf, something God sent him for that serves our benefit. That’s why we see Fathers’ love in Him as no other person dies for the sins of others to save them. People can do lots of nice things on their own, but here it is God who is sending Jesus for us.
I think dying for other people, for whatever reason, is an amazing sacrifice. It’s a sacrifice people have made and continue to make to save the lives of other people. It’s more than just a “nice thing people do.”
People also have chosen death rather than renounce a particular ideal that they believe in (like the Jews throughout the centuries who chose death rather than renounce God). That’s also an amazing sacrifice.
That to me shows a love of God so great and so fierce that I am moved and touched by it.
Dying for others is not unique. Jesus did nothing that thousands of others haven’t done as well, many suffered more for others. That’s if you buy the story which of course I do not.
You are moved by others sacrificing for others but you are not moved by God’s act of love of sending His son for our redemption.
Eric, I am not moved by events that did not happen. And I am not moved by a futile belief that God sent his son for our redemption, because the Torah teaches us how to secure our own redemption, and that doesn’t involve human substitutionary sacrifice in any way, shape, or form.
Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18 and 22
God is a Echad One. Christ believers do leave it there. Anything else would spiritual aldultery. The One true God of Israel is One. The very Hebrew word Echad is not Echid. The two mean one, but in context they are different. Elohim is a masculine plural noun, not singular. Of course this doesnt teach a triune Godhead here in just the two hebrew words, but it does start to open the doctrine to a plural Godhead, coupled with other evidences, it does then, with other texts show a triune Godhead. A Jewish scipture doctrine. My arguements are not based solely on NT teachings, but the Law, prophets and writings.
The above books teach that Messiah will be prophet, priest and King. The only person who could ever fit these prophecies is the Man Jesus of Nathereth. The prophets taught that when Messiah does come He will be rejected by His own kinsmen.
Your arguements are just a fulfilling of your texts. Your arguements against Jesus are Rabbinical, and traditional based on your forefathers rejections. Which is a complete fulfilling the texts.
Jesus wasnt rejected because He was wrong, Jesus was rejected because He had to, to fulfill the Jewish scripture.
Paul, your dishonesty is sickening. When arguing with you we always refer to the text of the Hebrew Bible and do not present rabbinical interpretations. If you were honest, you would support that statement with proof, but you have none to offer.
By the way, CR is not even Jewish, he was recently a Christian, so his “forefathers” were Christian too. Therefore, your statement “based on your forefathers rejections” is wrong.
But since you mention it, according to Deuteronomy 4 and 13 we are to worship God only according to the way we were taught by our forefathers. So if our forefathers rejected the idols of all the other religions we will too. (To us Christianity is just another idolatrous religion among many.)
Finally, like so many non-Hebrew speakers, you make a fool of yourself when you try to make an argument using Hebrew grammar/etymology. You have not only mangled one of the words, but you also make no sense.
Either leave Hebrew out of it, or learn it. We have plenty to talk about without dissecting Hebrew words.
My apologies for intruding on your and Con’s conversation. I just couldn’t hold my tongue :).
“You are moved by others sacrificing for others but you are not moved by God’s act of love of sending His son for our redemption.”
god so loved that world that he would do what any other human would do. man, why do you limit your god to man? why do you give him 2 choices? either you kill humanity or your son? you make the father LIMITED /boxed into a corner and the only way out for god is to let the train run over his darling son? don’t you see that you limit your father by having him pull the lever either to the left or right? god so loved the world that he killed his son for a few days and then if you don’t believe he gave him life, then he will kill you.
what great sacrifice? what great joke?
Same here, Paul!
Right, I forgot about the cloud of glory and the angel in Judges. Also the bush and the fire. Goodness me, the pantheon grows ever larger. Unless you want to stand by your argument that these manifestations were never worshiped.
I was just checking to see if you really meant what you said about believing what the text says, plain and simple. But you don’t. You find the text useful only insofar as you can twist it to support your idol worship.
Otherwise, you would see clearly that the teaching at Sinai as spelled out in Deuteronomy 4 and the warnings of Deuteronomy 13 are not allowed to be changed but must be taught from father to son forever, as the text itself teaches.
That’s why even if there were six thousand manifestations of God in Scripture, they are irrelevant. Deuteronomy 4 makes that clear. We are to worship God only according the knowledge that He Himself imparted to us at Sinai, for all time.
Im replying to your recent reply to Eric.
You mention Gen ch 4 v7. I appreciate that this verse doesnt speak of A human sacrifice to atone sin. That of course is correct. Its not a Messianic text, Which ever side of the fence one sits.
However the text does speak of a blood sacrife to atone sin. Im sure this is the point you are making??? Cains attitude is obviously different to Gods idea of sin atonement. Cains heart is unrepentant, coupled with no blood, cain is in a serious postion before God.
So are you stating from Gen ch 4, that a blood sacrifice, plus repentance is required?
You have stated in times past that no blood sacrifice are required today. Hence no real problem with not having a priedthood and a fuctioning temple service, because a repentant heart is only required.
I find the cain example odd, as cain was totally sinful before God and was judged accordingly. He refused to offer a sacrifice and to repent his heart.
Is it blood and repentance together
No blood or repentance at all?
Paul, my point in citing Genesis 4:7, as well as Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 18 and 22, was to show that God is teaching us that we have a choice–that we control our spiritual destiny. We can do it ourselves without the need for a sinless, divine messiah dying as a sacrifice to redeem us from our sins.
God’s rebuke to Cain is: what are you so upset about? If you choose, you can master sin. In Deuteronomy 30, God tells us that the Torah is not far away from us but near us so we can do it. He tells us that He has placed life and death before us and and that choosing life is within our grasp. He tells us that not only can we repent, but He predicts that we will. In Ezekiel 18 and 22, God teaches us that we can choose life by turning away from evil and doing good.
These teachings are clear. Cut and dried. No mystery about it. Very simple. If your mind weren’t so closed to the possibility that you might be wrong about the idolatrous concepts of Jesus, you would see the plain common sense of what I am saying.
It looks like one who is part of the Ephraimite movement. They are described in a YouTube video named “The New Xtians”. It is Esav wanting to reclaim an inheritance in the Land. I don’t see how this is any different than the old replacement theology.
If you are Torah observant which Nusach do you follow. Do you adhere to the Shulchan Aruch.
Shalom Sharbano! The first letter of your name is a shin, be careful not destroy the house of life…Is the the One Elohim divided to have many interpretations of the holy Torah? Only those in the Ruah Hakodesh can interpret and accomplish all the mitzvot. Are you filled of the Shekhinah? For those who are, they are truly light to the world!!
Mr. L., the Torah teaches that anyone who chooses can fulfill the mitzvos. Read Deuteronomy 30.
Shalom Dina! Yes but it is also written in Deuteronomy 30:
6 Then Adonai your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your children, so that you will love Adonai your God with all your heart and all your being, and thus you will live.
Also it written a little bit further:
14 On the contrary, the word is very close to you — in your mouth, even in your heart; therefore, you can do it!
The Dabar is very close. The word, the seed of the Elyon is in you wanting to grow. Each miztvot make the holy seed grow in us. But bashing tasadik people is a sin that kills and destroy the seed in you. Be careful not to judge others based on men interpretations but always refer to the Ruah Hakodesh to teach you in the Intelligence of the LORD.
Mr. L., you proved my point. The word is very close to do it, meaning you can do it. And God will circumcise our hearts after we fully repent and return to Torah observance–did you not read the passage carefully?
Dear sister! We are debating the obvious here our observance of the mitvot is imperative but the outpouring of the Ruah will gave us guaranteed divine presence for in Ezechiel 39 it is written:
וְלֹא־אַסְתִּיר עוֹד פָּנַי מֵהֶם אֲשֶׁר שָׁפַכְתִּי אֶת־רוּחִי עַל־בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה׃
I will not hide again my face(presence) from them that I will pour my spirit (ruhi) upon-house Israel declared Adonai YHWH
(Own translation from the Tanakh)
I don’t know what your point is in this comment, Mr. L.
WHAT?!?1? That response makes absolutely No sense. I notice you didn’t answer any of the questions but sent a diversion instead.
Torah is quite specific of who is charged with rendering Halachah. “If you have a question….” it doesn’t say to consult the Ruach HaKodesh but rather the Rabbis of your time. Even your Jsus said the same when he spoke that the Pharisees sit in Moshe’s seat and do all they say. Jsus didn’t say to consult the Ruach HaKodesh.
Isn’t it rather odd that Xtianity has modified itself in most every subsequent generation.
Your are not of the prophetic Tradition you can not understand for your are a little child in the faith:
Isaiah 42 Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
42 “Here is my servant, whom I support,
my chosen one, in whom I take pleasure.
I have put my Spirit on him;
he will bring justice to the Goyim.
He will not cry or shout;
no one will hear his voice in the streets.
He will not snap off a broken reed
or snuff out a smoldering wick.
He will bring forth justice according to truth;
he will not weaken or be crushed
until he has established justice on the earth,
and the coastlands wait for his Torah.”
That reply is a non-sequitur and is equally evasive.
Mr. L., I agree that Isaiah 42 could be a reference to the Messiah. But it is not a reference to Jesus. There is nothing in the text to support your implication.
Dear Dina Shalom!
Schema Israel the LORD Eloheinu, the LORD Ehad!
The LORD sent the Messiah not to the tsadik but to the lost away sheep of Israel which are the descendants of the lost tribes of Israel. They were in paganism lost away, the Messihim recognized the voice of their shepherd. The mission of the Messiah of Israel was to gather up all the lost away to bring them up to the remembrance of the holy Torah through the Ruah Hakodesh.
The Romans and the Greeks and all the Goyim impressed by the power of the Messihim started to get interest in this new movement. Saul-Paul decided to open the doors to all the Roman world thinking that if pagans can get out of paganism because of the Messiah that was worth it. That is how the goal intended was diverted to profit nations instead of Israel. But now the time of mercy to nations is ending to profit first Israel being the first born of the Elyon.
Now not all Christians so-called are from the Israel but surely the lost tribes comes out from the christian world and without the union of the house of Israel and the house of Yehudah the Messiah will not come on the Land to reign. Therefore do not think that you can despise your brothers lost away without them returning fully to the holy Land Erezt Israel. The Israel is not just Yehudah tribe and some of Levi but all the tribes from Reuben to Benyamin. No one in Israel can know who is from the Tribes except the one Elohim.
Now Eliyah’s mission is to put everything in order before the coming Messiah. Without first the coming of Eliyah the Messiah will not come. To not be deceived nor fooled, Sukkot will be fulfilled only when they will be unity of the two Houses as prophesied in the Tanakh.
21 Then say to them that Adonai Elohim says: ‘I will take the people of Israel from among the nations where they have gone and gather them from every side and bring them back to their own land. 22 I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king will be king for all of them. They will no longer be two nations, and they will never again be divided into two kingdoms. (Ezechiel 37)
In response to your claim that the resurrection proves that Jesus was the messiah, here: https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-18653 .
You might just as well say that Jesus is the president of the United States, because he was resurrected, or the queen of England, or, if you wish to remain contemporaneous with his time, emperor of Rome. None of these positions has anything to do with being resurrected, of course. It is not a qualification of any of them, but neither is it a qualification of the Messiah. The Messiah will be a king over Israel, ruling over a period of peace when God is acknowledged by all the world. These are qualities of the Messiah. Jesus does not possess any of these qualities, and is therefore, most obviously not the Messiah. Because he does not possess these qualities, but his followers insist that he must be the Messiah, they appeal to a supposed event that does not bear on the question of Messiah. This resurrection is supposed to qualify him by its mere wondrousness, but is in all reality irrelevant to the question. One might as well suppose that he is my garbageman, because he possesses the qualification of having walked on water.
Moreover, we must acknowledge that even according to the NT, Jesus is not to be accepted as even a prophet, because he did not fulfill the sign of Jonah, which he said he would. Note please the impatience with which he even promises the sign. Rebelliously he attacks those who ask for a sign, “An adulterous generation, etc.” He expects to be accepted on his own say-so, and offers verbal abuse to those who reasonably ask for proof of his claims. But he does offer them the sign of Jonah, rebelliously or not. So, after he came back from the dead, he should have presented himself. He should have said, “Here I am; now you know that I am the Messiah.” But he never did this, even according to the gospels. In fact, it is not until 47 days later than his promised resurrection, and after he is supposed to have ascended to heaven, that his followers begin announcing that he really did come back.
Paul Summers would have us believe that Jesus did not have to do this, because the Pharisees would not have believed Jesus anyway. This sidesteps the issue. It is no good to claim that I can perform miracles but I do not have to because you are not worthy. You will not believe me just because I attribute bad motives to you. Jesus’ responsibility was to present himself, to fulfill the word he spoke. If they disbelieved anyway, that would be their responsibility. He did not fulfill the sign, however. And so, his words cannot be accepted as those of a prophet.
And, if Jesus had presented himself, but had declared that he was divine, we must still reject him. Deuteronomy 13 makes clear that signs do not allow one to worship a god other than what was revealed at Sinai. Jesus is a god that the Jewish forefathers did not know, and therefore, if he claimed divinity, his resurrection would not make him any more acceptable. In fact, his message must be rejected, resurrection or no.
We can only conclude, then, that Jesus is not the Messiah. He bears nothing in common with the role of the Messiah, but only an assumed remarkable event that is unrelated to the Messiah. The evidence of the event was not presented, not even allowing us to accept him as a prophet. And even if he had presented himself, if he claimed divinity, we would still be obligated to reject his claims. The resurrection is irrelevant.
Regarding your post: https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-18653 .
You assert that Jesus refers only to Hashem. On this point you are mistaken. In fact, Jesus is self-aggrandizing, drawing attention from Hashem and to himself.
Consider well, please, Matthew 5. In this chapter, Jesus consistently opposes and elevates his words over the words of Hashem. When he says, “You have heard it said…” he quotes a passage from the Torah, and then contrasts it with his own teaching, “but I say….” Those things his audience had heard all came directly from God. He may as well have said, “God says…but I say.”
One might be tempted to argue that Jesus is merely explicating the law, and that his teaching complements it rather than contradicts it. However, if that were the case, he would not need to contrast them the way he does. He is clearly teaching that his words are superior to the Torah, not merely teaching principles that underlie the Torah. In so doing, he shows that he finds his teaching superior to God’s.
In Matthew 12, Jesus proclaims himself to be “Lord of the Sabbath”. This is clearly not a way to refer people to Hashem. This horrible pronouncement and the invective that precede it make a mockery of Torah and are an attempt on the part of Jesus to elevate himself above Hashem. What is obvious is that if Jesus were the “Lord of the Sabbath,” his disciples would have been more careful to properly observe it. What servant breaks the Law of the King when in His presence? Regardless, Jesus attempted to exalt himself with grandiose and arrogant claims, showing the greatest disregard for Hashem’s Law and its Author.
Likewise, at the so-called Last Supper, Jesus attempted to overwrite the Pesach with his own narrative. A day that was dedicated to remembering God’s removal of Israel from Exodus was now to be a day to commemorate Jesus’ death. Jesus is taking something that refers one to God, a day set aside eternally just for this purpose, and repurposing it to make it about himself. This is far from your claim that he always referred people to Hashem. In fact, he is taking a memorial that does refer people to Hashem and now making it to refer to himself. He exalts himself over God, the antithesis of your assertion.
The Church continues to exalt Jesus over God in the same manner, of course. Shavuot has become for the Church, Pentecost. A day dedicated to celebrating God granting Israel a most precious gift is to become a day about receiving the ability to speak a foreign language without having to learn. Shabbat is not about honoring the Creator but the supposed resurrection. And one may read the works of various counter-counter-missionaries to see how they relate the festivals to Jesus. The things meant to focus the nation of priests on their God are now rewritten by the Church to focus humanity on Jesus. How reminiscent of the one who “shall attempt to change the sacred seasons and the law” (Dan. 7.24).
When a man wishes to follow Jesus, but needs to bury his father, Jesus exalts himself, yet again. By telling the man to “let the dead bury the dead” he is telling the man to dishonor his father, contrary to the Law of Hashem. He also ignores that it is a mitzvah to bury the dead. Jesus again exalts himself over Hashem.
And, in fact, the way he interposes himself between Man and God is to draw one’s attention away from Hashem and to himself. When he asserts that no one comes to the Father except through himself, he has contravened the Torah and exalted himself with base arrogance. He has attempted to seize the honor one owes God and direct it to himself. He has attempted to capture the devotion one owes his Creator and keep it for himself.
In short, he has not referred one to Hashem. He has attempted to take attention from Hashem and exalt himself. He has attempted to enthrone himself in the hearts of humanity rather than the One to Whom is due all devotion, gratitude, and obedience. He pretended his own words were superior to those of Hashem, called himself “Lord of the Sabbath” and retooled Pesach to be about himself. Your thesis falls.
Shalom Jim! Very very good points which I will agree. But I’m not Greek but Hebrew! For me Yahushuo the Messiah did not do these sin. Those who wrote the Gospel wrote with their mind set and distorted the Message like all true Message corruption of the original Message was corrupted.
Now in Daniel the Messiah had to come before the destruction of the second Temple. Please carefully read Daniel! For part of Israel the Messiah did not come than Daniel is not Scripture or He did come but as been cut off from his people. That is exactly what happen.
My most powerful example is how the so-called prostitute (false church (knisse)) change the true date of birth of the Messiah Yahushuo who was born in Sivan for a so-called birth in a pagan festival. For if they had compted the months according to our sacred calendar they would have arrived in the beginning of Sivan which correspond strangely to the same day as SHAVUOT. For Yahushuo is the living Torah given to world to accomplish all Justice.
But the Satan did not want these thing to be known corrupted everything in other to build the divide that we have now. The mission of Eliyah is to reestablish the truth and put everything back in order.
There is a lot of things to say about the subject. YHWH my Beloved is showing me the truth about everything. I know that HE IS THE ONE.
Schema Israel: YHWH Eloheinu, YHWH Ehad
Bless be HIS HOLY NAME now and forever!!
Now this is an interesting development. You say the gospel writers distorted the “message”. If that message is corrupted how can you tell anyone what the truth is if you don’t have the benefit of being given any concrete facts. You would have to decide, on your own, which is accurate and which is corrupt. There is no way to conclude such without the benefit of a time machine whereby you could know first hand that truth. If you want to contend that you are being “Shown” the truth then join the many club members who have also been shown a truth, albeit a different truth. Why is “Your” truth any more valid than the other club members.
I think we can conclude your knowledge of Hebrew is certainly lacking. You have followed much in the way of Xtianity in expounding Daniel, messiah and the Second Temple. This can only be distorted by relying on a Xtian translation rather than the original source.
You pretend to support my argument, but then enforce its point through the greatest folly. Allow me to explain:
You say that my points are good and that you agree. If only you did! In fact, you have continued the error by placing Jesus’ birthday on Shavuot and declaring him the living Torah. The placement of his birthday is mere speculation. No one knows when he was born. But you want to have it on Shavuot because then you can have a “living Torah”. You have attempted to correct absurdity with absurdity.
Earlier, you quoted from the Complete Jewish Bible, which I would point out, like Sharbano, is a Christian translation. It is even more false than most Christian translations, because it attempts to dress up those Greek works of yours in Jewish lingo. Nothing says “wolf in sheep’s clothing” like trying to make the NT appear Jewish. Even Luke, who was not Jewish does not escape Stern’s treatment, imposing Jewish terms on the text in an attempt to seduce the Jewish people away from Hashem. “Look, it’s Jewish,” Stern beckons. “It says so right on the cover. Jesus did not have disciples. He had talmidim. See, Jewish! He did not make a blessing. He made a b’rakhah. Jewish. Those hateful vipers, those children of Satan, those hypocrites: they were not Pharisees. They were P’rushim. Jewish! Jewish! Jewish”
It does not make it true-ish.
But you will note that the sins attributed to Jesus by those treacherous Greek writers, not Jewish writers, still appear in Stern’s travesty of a “translation”. In Matthew–I’m sorry, Matisyahu–Jesus still exalts his teachings above the Torah of HaShem. He still claims to be Lord of the Sabbath, excuse me, “Lord of Shabbat”. (It’s all very Jewish now, not Greek.) He still makes Pesach to be about himself.
Or do you, perhaps, only employ the Tanakh when relying on Stern?
When relying on Stern for Psalm 22, you use his footnote to imply the crucifixion. But you should know that he relies on the Septuagint for that, as he admits on page xxx. He says that Septuagint implies karu, “they pierced,” and a scribal error could have been made either way. But for the reading to imply the crucifixion, it is not the Hebrew upon which you rely. It is the Greek.
But I must ask again, do you only use his Tanakh? Then how do you know what Jesus said and did? Are you of an extended life span? Do you have your own gospels upon which you rely, not Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Please let us know so that we do not waste our time quoting from sources you reject.
Regarding Daniel, I am certain you noticed the dishonesty of Stern’s translation. In v. 25, he translates mashiach as “an anointed”. In v. 26, he transliterates the same word, which is his commentary. Moreover, he capitalizes “Mashiach,” giving it a Christological–I mean, Mashiachal–feel.
I ask you to read Daniel 9 carefully. Was the Messiah the subject of Daniel 9? It most certainly was not. In fact, it would be quite bizarre to have the word “mashiach” here referring to the Messiah, when it has never been employed that way in scripture elsewhere, in neither the earlier or later prophets, nor in any of the later writings. In fact, it is a term employed by the rabbis later, a convention, but not a term used by scripture.
To read Daniel 9, to read and understand Torah, you will have to take off your Jesus glasses. You will have to read to find out what message HaShem is giving. You cannot come to Tanach with preconceived notions. If you do so, then you will only find what you put into it. It will be your ideas pushed into the Torah, not God’s ideas coming out of the Torah and into you.
Lion, it’s ironic that you put such an emphasis on the יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ part of Daniel 9:26, claiming that it was because of the “cutting off” of this “moshiach” that was the initiator of the “sixfold changes” mentioned in Daniel 9:24, including the “end of transgression/sin.”
You obviously identify this “cutting off” of this “moshiach” with the death of jesus…But what I find ironic about this is that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of the “sixfold promises” mentioned in Daniel 9:24!
Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
Did any of these things happen after your jesus died, Lion? Has iniquity been erased from Israel as this verse states concerning “your people”? (Which refer’s to Israel, Daniel’s people.) Do you still sin?
We both know that jesus’s death accomplished none of this…
So the question becomes, why in the world would you associate the promises of Daniel 9:24 with jesus’s death?! It is clear that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of these promises of the end of transgression among Israel or any other people.
So why do you insist that jesus must be this “moshiach” mentioned in Daniel 9:26?
It is interesting to note that Jews and Christians can agree on other passages referring exclusively to the Messiah! Here are a few:
Isaiah 11:1. And a shoot shall spring forth from the **STEM OF JESSE,** and a twig shall sprout from his roots.
Ezekiel 37:24. And **MY SERVANT DAVID** shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
Hosea 3:5. Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.
Jeremiah 30:9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** whom I will set up for them.
There is one thing all of these verses have in common: They all use a “Davidic qualifier,” meaning that they all exclusively refer to the Davidic dynasty in some fashion. This is a good reason why Jews and Christians can all understand that these future prophesies refer to one person: Moshiach ben David.
But Daniel 9:24-27, nor the rest of the chapter, give us any indication that this “moshiach” mentioned has any connection to the Davidic dynasty, at least at face value…This lend credibility to the Jewish position that this “moshiach who was cut off” in Daniel 9:26 is not the promised Messiah son of David who is spoken of in the four aforementioned passages above that both Jews and Christians agree refer to the specific individual called “Moshiach ben David.”
In fact, the word “moshiach” is NEVER used to exclusively refer to the individual of “Moshiach ben David” in the Tanach…Ever! Usually, the individual of Moshiach ben David is referred to as “David” or “melech/king.”
So your interpretation of Daniel 9:26 actually runs contradictory to the rest of scripture…
Thank you for your reply which is interesting! Daniel description is surely mysterious and not accompanied with the usual Messianic titles but יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ part of Daniel 9:26 is to be understood in the prophetic vision of Isaiah 53 where it is stated:
“8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from a land of the living;
For a transgression of My people He was stricken.” (NKJV)
Here this Messiah is not glorious and king but a servant despised. Isaiah says in this vein:
“6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” (NKJV)
Now to go back to Daniel, he warns us in his vision of troubled times when this messiah will be cut down. That is what happen with the Romans and the destruction of the temple. But you claim that Yahushuo did not do Daniel 9 v.24, let us look at the passage:
24 “Seventy weeks are decreed
For your people and for your holy city,
To shut up the rebellion
And to seal up sin-offering
And to forgive iniquity
And to bring in everlasting righteousness
And to seal up vision and prophecy
And to anoint a holy of holies. (Own translation)
All those 6 things have 70 weeks to be fully accomplish. The last week still is not in place see Daniel 9 v.27
To understand this final week (period of 7 years) only the Book of Revelation will give you some insight… for it is written by Daniel 12 v.4:
“But you Daniel stop up the words and seal the book unto a time of end, will wander about many and will be increased the knowledge…” (Own translation)
The question therefore is when do we know that the final week is in place?
Daniel 9 v. 27 says:
“And he will have strengthen an alliance to many one week and a half-week he will stop work sacrifice and offering…”
A major alliance to come is a sign to linked to Gog in the upper region of the North
4 “Remember a torah of Moses my servant,
Which I commanded him in Horeb unto all Israel,
Statutes and judgments.
5 Behold, I will send to you Eliyah the prophet
In front of a coming day of YHWH the great the awesome. (Malachi) (Own translation)
Eliyahu is a sign who will combat this prince from Edom the last Rome!!
P.S.:I hope I gave you some insight continue to observe Torah and reject any pagan messiah but do not reject the true Messiah which Eliyahu will confirm…
May YHWH shine his face upon you all and may he bring the final Redemption to all Israel!!
Concerning Isaiah 53, I challenge you to show me one reference in the entirety of the servant songs where the servant is referred to explicitly as “David” or “the stump of Jesse” or any other Messianic specifier used in other passages throughout the Tanach…
The fact is, the “servant” of Isaiah’s servant songs is referred to as Israel and Jacob multiple times. But where is the servant referred to as being “David” or “the stump of Jesse” or even a “king”?
Jews and Christians can agree on other passages referring exclusively to the Messiah! Here are a few: Isaiah 11:1, Ezekiel 37:24, Hosea 3:5, Jeremiah 30:9…
Isaiah 11:1. And a shoot shall spring forth from the **STEM OF JESSE,** and a twig shall sprout from his roots.
Ezekiel 37:24. And **MY SERVANT DAVID** shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
Hosea 3:5. Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.
Jeremiah 30:9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** whom I will set up for them.
There is one thing all of these verses have in common: They all use a “Davidic qualifier,” meaning that they all exclusively refer to the Davidic dynasty in some fashion. This is why Jews and Christians can all understand that these future prophesies refer to one person: Moshiach ben David.
However, Isaiah 53 makes no mention of this servant having any exclusive association with the kingdom of David. This is why we understand it as referring to a collective group of individuals, namely the righteous among Israel, Messiah included!
But you error when you assume that the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 refers only to the Messiah.
Lion, concerning Daniel 9, you completely ignored what I said in my last post. I’ll post it for you again:
Daniel 9:24-27, nor the rest of the chapter, give us any indication that this “moshiach” mentioned has any connection to the Davidic dynasty, at least at face value…This lends credibility to the Jewish position that this “moshiach who was cut off” in Daniel 9:26 is not the promised Messiah son of David who is spoken of in the four aforementioned passages above that both Jews and Christians agree refer to the specific individual called “Moshiach ben David.”
In fact, the word “moshiach” is NEVER used to exclusively refer to the individual of “Moshiach ben David” in the Tanach…Ever! Usually, the individual of Moshiach ben David is referred to as “David” or “melech/king.”
So your interpretation of Daniel 9:26 actually runs contradictory to the rest of scripture…
Shalom and G-d bless!
Also Lion, Concerning Isaiah 53, in order to determine who the servant is, we need to look at the context. Isaiah 49:3-6 is a good place to start.
Isaiah 49:3. And He said to me, “You are My servant, Israel, about whom I will boast.”
Isaiah 49:4. And I said, “I toiled in vain, I consumed my strength for nought and vanity.” Yet surely my right is with the Lord, and my deed is with my God.
Isaiah 49:5. And now, the Lord, Who formed me from the womb as a servant to Him, said to bring Jacob back to Him, and Israel shall be gathered to Him, and I will be honored in the eyes of the Lord, and my God was my strength.
Isaiah 49:6. And He said, “It is too light for you to be My servant, to establish the tribes of Jacob and to bring back the besieged of Israel, but I will make you a light of nations, so that My salvation shall be until the end of the earth.”
So how is this reconciled? How can Israel bring back Israel? The answer is simple! Isaiah
49:3 refers to a specific part of Israel, namely the righteous remnant. (G-d promised a righteous remnant of Israel throughout all generations.) Verse 5 refers to the remnant bringing back the rest of Israel back to righteousness. And finally, verse 6 refers to the newly restored Israel being “light to the nations” through the revelation of truth through Hashem.
In other words, this is a two step process:
1. The righteous remnant of Israel will bring back the rest of Israel to righteousness. (Isaiah 49:3-5)
2. The newly restored nation of Israel will serve to be a “light to the nations.” (Isaiah 49:6)
So ultimately, the nation of Israel is the servant who will be “a light unto the nations.” However, in order to get to that point, the righteous remnant of Israel will first gather back the rest of Israel back to Torah. It’s a two step process.
The servant is the righteous remnant of ISRAEL.
Isaiah 51:7. Hearken to Me, you who know righteousness, a people that has My Torah in their heart, fear not reproach of man, and from their revilings be not dismayed.
This is yet another verse which highlights the suffering of G-d righteous servant, Israel.
Isaiah 54 even refers to the “SERVANTS of the Lord”!
Isaiah 54:17. Any weapon whetted against you shall not succeed, and any tongue that contends with you in judgment, you shall condemn; this is the heritage of the SERVANTS OF THE LORD and their due reward from Me, says the Lord.
Isaiah 52:15 describes the gentiles kings who will shut their mouths because of their astonishment of Israel’s vindication by Hashem:
Isaiah 52:15 So shall he cast down many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him, for, what had not been told them they saw, and [at] what they had not heard they gazed.
Micah 7:16-17 echoes this sentiment:
Micah 7:16. Nations shall see and be ashamed of all their might-they shall place a hand upon their mouth; their ears shall become deaf.
Micah 7:17. They shall lick the dust as a snake, as those who crawl on the earth. They shall quake from their imprisonment; they shall fear the Lord, our God, and they shall fear you.
Also, Isaiah 60:14 speaks of the future Israel who was previously despised by the nations as being vindicated at the end of days, also echoing in line with the suffering/despised servant of Isaiah 53:
Isaiah 60:14 And the children of your oppressors shall go to you bent over, and **THOSE WHO DESPISED YOU** shall prostrate themselves at the soles of your feet, and they shall call you ‘the city of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
So there you have it. The suffering servant of Isaiah 53 ultimately is the nation of Israel.
Yehuda dear brother Shalom!
Your interpretation of Isaiah and Isaiah 49 in particular is difficult to swallow.
I admit it is clever to assign to righteous part of Israel the role to bring back all Israel. That surely will evacuate the need of a Messiah Savior.
Therefore let us look at it with the help of Scriptures:
Yosef was the Beloved of Yaakov our father but he was despised by all his brothers. He got one time a dream where even the sun and the moon will bow down to him. What happen? His dream was prophetic for who saved his brothers and the house of his father from famine… He was the instrument of salvation.
Now the Messiah Ben Yosef was also despised by his brothers when came the famine and the destruction of Yerushala’im only those who turn to him were saved from eternal famine. Actually prophetically those who follow Yahushuo were warned to flee in the mountains and be prepared (vigilant):
Matthew 24 New King James Version (NKJV)
Jesus Predicts the Destruction of the Temple
24 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
The Signs of the Times and the End of the Age
3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”
4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all[a] these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences,[b] and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. 11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.
The Great Tribulation
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’[c] spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
The Coming of the Son of Man
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
This Son of Adam will be the Messiah Davidic who will reign in the Messianic Era…
“I admit it is clever to assign to righteous part of Israel the role to bring back all Israel. That surely will evacuate the need of a Messiah Savior.”
You fail to take into account that Christians have assigned a purpose to the Messiah that is not found in Hebrew Scripture. The purpose of the Messiah is to rule over Israel during a time of universal peace, universal knowledge of God, ingathering of the exiles, restoration of the Third Temple, etc.
Dina, to Lion “You fail to take into account that Christians have assigned a purpose to the Messiah that is not found in Hebrew Scripture. The purpose of the Messiah is to rule over Israel during a time of universal peace, universal knowledge of God, in- gathering of the exiles, restoration of the Third Temple, etc.”
We didn’t assign the new purpose to the Messiah but you fail to see that purpose in your scriptures. If you could include yourself in the words that the text of is 53 speaks of all’ going astray like ship” you would see that purpose.
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20590
When you read my very long comment on Isaiah 53 you will see what I mean. (Take your time; it is long.)
sorry for my English ; it should be ‘ going astray like SHEEP.”
You have a serious dilemma here. The “abomination of desolation” spoken of by Daniel happened some 2000 years ago, WHEN the temple stood. Since there is NO temple how can this come to pass, especially considering you have informed us there is NO THIRD TEMPLE. You have some serious Splainin to do.
Mr. Lion, concerning your strawman argument, I will address the typical christian claims that you made concerning Daniel 7:13-14…
Let me give you a lesson in context.
Daniel 7:1-14 describes Daniel’s DREAM/VISION. Do you know what a DREAM/VISION is? A DREAM/VISION is not to be taken literally and utilizes vivid imagery to represent various ideas and concepts. The beginning of Daniel chapter 7 begins like this:
Daniel 7:1 In the first year of Belshazzar, the king of Babylon, **DANIEL SAW A DREAM,** and the visions of his mind [while asleep] on his bed; then he wrote the dream and said the beginnings of the matters.
Daniel 7:2 Daniel raised his voice and said: I saw in my vision during the night, and behold the four winds of the heavens were stirring up the Great Sea.
Daniel 7:3 And four huge beasts were coming up out of the sea, each one different from the other.
Daniel 7:4 The first one was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle, until its wings were plucked and it was taken from the earth, and it stood on feet like a man, and the heart of a mortal was given it.
Daniel 7:5 And behold another second beast, resembling a bear, and it stood to one side, and there were three ribs in its mouth between its teeth, and so did they say to it, ‘Get up, eat much meat.’
Daniel 7:6 After this, I saw, and behold another one, like a leopard, and it had four wings of a bird on its back, and the beast had four heads, and dominion was given it.
Daniel 7:7 After this, I saw in the visions of the night, and behold a fourth beast, awesome and dreadful and exceedingly strong, and it had huge iron teeth. It ate and crushed, and trampled the rest with its feet, and it was different from all the beasts that were before me, and it had ten horns.
Now, I want to interrupt here to ask you a question. Given the description of these beasts,” do you believe that we are to take this literally? Must we assume that there will be four beasts, one of them having “iron teeth” and “ten horns” that will come in the future or who have already came? Is this what you believe?
Anyway, moving on…
Daniel 7:8 I looked at these horns and behold another small horn came up among them, and three of the first horns were plucked out before it, and behold eyes like human eyes were on this horn, and a mouth speaking arrogantly.
Daniel 7:9 I was looking until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days sat; His raiment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like clean wool; His throne was sparks of fire, its wheels were a burning fire.
Daniel 7:10 A river of fire was flowing and emerging from before Him; a thousand thousands served Him, and ten thousand ten thousands arose before Him. Justice was established, and the books were opened.
Daniel 7:11 I saw then from the sound of the arrogant words that the horn spoke, I looked until the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed and given to a flame of fire.
Daniel 7:12 But as for the other beasts, their dominion was removed, and they were given an extension of life until a set time.
Now here come your favorite versesi. **Keep in mind that they are still within the context of Daniel’s DREAM…**
Daniel 7:13 I saw in the visions of the night, and behold with the clouds of the heaven, one like a man was coming, and he came up to the Ancient of Days and was brought before Him.
Daniel 7:14 And He gave him dominion and glory and a kingdom, and all peoples, nations, and tongues shall serve him; his dominion is an eternal dominion, which will not be removed, and his kingdom is one which will not be destroyed.
Now, have you ever read the next verse? Daniel 7:15-28 is CRUCIAL to understanding what was meant in Daniel 7:1-14. Lets read on:
Daniel 7:15 My spirit-I, Daniel-became troubled within its sheath, and the visions of my mind terrified me.
Daniel 7:16 I drew near to one of those standing [there], **AND I ASKED HIM THE TRUTH OF ALL THIS, AND HE TOLD IT TO ME, AND HE LET ME KNOW THE INTERPRETATION OF THE MATTERS.**
Here we see that Daniel was confused about the vision. Daniel did not understand what the vision meant on his own. He needed the assistance of an angel to gain true understanding of the dream/vision. Thus, the next few verses will explain to us what Daniel’s dream actually represents. Moving on…
Daniel 7:17 [He said] “These huge beasts, which are four, are four kingdoms, which will arise from the earth
Daniel 7:18 And **THE HIGH HOLY ONES WILL RECEIVE THE KINGDOM,** and THEY will inherit the kingdom forever and to all eternity.”
Compare Daniel 7:18 to Daniel 7:13-14. The HIGH HOLY **ONES** (plural!) WILL RECEIVE THE KINGDOM FOR ETERNITY! The “son of man” description is not exclusive to one person according to Daniel 7:18! Please keep this in mind as we read on…
Daniel 7:19 Then I wished to determine the truth of the fourth beast, which was different from all of them- excessively dreadful; its teeth were of iron and its nails of copper; it ate and crushed to powder, and the rest it trampled with its feet.
Daniel 7:20 And concerning the ten horns that were on its head, and the other one that came up and [the] three [that] fell before it, and the horn that was like this and that had eyes and a mouth speaking arrogantly, and its appearance was greater than [that of] its companions.
Daniel 7:21 I looked and the horn that was like this waged war with the holy ones and overwhelmed them.
Daniel 7:22 Until the Ancient of Days came and gave revenge to the high holy ones, and the time arrived that the holy ones inherited the kingdom.
Daniel 7:23 So he said, “The fourth beast [represents] a fourth kingdom [that] will be on the earth, which will be different from all the kingdoms, and it will devour the whole land and trample it and crush it.
Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns that [sprout] from that kingdom [represent] ten kings [that] will rise, and the last one will rise after them, and he will be different from the first, and he will humble three kings.
Daniel 7:25 And he will speak words against the Most High, and he will oppress the high holy ones, and he will think to change the times and the law, and they will be delivered into his hand until a time, two times, and half a time.
Daniel 7:26 And the judgment shall be established, and they will remove his dominion to be destroyed and annihilated until the end.
Daniel 7:27 And the KINGDOM and the DOMINION and the greatness of the kingdoms under all the heavens **WILL BE GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE OF THE HIGH HOLY ONES;** its kingdom is a perpetual kingdom, and all dominions will serve and obey [it].”
As you can see, the kingdom mentioned that was given to the “son of man” in Daniel’s DREAM was interpreted as being the kingdom that was given to the PEOPLE OF THE HIGH HOLY ONES. This is PLURAL. It does not refer to one individual.
And for completion’s sake:
Daniel 7:28 Until here is the end of the matter. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts terrified me greatly, and my colors changed upon me, and I kept the matter in my heart.
As you can see, if we look at the CONTEXT of Daniel 7:1-14, we can see that what the text literally says is quite different from the INTERPRETATION OF THE DREAM given in Daniel 7:15-28.
And since I know you will bring it up… concerning the “יִפְלְח֑וּן” argument and how you and other christians interpret it to mean “worship,” we have already proven that “יִפְלְח֑וּן” here does not mean worship, as same word is used in verse 27 with regards to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL/THE PEOPLE OF THE MOST HOLY ONES. In this context, the word “יִפְלְח֑וּן” means “serve.” It does not mean to be worshipped as a god! (Chas v’shalom!)
So unless you want to tell me that the children of Israel are to be worshipped as gods along with your jeezer, I wouldn’t keep pushing for that if I were you… 😉
You want to know about what Daniel’s dream represents? Then read Daniel 7:15-28. Stop making up your own interpretations and isolating two verses of a dream and then saying “Look, jesus said he was the son of man! This makes him the fulfillment of this prophesy that was not fulfilled yet because I just know!”
Literally, this is your argument. Your jesus did not fulfill Daniel 7:13-14 and you know it. This is one of the christian “second coming” arguments that even the most kooky of believers in jesus would have to admit was not fulfilled by jesus during his time on earth.
Daniel 7:13-14 has nothing to do with jesus…
Y Y, in response to YY;
“Mr. Lion, concerning Psalms 110, I am confused why you come to the conclusion that the Melchizedek priesthood relates exclusively to Jesus (…)But I have no problem with it having a Messianic connotation to it as well.”
Why jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek ( king of righteousness) ? His position as priest did not depend on his parents or his genealogy (unlike the Levitical priests). His priesthood was a different kind, a different order like the king’s of Salem.
The new priest in Ps 110 is also called a priest forever which means whose priestly duty are sufficient , perfect before God with no need for replacement and no death and followers.
“He remains a priest forever..”
Since you can admit the psalm can relate to the Messiah, you can see that his messianic duty will last forever. ( unlike other people in messianic kingdom who will still be subject to death)
NT Hebrew 7;24-25 “but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.”
Purpose; ” For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.”
“One of the most striking commonalities between King David and Abraham is that they both “crushed kings” with the help of Hashem.”
Yes but with David the difference is obvious; “The Lord is at your right, He crushes kings on the day of His anger.and v.6 ” He will judge the corpse- filled nations… These events relate to the time of God’s vengeance when He will come to judge the nations. At that time God is crushing kings (of the nations) “on the day of His anger” Compare to Zechariah 14. which is at the coming of Messianic kingdom , not David’s times. Most Jews won’t even admit possibility that the Psalm is Messianic.
Last thing; there was never a king to whom God said the words in v.1 “wait at My right hand until I make your enemies a stool for your feet” No enemies of any king were ever made submissive to the king (,including David’s.) until the Messianic ruling over the nations (with iron rod) comes to pass ( Is 11)
This is not an argument against Jesus ; “crushing kings” and defeating his enemies and making them a footstool at his feet- has not happened yet, as it is understandable to us to happen during the Messianic kingdom.
“so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.” Hebrew 9;28
Sharbano the abomination of the desolation are done by people like you when you bring the loss of the Faith in the heart of men.
Yehuda, what is your point? You talk about a straw man then you talk about Israel and arrive to no conclusion… Can you just state the matter in an understandable way. Todah Rabah!
Also Yehuda can you tell me who is the Ancient of days? What does it mean?
That’s NOT what the text says. Will you change the text here too.
Sharbano listen o fool one, I just took it from Yehuda own quote from Daniel 7:
Daniel 7:9 I was looking until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days sat; His raiment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like clean wool; His throne was sparks of fire, its wheels were a burning fire.
Daniel 7:10 A river of fire was flowing and emerging from before Him; a thousand thousands served Him, and ten thousand ten thousands arose before Him. Justice was established, and the books were opened.
Therefore again my question is :
Also Yehuda or the so-called rabbi of this place can you tell me who is the Ancient of days? What does it mean?
You don’t even realize Who and when you are responding to.
Looks like you’re getting all flustered again. I realize you have been UNABLE to answer questions put to you. That doesn’t mean you have to get agitated. Your “ruach” is just limited, that’s all.
The “Ancient of Days” is understood metaphorically to represent Hashem. Please keep in mind that Daniel was experiencing a DREAM/VISION as explained at the beginning of Daniel 7. As explained before, Daniel 7:1-14 describes Daniel’s DREAM/VISION. Do you know what a DREAM/VISION is? A DREAM/VISION is not to be taken literally and utilizes vivid imagery to represent various ideas and concepts.
This includes the verses you quoted concerning the “Ancient of Days” and the description given in verses 9-10.
Lion, you ignored my question to you concerning Daniel 7:3-7 and the “four beasts” mentioned there. I’ll ask you again:
Given the description of these beasts,” do you believe that we are to take this literally? Must we assume that there will be four beasts, one of them having “iron teeth” and “ten horns” that will come in the future or who have already came? Is this what you believe?
I look forward to your honest answer…Anyway, I’d like to refocus your attention to Daniel 7:15-28…
Daniel 7:15-28 is CRUCIAL to understanding what was meant in Daniel 7:1-14. Lets read on:
Daniel 7:15 My spirit-I, Daniel-became troubled within its sheath, and the visions of my mind terrified me.
Daniel 7:16 I drew near to one of those standing [there], **AND I ASKED HIM THE TRUTH OF ALL THIS, AND HE TOLD IT TO ME, AND HE LET ME KNOW THE INTERPRETATION OF THE MATTERS.**
Lion, here we see that Daniel was confused about the vision. Daniel did not understand what the vision meant on his own. He needed the assistance of an angel to gain true understanding of the dream/vision. Thus, the next few verses will explain to us what Daniel’s dream actually represents.
And Lion, I’ll give you a little hint: The description that the angel gave to Daniel concerning his dream has absolutely nothing to do with jesus/yeshua/yahushuo/yahawishiwashi/whatever.
Your jeezer has nothing to do with Daniel 7:13-14…
Ok, you say that God has given, shown a way for your spiritual destiny, I guess you are talking about free will, and the means of that are choosing to walk in Gods statutes, according to His Law etc.
That is the crossroads where cain was at?
Today you can make that same decision?
One way is Gods way, the other isn’t.
Im sure this is the basics of your previous statements?
So my question based on the context of Gen ch 4 and your previous statements on repentance still stands. Surley it must be one of the two, both together, or none at all.
Yes I understand one can choose, to be fair, that was the only answer you gave. You never answered my question. So anyway if one does decide to follow God, what are the means? Surley the Law of Moses has both contained within it. If you follow the Law, then the Law has to be followed to the letter?
I appreciate that the Law of Moses wasn’t functioning in Gen ch 4, however repentance and blood sacrifice was.
Ps. You are correct that im no Hebrew scholar, but I can read a hebrew concordance, and reference books written by Jewish scholars, who study the bible texts. If of course ive stated a hebrew word incorrectly then you must put me right. Oddly you say I should leave the hebrew out of it. Surley thats read it IN Hebrew?
“You are correct that im no Hebrew scholar, but I can read a hebrew concordance, and reference books written by Jewish scholars”
Reading a Hebrew concordance means absolutely Nothing, especially if you are using that Strong’s concordance. It is simply Impossible to gather any meaning of a text using this method.
Ok, I hear you. So what concordance, translation would you advise for a non speaking gentile like me to use. If a strongs is inappropriate there must be one that is?
Unfortunately there is No translation that is totally accurate. Many have found the Artscroll Tanach to be one of the best ones, especially in conveying the context. But even then the context may be accurate but the exact translation may not be clear and this too can cause a misunderstanding. If a person really and truly wants to understand the Hebrew text then learning the language is best. It would be worthwhile to spend the time.
Paul, I guess I don’t understand your question. The Hebrew Bible teaches clearly and unequivocally that, yes, we can keep the whole Torah, yes, we are fully responsible for our spiritual destiny, and yes, we choose between good and evil. The teaching is very clear, I’m not making this up. Read Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 18 and 22 and you will see that this is what the Bible teaches.
The Bible also teaches that during a time when we can’t offer sacrifices we can offer prayer and repentance (Hosea 14:3, perhaps 2 in Christian bible; 1 Chronicles 8:46-50). Deuteronomy 30 teaches that the Law applies even while we are in exile, and after we fully repent and return to Torah observance then God will gather our exiles and restore us to the Land.
Please clarify what you are asking because I have tried to answer your question. Thank you!
Dina, ‘God tells us that the Torah is not far away from us but near us so we can do it.’
God’s words wasn’t far away from Adam either. Actually more, he could hear it just there where he was. And he failed. What destiny could he choose, I am sure he had options like anybody else; blessings or curse Whatever way he would go ,pleasing God or not -pleasing God, the one thing didn’t change; one thing remained, there was death that was brought by sin.
“We can do it ourselves without the need for a sinless, divine messiah dying as a sacrifice to redeem us from our sins.”
Yes we just repent, and everything is ‘over’. We can choose life, to keep our life. Repentance is what God requires from our side, it is our responsibility. But there is more than that in order for our sins to be wiped out, for our mortal bodies to be able to come back to life in the resurrection. And this is all possible because God kept his words what He said; “the attonment is in the blood”, and He Himself provided the payment for sin according to His words.
Do you think God changes His mind about the meaning of His words? When He said His words in leviticus , was it just a temporary ? Type of limited – time’ ritual’ ? Does He ‘ skip’ His requirements and law because there is time of exile and no temple to offer sacrifices? As you said;
“The Bible also teaches that during a time when we can’t offer sacrifices we can offer prayer and repentance (Hosea 14:3, perhaps 2 in Christian bible; 1 Chronicles 8:46-50).”
Yes, we can offer a prayer and repentance. But God doesn’t changes His words. He takes care of the rest to fulfil His words. And He fulfilled them in Jesus. We don’t bring a sacrifice , God took care of our sin.
Sacrifices of animals weren’t a means of wiping away sins. They were symbols of ‘ the price for sin which was death. ‘Blood’ in Leviticus ( mentioned by God ) was to mean or symbolize loss of life due to sin. During the exile or any other time without the temple without offering, God still remembered His words that He would take care of our sins to be covered by His son’s life given for us.
P.S Jesus is not calling you to worship any image of God. He calls you to give thanks to God, thanks to the Father for the things He has done. Jesus is not telling you ‘ worship me, I am God.”
Jesus is not telling you ‘ worship me, I am God.”
Tell that to the Church!
So, if that’s the case, why are Christians treating his person as if it were G-d? Why pray to Jesus, in his name, or sing songs about him, celebrate his birth, etc. If repentance in the light of the commandments is what is needed as you say, then what Jews are presently doing today (without Jesus) is sufficient to please G-d as he said it would be in Torah.
Con, the point is Jews won’t even accept him as a man of God, human messiah, but will argue about Unitarian approach and criticize Christianity for that. I need to pick the kiddos . I can’t comment more.
Con, just finishing your comment; repentance doesn’t go without trusting God. And that trust includes believing God’s testimony He gave about His son ( like trusting God included obeying Moses in the time God led His people out of Egypt) . That is why next to repentance we acknowledge Jesus.
You left out one thing. As Moshe said, they will not believe me. That’s why G-d “spoke” to the entire nation.
Shabrano, and that also proved that seeing or hearing God’s voice from heaven doesn’t mean you will trust God because people were rebelling with Moses , they still made an idol and many died.
If you are speaking of the golden calf they weren’t “rebelling” against Moshe but wanted substitute for him. Those who actually Worshiped that calf were the Erev Rav.
Right, Eric, so some people sinned (not all). What does that prove? The Scripture still tells us that God spoke to Moses in front of all of Israel so they would hear and believe (Exodus 19:9). How is your response to Sharbano a refutation of that Scripture? And why are you trying to downplay that Scripture anyway? Do you or do you not believe that it is the word of God? Or is it only useful to you insofar as you can twist it to support your theology?
Eric, this is how it works:
There are laws that apply only in the Holy Land. There are laws that apply only to farmers. There are laws that apply only to women, laws that apply only to men, laws that apply only to fathers, and so on. I don’t see a problem.
But I do see a very big problem for you. In the passage from 1 Chronicles that I cited, Solomon prays for God to forgive the Jewish people when they are exiled if they pray and repent. Why didn’t he ask God to send a perfect sinless human being as a sacrifice for their sins? This would have been a perfect opening to ask for such a thing.
Hosea says that we will offer prayers instead of sacrifices. Why didn’t Hosea ask for a perfect sinless human being as a sacrifice for their sins? This also would have been a good time to mention it.
The fact is, the Torah teaches us that we can repent on our own, take full responsibility, and choose life (Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18 and 22–did you even read these passages?). The Torah does not teach that the price for all sin is death, nor does it teach that the only way for atonement is for a human who has never sinned to offer himself as a sacrifice.
God doesn’t change His mind. The laws of sacrifice always apply when there is a Temple. May the third one be restored speedily in our days!
P.S. I don’t need Jesus to call on me to thank God because I do that already.
Dina, Sending sinless human to die for others won’t fix a ‘sin-problem’ if there is no repentance. That is why repentance is coming ahead before all things and God takes care of the rest. He had His appointed time for His son to be sent, the same way He has His time for ruling in Messianic kingdom.
Sacrifices were a symbol , they can’t go ahead before repentance and prayer or replace it.
“The Torah does not teach that the price for all sin is death” Then read Genesis and tell me how long did Adam have to sin before he heard God saying that he would die because He disobeyed God’s words.
“God doesn’t change His mind. The laws of sacrifice always apply when there is a Temple”
Then ask yourself a question why? Because the temple is a place of God’s presence. So why in God’s presence you need all the sacrificial rules especially if repentance and prayer was everything that was needed for our life? What God introduced – it has a meaning!
God doesn’t need animal’s blood for any reason, especially at His altar. He doesn’t need any creature dead as everything is His. What is done and will be done in the temple are symbols of how we are going into His presence, lessons of price of the sin , lessons how we are redeemed..
Eric, you simply don’t have an argument. The Torah does not teach that in addition to prayer and repentance you need the sacrifice of a perfect, sinless human being. The Torah does teach, very clearly, that you can achieve repentance without sacrifice through prayer, repentance, and acts of justice and charity.
Adam brought death to the world for one sin–the sin of eating from the Tree of Knowledge (“for the day that you eat from it you shall die”). The Torah does not teach that the price for ALL sin is death. If it does, prove it by citing chapter and verse.
Genesis 4:7 teaches that we can master sin. Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 18 and 22 teach us that we will live and not die if we make the right choices. This is the opposite of “the price of sin is death.”
The laws of sacrifice apply when there is a Temple, I have made that clear. You started with a conclusion and then asked a question that fits your conclusion. You have closed your mind to the very clear and open lessons Scripture is teaching.
Dina, you still don’t get it. You can choose life but you will still need resurrection. If not sin you would not need resurrection but would live forever. That is what was lost after Adam sinned. Torah is teaching that, but you don’t see it. So I am not just writing to fit things my imagination. And God restored that privilege of eternal life by the sacrifice of his son who paid for our sins .
But anyways that what I said landed on a death ear. Anyways you didn’t answer why you needed sacrificial system at all in the temple.
Eric, I’m afraid you’re the one who’s missing the point. The Torah does not teach anywhere, at any time, or for any reason, that we need a sinless human being to die on our behalf. How to we attain eternal life? The righteous are resurrected. How do you become righteous? Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 18 and 33 (I’m sorry I was accidentally citing chapter 22 all over the place, but I meant 33) teach us how.
I made the point about prayer and repentance instead of sacrifice because Christians insist that we cannot atone for our sins without sacrifice. But the text teaches otherwise, as I have shown with 1 Chronicles 8 and Hosea 14. I wasn’t even talking about resurrection, but now that you mention it…
Dina, Sorry for cutting in that discussion you had before with Mr.L.
“It’s true that we are in exile for our sins, but at least it’s not for the sin of worshiping the idol Jesus.”
– But what about other idols??? Isaiah 10; 10-11. That is just one example. So what’s the difference; this idol or the other?
No matter what accusations you bring up against Christians, we still have relationship with God and enjoy His blessings. God’s testimony about righteousness of Jesus is recorded in Jewish NT.
You seem to be bragging so much about;
“By the way, we already have the ruach of Hashem upon us.” and that God’s words have been upon you all the time Is 59;21. And “who has been continuously observing God’s eternal sign between Him and the Children of Israel, the Sabbath? None other than His faithful witnesses, the Jewish people whom He chose to be His servant and witness.”
I suggest reading entire chapter 59 . Verses 12-16 are telling you that nobody is found to deserve salvation/ redemption on their own because of their deeds, no matter whether he has a spirit or not , whether he keeps a Sabbath, whether he belongs to people of Israel or not. ( Is 48) It will be God’s entire act of grace and only out of His own initiative and mercy and because of His name. Is 48;9
Redeamer is also coming to those who repent , not to those who just keep the Sabbath. Someone may keep the Sabbath and other holidays and even sacrifice , but be far away from God. Is 1;14, Amos 5;21-22.
Also as far as Is 59;21 you quoted, it all relates to time after redeemer is given. It happens ‘from this moment and forever” and the moment is after repentance and coming redeemer.
Do you see all Jewish people keeping all God’s words nowdays? Do you see that in entire book of Isaiah??
” You said ; Pay attention to the testimony of God’s witnesses, those who have been observing the Sabbath since Mount Sinai, upon whom God placed His spirit and promised that His words that He put into their mouths would never depart.”
You said the words should not depart. But Is 59 is contradicting that statement and many other chapters. And many Jewish people nowadays are not even observant.
“You are My witnesses–the word of Hashem–and My servant whom I have chosen” (Isaiah 43:10). So whose witness should I choose? Those who testify that God’s salvation is entire act of grace not by my own deeds and those who trust God’s testimony He gave about His son for our redemption- which includes NT.
Okay, Eric, I’ll take a look at those passages and get back to you, God willing.
Okay, Eric, I’m ready to go toe-to-toe with you.
“Dina, Sorry for cutting in that discussion you had before with Mr.L.
“It’s true that we are in exile for our sins, but at least it’s not for the sin of worshiping the idol Jesus.”
– But what about other idols??? Isaiah 10; 10-11. That is just one example. So what’s the difference; this idol or the other?”
What other idols do Jews today worship, Eric?
“No matter what accusations you bring up against Christians, we still have relationship with God and enjoy His blessings.”
What is this supposed to prove? I never said that Christians don’t have a relationship with God (albeit an incorrect one). I don’t think Jews have a monopoly on God, and I believe there are many good and righteous Christians. Jews believe that all people of any faith or no faith who lead basically good lives and do justice and charity have a share in eternal life. Christians believe that only if you believe as they do can you be a genuinely good person who is not going to be eternally damned. So tell me, whose more generous and inclusive?
“God’s testimony about righteousness of Jesus is recorded in Jewish NT.”
You keep going on about accepting the testimony of the early Christians who were Jews. Unfortunately for you, you do not have their testimony. The authors of the gospels were gentiles. And the early Christian Jewish sect known as the Ebionites testified that even Paul was a gentile, a failed convert to Judaism.
“You seem to be bragging so much about;
“By the way, we already have the ruach of Hashem upon us.” and that God’s words have been upon you all the time Is 59;21.”
So context is all of a sudden very important to you here. Eric, please, read the Hebrew Bible to learn what God is teaching. Christians read the Hebrew Bible to find Jesus in it. That’s the wrong way to read it. The Jews are the Bible’s target audience. They are the ones who brought the message of the Bible to the world. It is bizarre for Christians such as you to tell Jews how to understand their own message, their own Bible. It would be like me telling you how to understand your wife’s love letters, all her private jokes and allusions to events and shared experiences.
But going back to Isaiah 59:21, I disagree with the way you read this, and my understanding is corroborated in Psalm 78. This chapter tells us that the Jewish people will preserve the truth despite our sinning in exile.
As for chapter 59, the verses that you cited are talking specifically about the sinners. You are simply ignoring the evidence that there is a righteous remnant. If there are no righteous people, who is Isaiah addressing in 51:1: “Listen to me, O pursuers of righteousness, O seekers of Hashem”?
You also ignore the previous verse (20) that says that a redeemer will come to Zion, to those who repent–so obviously our actions are important.
You subscribe to the typical Christian stereotype that Jews focus on ritual observances only, like Sabbath observance, and ignore important ideals like prayer and repentance. For Jews, it goes without saying that if you observe the Sabbath but you don’t repent that it’s not enough, and I find your attitude that you think you have to spell that out disrespectful and insulting. You also underestimate the importance of Sabbath observance. Sabbath observance and repentance are not mutually exclusive, you know. We can do both. And it’s disobedient to God to disregard any of His commandments, which includes the Sabbath. We cannot repent while disobeying God. So that brings me to what the prophet says about the Sabbath observers; see Isaiah 56:4-5.
My point in all of this wasn’t to brag but to present the truth. God appointed the Jewish people to be His witnesses, but which Jewish people are the ones who are loyal to Him to whose testimony you should pay careful attention? The ones who have preserved the Torah through the generations, through hell, fire, and water, and whose observance of the Sabbath never wavered from generation to generation.
“You said the words should not depart. But Is 59 is contradicting that statement and many other chapters. And many Jewish people nowadays are not even observant.”
Where in Tanach do you find a statement that Hashem’s Torah will depart from the Jewish people? The fact that a lot of Jews are not observant is irrelevant. The testimony of the truth about God is preserved by the righteous remnant–and God promised He would always preserve the righteous remnant. It so happens that the Jews who adhere to the Torah and keep the Sabbath are the ones who survive into each generation. Everyone else to our great sorrow–non-observant Jews and Jewish Christians–simply fade out of existence through assimilation.
“If you are speaking of the golden calf they weren’t “rebelling” against Moshe but wanted substitute for him. Those who actually Worshiped that calf were the Erev Rav.”
My point while bringing up that story was to show that seeing and hearing God doesn’t make people obey Him. And God wants obedience and trust not just knowledge that people ‘saw’ or ‘heard Him’.
Lets look at the Exodus 32;
“When the people saw that Moshe was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods[a] who will go before us(…)
(…)He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.(…)”
(…)Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”
This example shows that even God speking Himself won’t cause people trust Him all the time. God was ready to destroy His people if not Moshe’s intercession.
So putting the credibility of that testimony over the testimony about Jesus God gave in NT is here irrelevant. It shows that rebellion can come out among people no matter how great God’s testimony would be. God is able to speak to peoples’ hearts without a constant great revealtion about Himself like speaking in front of entire nation. He choses to speak to those whom He knows that will trust Him.
You said that ” Jews believe that all people of any faith or NO faith( my emphasis) who lead basically good lives and do justice and charity have a share in eternal life. ”
– So idolatry – that you call – seeing God working in Jesus ( by Christians) , shouldn’t be any issue to you. Why to even talk about it? If the ‘flaws’ in our beliefs still qualify us for eternal life to come, why to worry about that what we believe what not? We believe Jesus is the future king of Israel, he carried God’s word, he is the Messiah, God works through him, and we still have a share in eternal life to come.
By the way; if we talk about idolatry, it can be anything that is more important than God . People’s idol can be their cars, money, TV anything that is more important than God and His word. And Jesus words don’t take place of God for us, as they are God’s words.
“Christians believe that only if you believe as they do can you be a genuinely good person who is not going to be eternally damned. ” I am leaving it up to God whom he will consider righteous and whom he considers eternally damned. I believe that wherever there is repentance and trust in God and His words- there is salvation.
I said in my previous messages that “God’s testimony about righteousness of Jesus is recorded in Jewish NT.”
( it’s been a while so I am bringing it up) you responded that way;
“You keep going on about accepting the testimony of the early Christians who were Jews. Unfortunately for you, you do not have their testimony. The authors of the gospels were gentiles. ”
– I say; fortunatelly I have their testimony as John one of Jesus’ disciples says ;”This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and WROTE these things DOWN : and we know that his testimony is true.” gospel of John 21;24
He testifies not only about resurection but all events that took place recorded in the gospels that other 3 authors are also confirming. His disciples were Jews and understood he was the messiah. Also the credibility of jesus being son of God is confirmed by the authors of all epistles in NT and in a book of Acts.
You said; “And the early Christian Jewish sect known as the Ebionites testified that even Paul was a gentile, a failed convert to Judaism.”
Paul ‘s testifies for himself and doesn’t need Ebionities to twist the truth about who he was. He gives a clear testimony about himself in Romans 11;1″ I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin.”
and Phil 3;5 .”circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.”
Acts says that in his younger days, he was involved in persecuting Jewish followers of Jesus because he believed they were heretics (Acts 22:4-5). Then he had his encounter with Jesus and believed he was the son of God.
Then we have Peters ‘ testimony ( one of jesus ‘ disciples) and many others in the epistles which carry on Jewish testimony about Jesus being sent by God. And whose testimony you should pay careful attention? God’s testimony about His son being resurrected- testimony that all the words Jesus said were spoken in the name of God and were true. This is the testimony brough up by Jewish believers.
“The Jews are the Bible’s target audience. They are the ones who brought the message of the Bible to the world.It is bizarre for Christians such as you to tell Jews how to understand their own message, their own Bible”
To me it is bizarre that you think you are the only ones to have a monopoly on how to understand God’s word. Second my knowledge is based on jewish testimony in NT that I consider credible based on correlation with what God said in His word in OT and that ” atomnent is in the blood” . And the meaning of His words doesn’t expire because ‘there is no temple’!
You said that “Christians insist that we cannot atone for our sins without sacrifice.”
But what is meant here by these words? It doesn’t mean that along with your prayer and repentance you need to present sacrifice in order to be forgiven. We don’t present any sacrifice, we don’t present Jesus. What is meant here by our words is that God already took care of the sacrifice that was to atone for our sins. Whenever he said He would forgive people after they repented ( Hosea 14 ) He knew He would provide atonment for peoples’ sins and He did. What belongs to us after prayer and repentance it beliving God in what he did for us.
You don’t see that through one sinless man God brough us back eternal life because you don’t even see that death also came through ONE man in Genesis.
You quoted it but didn’t understand it. “These are YOUR gods, Israel”. The “they” here were the Egyptian converts who Moshe brought with him. It is also noted that Hashem says to Moshe, the people YOU brought. As Hashem says, ‘I’ brought you out from Egypt.
Why the revelation at Sinai is paramount is not as you say but rather this is the STANDARD from which to judge. Speaking to “one’s” heart is irrelevant. Anyone can “feel” he is hearing but the mind can imagine such a thing.
It’s not about whether you want to believe in that religion but it is most certainly idolatry for a Jew to believe in it. This is the harlotry that so many in the past indulged in. Hashem desires Emunah.
How can we really trust Paul when he admits deceit. He says he was a Pharisee and an agent of the High Priest. He could not be both. I seem to recall that Paul was supposedly taught by R’ Gamliel as a child. I’m not sure on this part but if that is the contention it too would be false. The Yeshiva of R’ Gamliel would No be teaching children but only a Talmid Chacham.
There is much more to understanding “G-d’s Word” then a superficial reading as Xtianity does. Can a person understand medical or law books without education. Would you trust a doctor who only read books on the subject. Would you employ the services of a lawyer who only read books. Xtians have the assumption there is nothing else to Jewish knowledge and history Except what is written in the scriptures.
Since you bring up sin and sacrifices then why is it necessary for G-d to dictate a “sin sacrifice” in the Third Temple. I guess Yechezkel wasn’t told of Jsus. Apparently it was only Isaiah who “knew” of J’sus.
“You quoted it but didn’t understand it. “These are YOUR gods, Israel”. The “they” here were the Egyptian converts who Moshe brought with him. It is also noted that Hashem says to Moshe, the people YOU brought. As Hashem says, ‘I’ brought you out from Egypt. ” That’s what you said.
Sharbano your explanation doesn’t make too much sense. You are going around with it trying to defend people’s rebelion. God clearly said ;” Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become CORRUPT.” They bowed down and sacrificed to whay they made with their own hands. God doesn’t justify these people as poor converts because they witnessed enough of His miracles and miraculous delivery out of Egypt, yet, they still disobeyed and He was ready to destroy them. “They have bowed down to it ( golden calf) and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”
They quickly forgot who real God is.
That is a simple truth in that story that even supernatural revelation doesn’t guarantee that people would fully obey God. If any inconvenience, difficulties, they have tendency to turn away and abide by what THEY want to believe and trust.
By the way; if sacrifices are not needed at all- as repentance is what is needed;
I have a question why would God bring them back in the third temple? Why were they in the first temple?
Eric, if your reading of Scripture weren’t so one-sidedly against God’s people, you might have noticed that all the people who rebelled were killed, you would have noticed what that number was, and you might have even paid attention to the number of people who remained WHO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
Why do Christians read our Scripture looking to damn us as much as possible? Frankly, I find it disturbing.
Dina, My message is not intended to be against God’s people, or damn you ! You are missing a point I made in my ( exodus) message. That is seeing God speaking directly from heaven doesn’t guarantee everybody will obey Him every step of the way and while encountering inconvenience or difficult times people tend to choose their own ways and solutions.
The same way if God spoke directly to the entire nation about jesus that wouldn’t make all people obey him.
Eric, no one ever argued that national revelation means obedience by all. We’re not stupid, you know. We’re just arguing that God didn’t expect to accept anything on blind faith (Exodus 19:9) and He put His testimony in Jacob (Psalm 78).
Dina, there is blind faith or there is ignorance. Testimony for us is in Jacob in both OT and NT.
The NT is not Jewish testimony because Christianity did not survive as a Jewish movement. God promised that the Jewish people would never be completely wiped out. You have to ask yourself a hard question. The means through which God has chosen to preserve the Jewish people throughout their generations has been Pharisaic Judaism. Why?
Why did Pharisaic Judaism survive the sacking of Jerusalem and is still thriving today, while Christian Judaism was replaced by Gentiles?
God put His testimony in the living descendants of Jacob. Why are you listening to a long-dead sect that lost God’s protection, rather than God’s living witnesses?
“There is blind faith or there is ignorance.” That isn’t so. There is a third option: faith based on reason, not blindness.
Dina, God is not about Jewish movement or any other but about those who trust Him.
God is about those who trust AND obey Him. As it happens, that is the Pharisees. You are still refusing to face the question of why God chose this means of preserving the Jewish people.
Dina, “God is about those who trust AND obey Him.”
You are right. And obedience to us includes listening to His son.
you asked ” why God chose this means of preserving the Jewish people?”
God also preserved David’s line although many in his line departed from God including his sons who disobeyed and chose other things above God .Whether that happened sooner or later). God preserved the whole Jacob’s family with his sons despite what they did to Josef including lies to their father. He preserved them in Egypt. God keeps His promises despite peoples’ failure. and He has His plans toward the nation despite their mistakes. I don’t blame you all make mistakes and God says in Ezekiel 36; 32 that not for peoples’ sake He does what He does.
So choosing a group of people ( or how you call it ‘preserving’ ) simply doesn’t mean all are the only one righteous. In every generation you find people who listened to God and those who rebelled.
God preserved also gentiles, he didn’t wipe them off from the surface of the earth although many worship hand made gods.
So ‘preserving’ it is not a means to judge who obeys who not.
What does preserving Gentiles have to do with it. For one thing, you Do realize that the Tanach is a book that was written By Jews, About Jews and For Jews. This is the entirety of it all. When Gentiles are mentioned it’s in the context of interactions WITH the Jews. Their fate is determined by how they interact with Israel. As it says, Assyria attacked them without cause. Preserving IS of paramount concern simply because it is a promise of Torah. And as many Xtians today reference, I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. Now, consider this. Torah is quite explicit about Jews keeping the Mitzvot and says Not to do so will bring down curses. Therefore when Xtians convert Jews and teach them all those Mitzvot are not needed they are bringing a “curse” upon the Jew. Isn’t it interesting the Xtian will use that pasuk about blessings and curses but ignore the one about bringing curses for Not keeping Mitzvot. Where do you think the Xtian stands in the Heavenly Court when this is brought up. How will that Xtian defend himself. Whether the Xtian will admit or not, these Mitzvot were given with the stipulation that they continue forever.
Eric, you once again skirt the issue.
God punished the Jewish people by sending this small nation into exile, scattering them among hostile nations. By every natural law, this people should have long ago become extinct. No other national group of people survived such pressure to disappear. Again, this was a tiny nation that, 1) was fragmented; 2) was expelled from city to city and country to country (about 80 times within two millennia); 3) was economically squeezed through exorbitant taxation and being forced out of most occupations; 4) was frequently massacred; 5) suffered attempted genocide; 6) was frequently tortured and killed.
Eric, the survival of the Jewish people is not only unusual; it is unique in the history of mankind. It is nothing short of miraculous, and it is only because God promised that we would never be wiped out that I am sitting here tapping at my keyboard.
But God did not promise that He would protect every single type of Jew. His promise extended only to the righteous remnant of the people. Time and time again, only those who adhered to the Pharisaic tradition survived every onslaught on our people. Factions arose, splintered off, and disappeared, but the traditionally Torah observant Jews remained. Writers of Jewish history such as Paul Johnson (A History of the Jews) and James Carroll (Constantine’s Sword), both Catholics, have noted that rabbinic Judaism (another word for Pharisaic Judaism) is the only viable form of Judaism.
Using pure logic, if God promised to protect His righteous remnant, then all we have to do is ask, who survives? Whichever group consistently survives every generation, then, is the righteous remnant of Israel, God’s faithful witnesses, those loyal to Him and His Torah.
Therefore, you are wrong to say that “‘preserving’ it is not a means to judge who obeys who not.” It is indeed, my friend, it is indeed.
Dina, You didn’t really face what I write. Then you say; “His promise extended only to the righteous remnant of the people. Time and time again, only those who adhered to the Pharisaic tradition survived every onslaught on our people. ”
I don’t know how you go with this but both observant and non- observant jews were victims of so many crimes and persecution during the 2 world war. So how were these people ‘preserved’? But you will say; preserving is about new generations; you are typing to me, yea? But the same way are now preserved many others; non-observant Jews. God has a plan for all Jewish people and He will rule among them despite their wrongs, mistakes etc. He always finds the ways to put people back on the track like He did with jacob’s sons and many others. So that argument you presented doesn’t justify rejection of jesus being the Messiah.
Eric, you are the one who is not facing what I wrote. As I noted to you previously, non-observant Jews are assimilating through intermarriage at a rate of 80% (compared to 3% for Orthodox Jews). History is simply repeating itself. Traditional Judaism is the only viable form of Judaism. God plan is to preserve the righteous remnant of Israel. We know this because He said so and we know this because He has kept His promise to us for thousands of years.
If the only remnant to consistently survive 100% of the time is the traditional Torah observant Jews, then yes, they are the righteous remnant. They are the true witnesses carrying God’s testimony. It’s very simple and logical and clear.
Dina, so are ‘preserved’ non- observant and any other Jewish groups. They all were in every generation.
Preserving jewish nation has nothing to do with one group being righteous than the others. It is God’s plan despite people’s failure like I showed previously.
“Dina, so are ‘preserved’ non- observant and any other Jewish groups. They all were in every generation.”
Eric, you’re proving my point. In every generation, Jewish factions splintered off–but they always disappeared (usually through assimilation). The only group this NEVER happened to was the Pharisaic one.
“Preserving jewish nation has nothing to do with one group being righteous than the others.” Absolutely it does. I have in the past shown you references to the righteous remnant of Israel in Isaiah. God has not preserved the Jewish groups who were disloyal to Him and His Torah. History shows this again and again. It is so indisputable that even historians acknowledge that Pharisaic Judaism is its only viable form.
I reiterate: If God promised to preserve one righteous remnant, then all we have to ask is, “Which group of Jews has 100% consistently survived throughout the generations?” The answer to that question constitutes the righteous remnant of Israel that remains loyal to God and His Torah. And therefore, they are the ones who are God’s witnesses and who carry the testimony that He placed in Jacob–not some long ago Jewish group that was replaced entirely by gentiles and which did not survive as a Jewish movement.
Dina, if your point was proved that would mean having only Pharisaic Judaism left only as the preserved group ever left alive. No other non- observant Jews, no other groups. And that fact would have to be true in every generation, every century. But In every century God preserved both non- observant , all Jewish groups and there was no situations that one was wiped off and the other untouched. All suffered persecution, in all groups some survived some not.
God measures our righteousness by searching our hearts, not by the title we carry; observant ‘denomination’ or some other.
Surely you are not That dense. You should be well aware Dina wasn’t making that determination. It’s a feeble attempt to change the parameters of the argument. The point made was Who, of the different sects, will survive throughout the generations. What is Without question IS the fact that these evil Pharisees HAVE survived and the chain of transmission confirms this. No other group has such a chain that can be cited.
Sharbano, so say the same the other groups about themselves. Being present in every generation means nothing. All groups were present. Among them there might be a better believers in God than those who carry just the name. God looks at the heart not the title’ orthodox’.
Okay, who were the Reform movement leaders of J’sus time, or the Reconstructionist. You see, No, these other groups were Not present and Only came about recently. THIS is the point Dina is making and you are failing to comprehend. I have made the point the evidence is with the “Chain of Transmission”. This chain lists the prominent Rabbis of the time, who Their teachers were, and on and on Up the Chain. The Pharisees, the Orthodox HAVE this chain. Xtians don’t and I daresay no one else either. THIS is the proof Dina speaks of.
“Dina, if your point was proved that would mean having only Pharisaic Judaism left only as the preserved group ever left alive.”
No, it doesn’t mean that. All it means is that all the other groups eventually die out. Of course there are always non-observant Jews–but they are not preserved; they are always a new group. A faction often lasts a few hundred years before dying out. Reform Judaism has been around for about 250 years; it’s on the way out now with an assimilation-through-intermarriage rate of 80%. The early Christians survived about 300 years before assimilating. Then another group splintered off, and so on.
The fact is, that non-observant Jews lose their identity as Jews within a few generations. Their identity is not preserved.
One of the punishments in the Bible is “that soul shall be cut from the assembly of Israel” (see for example Exodus 12:19; Numbers 19:13). But it happens as a natural consequence. Jews who do not observe God’s commandments simply lose their Jewish lineage in their descendants.
Like I said, this fact is so simple and so obvious that Christian writers of Jewish history acknowledge it (Paul Johnson, James Carroll). I don’t understand why you’re having such difficulty with it.
Dina, “Wait a minute, Eric, are you saying that Jesus is not needed for atonement from sin, only for eternal life? And where in Scripture is that taught?
His life laid for you is what results in your redemption and eternal life.
Dina, “Wait a minute, Eric, are you saying that Jesus is not needed for atonement from sin, only for eternal life? And where in Scripture is that taught?
His life laid for you is what results in your redemption and eternal life.
Eric, you did not answer the question.
It can try one’s patience when Xtian knowledge of Torah has its foundation with people like Charlton Heston. You should not seek after Hollywood for Torah knowledge.
Contrary to Xtian opinion we know what Torah is about and what it teaches us. It is not for casual informal perusal. It requires careful, precise study. Only then will you find what you thought isn’t there.
It is presumptuous to believe that a mere 40 days that the “Nation” would actually disavow G-d and worship an idol. This is what Hollywood would have you believe.
It is inconceivable that one as Aaron would have created an “idol” even under the threat of death. He would have been the first who would be subject to the death penalty. Instead we see his service to G-d continued without abatement.
I will point to this now instead of at the end. In Jeremiah he tells us of the “perspective” of Hashem about that time.
2:2) Thus said Hashem: I recall for you the kindness of your youth, the love of your nuptials, your following Me into the wilderness, into an unsown land.
Clearly Hashem views the wilderness excursion differently.
First we find that Moshe was delayed in returning. They said to Aaron- make for us Elohim that will go “Before Us”. Would anyone expect they considered a new religion. What we do know is Moshe is late and the people were wanting a solution. What was Moshe’s role in this journey. He is the key to G-d’s power as all is mediated by him and thus called Elohim. He is so referred to this in Exodus
4:16) He shall speak for you to the people; and it will be that he will be your mouth and you will be his Elohim.
But now, there is no longer that conduit which G-d’s power reaches them. They are seeking a substitute connection. We should ask whether a physical object can be such a conduit to G-d. Is there a precedent for such action. We find in Exodus that G-d commands the people to make the Aron (Ark) and on the cover shall be two K’ruvim.
25:22) It is there that I will set My meetings with you, and I shall “Speak With You” from atop the cover, from between the two K’ruvim, that are on the Ark.
We can plainly see that the intention was for the people to have a conduit that would “precede” them such as it was with the Aron. Therefore this calf provided that linkage.
At this point we could ask Why it was that a calf was their choice. We find the answer in the book of Ezekiel and his accounting of the Merkavah. This is what was seen at Sinai and one of four was of a calf.
Aaron has them gather gold for the calf which he doesn’t consider an actual idol, as we discussed, because that would incur the death penalty. There were those who didn’t have the history and culture of monotheism. They needed an idol for comfort and seduced the Israelites into making the calf. They are mentioned in
12:38) Also a mixed multitude (Erev Rav) went up with them.
These are the people who speak, saying
This is Your god, O Israel, which brought you up from the land of Egypt.
Note they didn’t say “This is Our god”. And this is one of the crimes committed, the details forthcoming.
We can understand and know Aaron didn’t see this as an idol because he says;
“A festival for Hashem tomorrow”.
This is in accordance with the construction and inauguration of the Aron where a festival accompanied the inauguration. In accordance offerings are made.
It is only now, and not before, and not when it began, that Hashem confronts Moshe regarding this situation. He says;
Go, descend- for Your people that You brought up from the land of Egypt has become corrupt.
Note G-d doesn’t say My people, or the Israelites. These were the individuals (Erev Rav) who instigated the affair. Thus, G-d doesn’t want to associate His name with these people. We know that Moshe insisted to G-d to bring these people because they saw G-d’s power and believed whereas Egypt did not. Moshe assumed he was doing a good thing, even though being warned by G-d.
Starting in v8 we have the indictment that G-d lays down.
They have strayed quickly from the path.
They made a golden calf.
They prostrated to the calf.
They sacrificed to the calf. and said
This is your god which brought you out of the land of Egypt.
These are the indictments. When Moshe returns to Hashem to plead their case he says;
This people has committed a grievous sin and made themselves a god of gold. And now if you would but forgive their sin.
Notice that Moshe does not plead for the indictments of, Prostration, Sacrificing, and saying, This is your god. These are charges requiring the death penalty.
The actions requiring the most severe of punishment was meted out. Moshe says;
Whoever is for Hashem, join me, and the Levites gathered around him. So said Hashem the G-d of Israel. Every man, put his sword on his thigh and pass back and forth gate to gate in the camp. Let every man kill his brother, every man his fellow and every man his near one.
Those 3000 who had the death penalty imposed were the ones that had witnesses against them. Those who died at the hand of Hashem by the plague were the ones who committed a death penalty offense but there were no witnesses to give testimony.
All in all according to the census there were barely more than ten thousand in total that died because of the golden calf.
Finally, how do we actually classify the rest of the people and their infraction. As Hashem spoke to Moshe “They have strayed quickly from the way that I have commanded them.” How does this pertain you may ask. When they decided to Create that connection that was lost they did it of their Own accord. Whereas the Aron was Commanded by G-d, as it is written, this, the people did on their own, without a command from G-d.
Sharbano,You didn’t really address the conclusion I made in my message. Even a great revelation of God won’t guarantee that people won’t choose their own ways. God was aware of Moshe being away for a long time, He was aware of peoples’ needs and their doubts being born and lack of patience. Anyways He e didn’t justify that behavior.
I addressed the statement you made regarding the assumption All the people committed All the transgressions. You thought you knew the text and I showed otherwise. This is confirmed in the words of Jeremiah.
Eric, it’s been so long that I don’t remember this particular conversation. I don’t remember a discussion of golden calves, so I don’t understand your points. I’ll skip ahead and respond to other points you presented.
The truth is that Jews don’t proselytize, so in fact we don’t spend our time worrying about Christian beliefs. Of course, it would be awesome if the whole world would know the truth about God, but the prophets have taught us that that will not happen until the end of days, when the salvation of the nation of Israel from her oppressors will so astound the world that they will come to know the truth.
However, if Christians attempt to convert us or to convince us of the “truth” of Christianity, then we will defend our faith. And that is what I am doing here on this blog–not so much trying to convince as much as defending my religion. This is a counter-missionary blog. Think about the word “counter-missionary.” The counter-missionary exists only because of missionaries who target Jews for conversion. After 2000 years of failing to eradicate Judaism as they eradicated so many other cultures and religions (such as Norse mythology, Druidism, the Picts, etc.), we would like Christians to JUST LEAVE US ALONE. (Also, Christians would do well to reflect on that fact. In Europe, how is it that the Jews were the only people to resist the message of Christianity despite enormous pressure, small numbers, and unbelievable persecution?)
The “NT” is not Jewish testimony because its authors are gentiles. The Hebrew Bible is Jewish testimony. The Talmud is Jewish testimony. The works of Jewish scholars like Maimonides and Yosef Cairo are Jewish testimony. John was a GENTILE. I have no reason to believe anything THE GENTILE AUTHORS of the NT wrote, least of all Paul, who himself insisted that deception is the proper means to the ends of saving people’s souls. For example: “Being crafty, I caught you with guile” (2 Cor. 12:16); “Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews [What is he saying here, Eric? That he is not a Jew?]” (1 Cor. 9:20); “I am made all things to all men that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22); “For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Rom. 3:7).
And, yes, we do have a monopoly on how to understand the word of God, since we are the ones who received it and we are the ones who were appointed as His witnesses and we are the ones who God promised would preserve the truth despite our sins (Psalm 78). Your wife has a monopoly on understanding your love letters; we, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, have a monopoly on understanding the love letter we received from the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
I already showed you with Scriptural citations that the Torah teaches us that we have A COMPLETE PATH TO REPENTANCE AND ATONEMENT (and that in fact it teaches against the idea of vicarious atonement). You have not refuted these Scriptures; you merely reiterated your dogma.
Dina, IF John was a GENTILE – like you claim – THEN I should take Moshe as Chinese. Why I would say that? To show how radiculous and unsupported is your statement. The same way like there is no evidence that Moshe was Chinese , the same way there isn’t that John was gentile. Further there is evidence that John was jewish together with all Jesus’ disciples. Gentiles wouldn’t abide by Jewish holidays and customs. And all the disciples including John were abiding by jewish customs and holidays. The same way it is written about Peter who was Jewish and we have both his and Johns writings including Jewish Paul. If even a gentile author wrote one or two of the gospels , he is confirming the same facts; Jesus coming as God’s sent , his death for our sins and his resurrection by God. You can keep claiming as much as you want to that NT is gentiles’ , we know it it a Jewish testimony.
Also as far as Paul, he didn’t claim that deception is the proper means of saving people’s souls. You are quoting verses our of context about Paul making your statements; “Being crafty, I caught you with guile” (2 Cor. 12:16); isn’t Pauls’ confession about him being tricky but he is refering to false accusations that were made about him previously that he somehow took advantage of people. And in chater 12 he explains that he was never a burden to anybody although he could have been served by others for the work he does. v.16 starts with ‘ let’s admit, lets’ suppose, but let it be so, that I was not a trouble to you myself; but (someone may say) being false, I took you with deceit.” Then he goes in v 17; saying ; was any of the people I sent – a burden to you? Did anybody of them took advantage of you? No. Neither Thitus , nor anybody else. He is dealing with people’s false accusations.
“Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews [What is he saying here, Eric? That he is not a Jew?]” (1 Cor. 9:20); “I am made all things to all men that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22); ”
Pauls is explaining that talking with different groups you approach them according to their understanding. He is not talking about becoming Jew , then not, then becoming a Jew again- because he again is talking to a Jew. The same way like you would be speaking to different groups with different understanding in a different way, the same he does. He would approach a Jew differently (who knows about one God) than some gentile who belived only in many hand made gods so far and has no clue about God’s forgiveness, resurrection and everlasting life and what the Messiah is for.
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Rom. 3:7).
Read entire chapter 3. Paul is refering to what you skipped in v 4.
“God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.”
We usually call someboy a liar when we cought him on a lie. But the purpose of verse 4 is not to show that everybody is lying every minute of a day, but that in every person lie or deceit can be found. Then in v 5-6 Paul explains that our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly . Anotherwords peoples’ ways compared to God’s show how much greater God is than anybody else because in God there is no lie, no deceit, no impurity. You missunderstood v 7. Paul is talking in the name of people not about himself. He is quoting what a sinful person WOULD conclude about his sinfulness;
Paul says; ” But you say ( that is; you, me , my wife, or anybody else) ; if through my lie
( mine, yours, my wife’s, anybody’s) God;’s truth is enhanced and brings Him greater glory why am I judged as a sinner?”
Paul explains that although our sinful nature enhances God’s glory we shouldn’t be encouraged to do evil like some people understood. ( v.8)
Without proper understanding you can create lots of SUCH false accusations.
Aha! So you don’t like when I quote verses out of context from your precious scripture, but it’s fine for you to quote out of context from mine. And only your understanding of your scripture is correct, but my understanding of mine can’t be. I smell a foul double standard.
Eric, if only you so jealously guarded the words of God in the Hebrew Bible from being taken out of context and misrepresented! But no. You read the Torah to try to find Jesus in it, not to try to learn what God is teaching. Such a perspective is dishonest and will always lead you wrong.
By the way, it is not my claim that John and the other writers of Christian scripture were gentiles. That is the claim of scholars of Christian scripture. Maybe some claim otherwise, but you see, it’s up for debate.
On the other hand, no scholar claims that Moses or any of the writers of any of the books of the Hebrew Bible were anything but Jews. It’s not even up for debate.
Dina, I don’;t have to try to find Jesus in OT. His life testifies that he is fulfillment of all the law and God’s promises.
As far as John being a gentile and the others- there are many weird comments that you find even from those who claim themselves to be Christians. All NT has been know as a Jewish testimony from the beginnings when it was written. Jesus was not starting with gentiles to teach them but he came to the Jews and his disciples are among the writers. They confirm the same events together with even the unknown authors of the 2 gospels. Also the epistles ( among them Jewish Paul’s and Peter’s and James’ confirm the same truth presented in the gospels.
Eric, Jews already accept all that is biblically relevant (from the covenant perspective) concerning Jesus, namely by their daily living of a Torah observant lifestyle, as Jesus himself lived. To make Jesus more important than the 1st century teacher that he was, is why Christianity is so foreign and idolatrous.
The same warning goes out to other Jewish groups that venerate and or serve their messiah claimants as more than being good rabbis. Jesus is not unique in the land of people who were idolatrously venerated.
If Christians were content to say that Jesus was a 1st century rabbi whose morals I aspire to, and end it there, there wouldn’t be an argument. If you wished the Jewish people well in following the mitzvot of Moses as they were commanded, and tried to live a G-d fearing life yourself, (without necessitating that Jesus be involved in that equation,) that would be that and all would be well.
There is a saying in rabbinic literature. “A man’s memorial is in his deeds.” (His conduct) If you make acceptance of Jesus (or any man for that matter) into more than that, you have crossed into something foreign.
There are a few rabbis throughout history who have already said that Jesus did a lot of good for the Gentiles. Maimonides said that both Jesus and Muhammad (in G-d’s mysterious ways,) exposed the Gentiles to the Bible. That is a huge compliment. Likewise rabbi Jacob Emden said that “the Nazarene brought a double kindness to the world.” The Meiri said that Christians and Muslims belong to those schooled in matters of religion. Nachmanides in his disputation with Pablo Christiani, when asked by the bishop, “why do you hate Jesus?” Replied “I do not hate Jesus. It is my belief that the Church has perverted his teachings into idolatry.”
Those sir, are very positive very moderate views of Jesus from some of the biggest names in Judaism! There is no greater compliment that can be paid to this rabbi by the Jewish people without crossing biblically mandated lines.
Even the NT tells you not to rest your faith on miracles, or on People who make claims to deep wisdom, deity, etc. Read 2 Thessalonians and Revelation 13 to see what I mean.
So, sir, respectfully, please give your Jewish brethren a closer hearing. Listen to their opinions that are available for anyone to read.
Con Shalom to you! Very interesting what you said the testimony of the ancient rabbis. Your reference to Revelation 13 is uncommon. When you know that the book of Revelation is prophetic and bears the testimony of the Resurrection of the Messiah and conclude with the words in Aramaic: Marana Tha which means Lord Come!
The most powerful book of the NT is the book of Revelation (Apocalypse) for it is prophetic in nature and refers to the Prophets of old.
”5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue[c] for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe,[d] tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
Con, “If Christians were content to say that Jesus was a 1st century rabbi whose morals I aspire to, and end it there, there wouldn’t be an argument.” Thanks for your advice, but there would be an argument. Actually it already was no matter what; between pharisees against Jesus.
Eric, I agree with Con. As a Jew, I can tell you that if all Christians said is that Jesus is a teacher whose morals they follow, leaving out the rest of it (he is messiah, he is atonement, you must accept him as your lord and savior to achieve eternal salvation, etc.) and leaving out their insistence that we follow him, then we wouldn’t have an argument.
The fact that you want to think that we would argue with you anyway is alarming. If you think that, you have a very low opinion of Jews.
But you’ve already demonstrated that, I forgot. You’ve bought the ugly caricature of Jews painted in your scripture and your contempt for us runs deep.
I don’t comment on somebody’s suggestions about my intentions that don’t agree with what I am writing about. Just that one ; “The fact that you want to think that we would argue with you anyway is alarming” I didn’t notice it would be so alarming to you. Then let me ask you a question. What is the point of your writing at all? Aren’t you doing it hoping that your words will ‘open my eyes, that I will finally see the truth as for you I don’t? Don’t you hope I would finally wipe off my blindness reading your comments and agree with you ? Or you just writing for killing your time? The same way you think I should see the truth , the same way I hope you might do as well.
Eric, the reason I write is because I believe these discussions bring greater clarity both to those participating and to those who are reading them. I, for one, have learned a lot from our discussions.
I do not think you are blind and I am not trying to wipe away your blindness. I believe that God implanted in all of us the desire for truth, and I believe that He will help us find it if we seek it with sincerity.
Christians believe Jews are spiritually blind, but we do not believe that of Christians. Misled, perhaps, but blind? No.
Out of kindness, I feel compelled to point out that your tone is becoming increasingly angry and hostile. I’m sure you don’t intend to come across that way, but perhaps that is something you want to be aware of.
Peace, my friend!
Dina, my tone is result from reading many messages here ridiculing Christians. It is hard to stay nice hearing lots of nonsense some people keep inserting.
Eric, we aren’t ridiculing Christians. We are showing the flaws in their beliefs. Good and honest people can disagree while keeping a civil tongue in their heads.
If you call disagreement ridicule, well, that does make it hard to have a conversation.
The fact that you label our position as nonsense also reveals the lack of respect you have for us as human beings. Instead of calling it nonsense, show us why we are wrong.
It’s well known in debating that if you can’t win an argument, the next step is to attack your opponent’s character.
Eric, it could be argued historically that when it comes to his legal interpretations, Jesus arguably has much more in common (in terms of agreement ) with the Pharisees than with any other sect of second temple Judaism. so, speaking historically, the idea that he was against them seems odd for a few reasons.
Jesus goes to the temple in John 10:22 on the feast of dedication AKA Hannukah. Hannukah is not a biblically ordained command from Sinai, it was ordained by the sages much later, yet Jesus was teaching an important message on this feast day.
Jesus tells his students in Mathew 23 that “the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, therefore do all that they teach you.”
We are told in Acts that most of Jesus’ early students were of the party of the Pharisees.
Jesus’ interpretation of how divorce should be handled (only to be allowed in the case of Adultry) is the opinion of the school of Shammai (a PHARISAIC school.)
Jesus Wore phylacteries (TEFFILIN.) That’s also an oral tradition in Judaism, only in the written text by allusion.
Jesus’ proof for the resurrection of the dead “G-d is the G-d of the living and not of the dead” is very much in the spirit of a Pharisaic saying.
If Christians would read their NT more closely, Jesus’ chiding of the Pharisees often comes from a place of being disappointed in them, not because they are wrong, but BECAUSE HE SAYS THEY KNOW THE TRUTH BUT DONT TEACH IT AS OPENLY AS THEY SHOULD. Luke 11 & Mathew 23 are good examples. The Pharisees hold THE KEYS OF KNOWLEDGE according to Jesus.
Did you know that Gamaliel (a Pharisee mentioned in Talmud) is regarded as a staint in the Orthodox and Catholic Church? https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=3512
Christians are so busy bullying Pharisees that they forget that arguably, Jesus was a bird of a feather with them.
Eric, Jews trust the father and him alone, and if that’s not enough for Jesus, then he isnt much of a son of G-d. Any good son seeks to please their parent, not to glorify themselves. When Christians rationalize an incarnation, it isn’t different than rationalizations that Idolaters like Plato made.
The belief that you express here that says, “by glorifying G-d’s son Jesus I am thereby glorifying G-d himself is no different than the old idolaters arguments for serving his gods, as even Christian sources admit, see below.
Below is an excerpt from Athanasius’ work “against the heathens.”
“They became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things, wherefore God gave them up unto vile passions.” cf. Romans 1:23
For having previously infected their soul, as I said above, with the irrationalities of pleasures, they then came down to this making of gods; and, once fallen, thenceforward as though abandoned in their rejection of God, thus they wallow in them, AND PORTRAY God, the Father of the Word, in irrational shapes. 3. As to which those who pass for philosophers and men of knowledge among the Greeks, WHILE DRIVEN TO ADMIT that their visible gods are the forms and figures of men and of irrational objects, say in DEFENSE that THEY HAVE SUCH THINGS TO THE END that BY THEIR MEANS the deity may answer them and BE MADE MANIFEST; because otherwise they could not know the invisible God, save by such statues and rites.
Below is an excerpt from http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/912359/jewish/Avodah-Kochavim-Chapter-One.htm
Avodah Kochavim Chapter 1 Halacha 1
During the times of Enosh, mankind made a great mistake, and the wise men of that generation gave thoughtless counsel. Enosh himself was one of those who erred.
Their mistake was as follows: They said God created stars and spheres with which to control the world. He placed them on high and treated them with honor, making them servants who minister before Him. Accordingly, it is fitting to praise and glorify them and to treat them with honor. [They perceived] this to be the will of God, blessed be He, that they magnify and honor those whom He magnified and honored, just as a king desires that the servants who stand before him be honored. Indeed, doing so is an expression of honor to the king.
After conceiving of this notion, they began to construct temples to the stars and offer sacrifices to them. They would praise and glorify them with words, and prostrate themselves before them, because by doing so, they would – according to their false conception – be fulfilling the will of God.
This was the essence of the worship of false gods, and this was the rationale of those who worshiped them. They would not say that there is no other god except for this star.
This message was conveyed by Jeremiah, who declared (10:7-8): “Who will not fear You, King of the nations, for to You it is fitting. Among all the wise men of the nations and in all their kingdoms, there is none like You. They have one foolish and senseless [notion. They conceive of their] empty teachings as wood;” i.e., all know that You alone are God. Their foolish error consists of conceiving of this emptiness as Your will.
While its true the NT says the word was G-d (John 1:1) that is not the basis of truth value. G-dly action in the light of the commandments is how you rightly divide the word of truth. Even your books teach this.
Jews do not need Jesus or Christianity to teach them ideas that they already know, accept, and believe through the Torah. If its new, its not testament, and if it is testament, its not new. 🙂 The Torah is sufficient.
By making Yeshua a necessary go between in their relationship with G-d (such as requiring Jesus for atonement from sin,) , Christians are inadvertently guilty of the same sin found in 2 kings 18:4 centered on the brass serpent.
See this excerpt from the clementine recognitions (A Christian source.)
Clemtine Recognitions Simon’s Defense of Polytheism: Then Simon said: “I shall make use of assertions from the law of the Jews only. For it is manifest to all who take interest in religion, that this law is of universal authority, yet that every one receives the understanding of this law according to his own judgment. For it has so been written by Him who created the world, that the faith of things is made to depend upon it. Whence, whether any one wishes to bring forward truth, or any one to bring forward falsehood, no assertion will be received without this law. Inasmuch, therefore, as my knowledge is most fully in accordance with the law, I rightly declared that there are many gods, of whom one is more eminent than the rest, and incomprehensible, even He who is God of gods. But that there are many gods, the law itself informs me. For, in the first place, it says this in the passage where one in the figure of a serpent speaks to Eve, the first woman, ‘On the day ye eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, ye shall be as gods,’631 that is, as those who made man; and after they have tasted of the tree, God Himself testifies, saying to the rest of the gods, ‘Behold, Adam is become as one of us;’632
Chapter XLI.—Peter’s Answer, Continued. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.iv.xl.html
“Listen, then,” says Peter, “that you may know, first of all, that even if there are many gods, as you say, they are subject to the God of the Jews, to whom no one is equal, than whom no one can be greater; for it is written that the prophet Moses thus spoke to the Jews: ‘The Lord your God is the God of gods, and the Lord of lords, the great God.’640 Thus, although there are many that are called gods, yet He who is the God of the Jews is alone called the God of gods. For not every one that is called God is necessarily God. Indeed, even Moses is called a god to Pharaoh,641 and it is certain that he was a man; and judges were called gods, and it is evident that they were mortal.
Yes I do understand you. Or I should say I do see your point of view.
I do of course believe God will totally restore the Jewish people back to the Land of Israel, and the surrounding lands that were promised. I believe all the covenants, physically and spiritually will be given back to the Jews in the land. I also believe that the church which consists of gentile and jews will also benefit from the blessings, but as partakers, no overtakers. The restored ethnic Israel and the church are two entirely seperate entities, but side by side in the Messianic kingdom.
Im sure you’ve heard me on this before?
This of course doesnt change your viewpoint, or your view on my beliefs, its not meant to. Im just stating again where I am thats all.
So heres a question for you, personally. Sorry I have to ask, but since you stipulate it as a requirement.
Have you personally repented? Or what do you need to repent? Is it specific or general sin? And secondly are you fully Torah observed?
I dont disagree with your teaching of repentance to restore you, im just curious for what?
Peace to you Paul! The restoration of Israel will be more than we imagine: Hosea the prophet said:
“Yet the number of the children of Israel
Shall be as the sand of the sea,
Which cannot be measured or numbered.
And it shall come to pass
In the place where it was said to them,
‘You are not My people,’
There it shall be said to them,
‘You are sons of the living God.’
Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel
Shall be gathered together,
And appoint for themselves one head;
And they shall come up out of the land,
For great will be the day of Yezreel!”
It is clear that the Jewish (Judah) are not numbered like the sand of the earth but a small people. Only with the children of Israel that the promise will be accomplish of being like the sand of the earth meaning as a great number. The Christian count for more than 1.7 billion souls. They will be called sons of EL living!
And the children of both houses will be gathered together. The greater Israel from Euphrates to the Nile will be possible only when all the tribes will reunited. That will be a beautiful Day!!
Baruch Hashem Adonai!!
Mr. L., in a comment to Sharbano you advised him to “stick to the substance discussed and try to bring intelligent arguments backed by the Hebrew Torah!”
Well, sir, I recommend that you take your own advice. What you wrote here, that the Christians will be joined to the Jews in order to increase their numbers, is pure speculation (and, might I add, wishful thinking).
This is sounding like the “grafting in” belief. I have known many a Xtian who refer to themselves “as Jews” since they consider themselves “adopted” in their messiah. The video “The New Xtians” show they want to inherit the land As Jews.
Therefore I would ask E.L..if you are Jewish By Birth. Do you have a Jewish grandmother.
Mr. L., just to clarify, do you have a Jewish grandmother on your mother’s side?
Im still replying to your last statement, not this immediate one. How come sometimes there isnt a reply link after some posts? ???
I wouldnt disagree totally, that Christians can be biased and look through NT teachings instead of Tanach teaching, infact im dead against the idea and concept that Christianity has superceded Judaism proper.
I throw in the mix when discussing Christians, Christ, and non believing Jews, that Jesus never came to establish Christianity per se, but establish the Law of Moses, prophets and writings. Thats why Christianity, the word that is, is never mentioned in your texts, and when it is mentioned in the NT, it is, in context used quite sarcastically.
But looking back to Math ch 12, obviously the only texts available were the old writings, Jewish or greek. Not any biased NT. Not every one thought the same way. Some of course did believe in Jesus. Infact we wouldnt be here Today, discussing thus, if no one believed and recoreded all that was done. The Jewish leaders of the day rejected Jesus, so in turn did the masses. Jesus rebuke is primarily against unbelieving leaders and hard hearts, not Jews in general. Yes to those jews, of that generation, but not because they were Jews. But being Jews they should have nown better.
So the whole foundation of the apostles belief then is stood on Tanach not NT.
In regard to Appolinus, he is totally unrelated. We have already discussed false miracles and there origin.There is no evidence to show, theologically, scripturally, historically, or anything else ending lly to argue that Jesus to be false compared to a false other doing mighty works. Jesus did warn in the Olivet discorse about false Messiah’s that would come. Simon bar Cochba being another.
It appears the reply links only go so far, especially since there indented. I use the reply button from the email.
Apollonius is related due to the proximity of the time of J’sus. These two weren’t the only ones who made similar claims. If a person only gets their information from one source it is not possible to see the “why” of reactions to J’sus and his teachings. If someone, say Apollonius, came on the scene just Before J’sus and preached similarly, then, of course, there will be mounting suspicions. This may very well have been the case. What is also of questionable nature is the secretiveness of J’sus in telling his followers not to divulge matters to others. When YOU read the text you are not reading it as someone who was there listening to him. Your belief is derived from all the text and not words in a vacuum. It could be a worthwhile exercise to separate out ONLY the words of J’sus and see what conclusions can be drawn. The writers of the Xtian text came years later and are attempting to “explain” matters. In essence they are adding their own perceptions of what came to be known later. In light of all this how can Anyone fault those of his time for disbelief. It’s as if doing a few miracles should “guarantee” acceptance. Was he really attempting to “teach” the people or simply resorting to “commanding” them. It’s all a matter of perspective, the perspective of being there At The Time compared to the perspective of later writers having to Explain the matters.
Paul The reason there is no reply link after a certain number of posts (I think 10) is because that is how wordpress operates
Sharbano Dina like I have said from the start of my entering this blog:
1) My two grandmothers are Jewish from Haifa and the south of Lebanon from the Hayat (Taylor) family the same family of Elisabeth Taylor (Hayat)
2)My grandfather of my mother side his ancestors came from Sephardic origin came back to Yerushala’im. He is from Yerushala’im from the Montura family
3)The father of my father is Lebanese from the lords family from the Maronite Tradition those descendants who combated with Ariel Sharon in 1982 war. Orthodox Jews sold a synagogue to only the Maronite Knesse from they recognized in them the sons of the lost tribes of Israel
4)Many Maronite lives in Israel very well integrated community in Israel
5)I was born in Alexandria Egypt in the French Maternity circumcised
6)My wife is from the Levite tribe from Aaron directly Russian speaking
7)I am Christian(Messihim)-Jewish but believed that Yahushuo came for the lost Israel not the Tsadik.
Now it is the time to reunite and let go our divide for the enemies want the destruction of Yehudah and Israel. I hope you do hear the international news and see the threat out their. Rabbi Boteach and many honest Orthodox Jews realize the imperative to bridges our differences and unite to face the common threat. If not YHWH will bring total destruction. I will not be accused to have not try but in the end the Hand of YHWH will reunite House Israel and House Judah. All the prophets have predicted this.
P.S.: false jews claiming to be jews can be accused from the Askhenazi branch for you were mixed with a country who converted to Judaism. They are might not be real jews but arrogated the name…
Your PS is nothing but propaganda put out by anti-Semites; and You want to rely on those types. Right! It HAS been proven to be false. Do the research. It IS a favorite of the Arabs, and other anti-Semites, to dispel any claim that Jews have a right to the land of Israel.
Of course there are Jews out there who want to “embrace” the Xtian and we typically find that it is centered around Money.
I have heard the call that Xtians and some Jews are saying there needs to be a united front against Islamists. Since Everything is from Hashem one should ask themselves Why is it Now that the followers of Islam are wreaking havoc on the world, and why have the Xtians been singled out first. This cry is coming from many Xtian leaders. There are answers to be found but now where these people are looking. As always, answers are in ‘Torah’, but few are looking There.
Dina, Zech 2;15 ” Sing and be glad , o Daughter of Zion. For behold I am coming and I will dwell in your midst – the word of God. many nations will join themselves to God on that day and they will become a people unto Me and I will dwell in your midst..”
Eric, without looking at this in context because I’m in a hurry, please note that it says they will join themselves to God, not to the Jewish people.
Dina, ” please note that it says they will join themselves to God, not to the Jewish people”
yes you ‘re really in a hurry ; “and they will become a people unto Me and I will dwell in YOUR midst.
They don’t have to ‘join you’ but they will be dwelling in your midst as those who are ‘ people unto God.
Eric, you can seize on a verse to make it say what you want it to. The covenant between God and Israel will not expand to include the gentiles. The gentile nations will join the Jewish people in worship of the one true God of Israel, and therefore God will dwell in the midst of all of us. That’s all the verse is saying. The verse is not saying that the nations will become a part of Israel or part of the covenant.
You know, if I wanted to, I could claim that the gentiles will serve the Jewish people as slaves or servants in the messianic age, using Scripture to support it. I could cite the following, for example:
Isaiah 14:1-2: For Hashem will show mercy to Jacob. He will choose Israel again and grant them rest upon their land. The proselyte will join them and be attached to the House of Jacob. [Wait for it–here it comes!] The nations will take them and bring them to their place, and the House of Israel will possess them as slaves and maidservants upon the land of Hashem; they will be captors over their captors and they will rule over their oppressors.
Isaiah 61:5: Foreigners will stand and tend your flocks and the sons of the stranger will be your plowmen and your vineyard workers.
Now, of course, when you look at Scripture holistically, you know that is not the case. You can’t seize one verse and ignore the rest of Scripture.
The election of Israel is eternal and unchanging, Scripture makes that clear.
I have to agree. There is nothing in scripture about increases in numbers to bolster the end sum. To say otherwise would indicate that God needs a helping hand with his plan.
Paul, I’m glad we agree on something!
Dina Hosea, Isaiah, Ezekiel and all the prophets disagree with you. I prefer to be on the side of the Prophets than to be on the side of your sect. Real Judaism will triumph over your false Babylonian teaching.
In case you did not read it properly for you emotion can blur you mind here it is again:
Hosea the prophet said:
“Yet the number of the children of Israel
Shall be as the sand of the sea,
Which cannot be measured or numbered.
And it shall come to pass
In the place where it was said to them,
‘You are not My people,’
There it shall be said to them,
‘You are sons of the living God.’
Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel
Shall be gathered together,
And appoint for themselves one head;
And they shall come up out of the land,
For great will be the day of Yezreel!”
Nothing here about Christians being added to Israel to increase her numbers. You simply made it up.
I hadn’t considered the numbering of Xtians, but even so, with All their numbers, even including Muslims, the number could Not Even come close to the number of sand of the sea.
Whether it’s sand or stars, neither count would ever correspond the number of Israel. Therefore it is clear that this reference must mean something else.
Sharbano Scriptures means what they mean. Do you doubt the Elohim power?
Obviously if you count your sect it will not come even close to be the stars nor the sand of the earth… You should ask Mizrachi or Singer or Yisroel about this. That is a real problem for you guys. It surely discredit your sect.
Dina you contradict yourself: you are not a racist but your can not admit that convert can be joined to Israel. How do you reconcile your contradiction.
For my part I believe that the seed of Faith is the seed of true seed of Abraham therefore Israel can accept in her midst all converts but the Jewishness of a person can only given by flesh and bones through the generation of the father in the womb of a daughter of Israel for woman is the land which receives the seed to give a son of the holy People…
It sure seems odd. There are times you write with quite fluent English, then other times it’s barely readable.
Are you suggesting that numbers determine who is right and who is wrong. That seems to be your contention of late. If we were to accept this premise then logically Islam should be the most righteous of religions, OR, maybe even the eastern religions. If I’m not mistaken there numbers are even greater. We could even count not only Your sect but every person living and dead and they Still would equal the numbers of sand. Whether you realize it or not you are simply making a specious argument.
I am very curious to know in what language the “ruah holy” speaks to Lion.
When did I ever say I can’t admit converts? Converts are fully welcomed into our nation and are considered fully Jewish.
You’re the one who contradicts yourself. You said that conversion is an invention of the rabbis.
Paul, I did not stipulate anything as a requirement. You stated that I did not answer your question. Because I thought that I had, I asked you to clarify. That is all.
Now you ask a new question (or series of questions), and a highly personal one at that. Really, I’m uncomfortable answering that because it’s between God and me.
Instead, I will answer you in a general way.
The Torah observant Jew strives to live his life every day in accordance with God’s will as He expressed it in His commandments. Repentance is an ongoing process, because there will often be moments when our Torah observant Jew might give in to temptation and gossip, lose his temper with his mom (or mum) and say something disrespectful, or say something insensitive to his wife.
Ideally, our Jew will take a few moments every night to review his actions that day and see if he needs to make an amends to anyone. If so, he will make a note of it and make amends at the next available opportunity. Every morning he will pray for help in overcoming temptation and adhering to God’s commandments.
This is what it means to me to be Torah observant and to be involved in the process of repentance. (By the way, Torah observance includes eating only kosher food and refraining from work on the Sabbath, among other things. However, the ritual commandments are far easier to observe than the ethical and interpersonal ones, which is why I did not include them in my examples above.)
Ezekiel 18 and 22 give us a roadmap for repentance as well: doing acts of justice, charity, and kindness.
Because there is always room for improvement, the process of growth and repentance never ends. The ideal Jew is always working on strengthening his observance, improving his character, and improving his relationships with his fellows and doing all he can to lighten their burdens, and most of all, connecting with God.
Since the overwhelming majority of Jews today are not Torah observant, Deuteronomy 30 is predicting that they will repent and return to Torah observance. We do see this happening today as hundreds (thousands? I don’t have statistics) of Jews are returning to the fold.
Just to say I wasnt asking you to reveal anything personal, its was a general question without personal details. We all have things which are between ourselves and our maker.
Anyway, I was wondering about Ez ch 18 that you mentioned?
Do you believe that ch 18 is still future in regard to Israel. Or has it already been fulfilled?
Sorry ch 22!
Oh my goodness, Paul, I’ve been citing the wrong chapter all over the place! On repentance, specifically, I meant to cite 18 and 33. I hope that clears up some confusion. My apologies for this error!
Lion, those rabbis aren’t really ancient, they are more or less medieval. The point I’m making, is that Jesus is irrelevant to Jews and Judaism. The only way he could be relevant is as a 2nd temple teacher. Not as a messiah, not as G-d, not as a prophet, but just as a teacher in a line of teachers.
The Torah of Moses already contains all you need to know to worship and serve G-d.
Shalom Con! Yahshuo is certainly the greatest Rabbi of all time, our Master in the Faith! But I will go further He is the Messiah of Israel for He saved his people from perdition here I’m talking to the lost way sheep of the House of Israel. See Yahshuo in Matthew’s Gospel with the encounter with a Canaanite woman:
“I was not sent away except towards the sheep the completely lost away of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15) (Own translation from the Greek Orthodox Church text)
Concerning rabbis I will follow the number ONE. I learn more with the excellent one:
8 Ye however do not be called ‘rabbi’; one namely to ye is the master-teacher, the Messiah; all moreover ye brothers ye are. 9 Even father ye should not call of ye on the earth; one namely is your father the one in the heavens. 10 Nor ye be called leaders-directors; one namely to ye is the leader-director, the Messiah. 11 The one namely greater of ye will be your servant-messenger. 12 Whoever yet will raise himself will be lowered, and whoever will lower himself will be raised up. (Matthew, chap. 23)
Lion, the name IESOUS (in Greek) is a form of the Hebrew Yeshua which in English is just the name Josh. I don’t know what this sacred name nonsense of yours is, but its something entirely foreign to Judaism and Christianity. Jesus is not a deity, nor is he the greatest rabbi who ever lived. He was just a second temple teacher. If he were the messiah, he should come back and finish the Job already.
Shalom to all! Another point that can seriously shake the foundation of Judaism today is the book of Daniel. Daniel with the prediction of the Temple’s second destruction.
That should make us wonder why the Yehudah tribe and some Levite want a third Temple to go back to ancient rituals that the modern mind will surely oppose. Animal sacrifice is no longer a highly regarded practice (maybe in Moshe or Abraham time) but now mostly Muslim practice this ritual from ancient ages. What’s disturbing is that religious fanatics still are attached to the restoration of an ancient Temple where animal sacrifice will be performed.
Therefore it is imperative to know that the Tanakh have different levels of interpretation suiting different mentalities. For the carnal minds animal sacrifice is a must of the 3rd Temple coming. But for spiritual minds the sacrifice of a contrite hearts is better than any animal sacrifice. For the sons of the Light, the ultimate sacrifice of the One Lamb is sufficient to redeem us of the price of our sins. Why? For this Lamb is not carnal but the Dabar Elohim manifested in the flesh in which his blood is highly highly highly priced to redeem us all and save us from Egypt and the bondages of sin.
The Exodus our ancient history of redemption was a work of might by YHWEH Eloheinu which foreshadow His marvellous Work of Redemption and Salvation of all Israel and the elevation of all the Goyim from the rank of pagan slaves worshipping demons to the rank of slaves of our King Rigthteous the Messiah through which we worship in the Dabar and the Ruah YHWH ELOHIM.
The power of conquest of the Resurrection of the Messiah destroyed the pagan world to elevate our age to the service of Elohei Abraham Isaac and Yaakov. For He was sent into our cosmos to keep the Promise of YHWH , which the enemy was working to impede. But who can oppose ELOHIM WILL: WHO IS LIKE YHWH EL-ELYON
Also why YHWH Elohim let the Yehudim wandered for 2 thousand years. What transgression let them be cast out of the Land for so long? They rejected the 3rd Temple for they were attached to stones and wood in their carnal minds failing to reform their minds through the power of grace given freely to those who believe in the redemptive power of the Messiah and the true reality of his awesome Resurrection. For we are witnesses of the Resurrected and the Ruah confirms our dabarim for we are children of the Dabar to the glory of YHWH Elohim.
Whether you like it or not, the prophets predicted that the Temple will be restored along with the full sacrificial system (Ezekiel chapters 40-48).
Who are you to decide which prophets to accept and which to reject? Is what Ezekiel said true or false?
(I must catch up with you ref previous texts!)
But I cant help myself here, im sure we are in danger to agree AGAIN on some thing?
Of course there will be no agreement on the context and content, but a fully functional Jewish temple will be in operation again.
The texts are very clear.
The problem with latest response from Eliyah Lion is that there is a elimant of truth, unfortunately at most the statements given are inaccurate, and misguided, plus there are statements which are totally false, coupled together dont do justice to the truth.
Lol, Paul, I’m delighted to have something to agree with you about, for a change :).
This reply is intended for Sharbano, Im not trying to be rude Dina.
I would again not totally disagree with everything that you have said. However Jesus was being recognised as a man sent from God, John ch3. He authenticity proved His abilities, keeing all things proper. No one was doing the works, especially at such a level where the nation took notice. Not everyone, I agree, but His fame (not celebrity) was well witnessed.
Who else in the whole history of the universe has caused so much debate?? You have to agree, no other “Messiah ” is aligned with Jewish scripture too challenge the written texts. Especially those texts which say a,b,c,d and the NT shows Jesus living out a,b,c,d.
The last point is Jesus ministry taking an alternative route. I dont see anything sinister here. His ministry went from tell all, show all. After the final Messianic miracle which resulted in the unpardonable sin of math 12, it went from tell no one, show no one. The outward authentication part had come and gone. The offer of the Kingdom now was, for a future time, taken away. Now Jesus spoke in parables, and any healing came by faith in Him only, before no faith was required. His teaching was then directed to His disciples, for there future work in the ministry. This ultimately brought in the church age and the times of the gentiles, which will end soon.
Israels redemption is yet to come in Jesus.
All this can be gleaned from the texts.
Sharbano, You know , first of all NT doesn’t tell Jews to give up the Mitzvot. God is passing the message through Jesus that sins of people can be forgiven if they come to HIm ( God) . That His son is dying for these sins. It is a call to repentance. It is not a call to give up and give up and give up what you learned from Torah. God is bringing His plan into light how He redeemed mankind, how our sins are wiped out that He doesn’t have to remember them as He promised.
When Jesus says he is the fulfillment of the law it means he is the only one who fulfilled it completely! That is why it is said he is the end of the law, which many understand wrongly that once you believe what jesus said , you have to reject the law. No, we are not called now to do whatever but to be the light . But if you fail we are called to repent , as we all do , as there is no person that will be perfect all the time, and Jesus is the one who paid the price for those failures. The one who fulfilled the law , willingly paid for us who did not fulfill it completely.
Finishing the my first thoughts God testified it by showing that there was no reason for death to hold Jesus, as there was no sin that held against him. That is a simple truth showed there in NT and simple to accept expressing we trust God about what He did for us. But f people start adding this and that, add new titles to all that making it as a new religion then it becomes problem and makes others all confused . Then it goes about arguing what Christians do wrong, where do they fail, what did the added, but NT is not calling you to copy all wrongs of them. NT passes you a simple message i put in my first lines in that email.
Much of what Paul wrote indicates the law, as He put it, has outlived its usefulness. Also, if it was so clear that Mitzvot didn’t end how is it that for all these centuries virtually ALL churches said the same. It has only been recently, mainly started by the Hebrew roots movement in order to facilitate conversion, that Xtians will say you can keep your Mitzvot and have J’sus too. To me this sounds like a con game.
So, J’sus fulfilled Torah completely. Did he fulfill the Temple services while alive. Did he keep the commandments pertaining to women. We can go on and on with That notion.
Why is it ONLY in the context of J’sus and his followers that mention this need for a man to pay the price. Ezekiel Clearly and Unambiguously states that even the WICKED will not be rejected and ALL that is needed is T’shuva. These are G-d’s words to the people. Now, here comes along a group of “men” who, along with their leader, says No, Ezekiel is wrong, we have to accept a Human Sacrifice, the same “remedy” ancient pagans used. They too saw merit in human sacrifice. And what was even the point of this sacrifice. As you stated we all sin and need repentance. If one needs to keep repenting for what he has done then the sacrifice hasn’t really accomplished the task.
Sharbano, ” Ezekiel Clearly and Unambiguously states that even the WICKED will not be rejected and ALL that is needed is T’shuva.”
You should have added; Wicked who turned away from their wickedness and repented. Any sinner has a chance to come to God after changing but that doesn’t exclude the fact God had to deal with our sins punishing them on Jesus. Nobody says Ezekiel is wrong. Both Ezekiel and Isaiah talk about our need for ‘cleansing’ and God who will’ cleanse us from sin.” High Priest never came to the altar before God without blood although people repented.
Did you even find the answer to the question why ‘blood’ played such important part in the ‘sin cleansing process’ in the temple? Blood was simply a symbol of life lost.
“As you stated we all sin and need repentance. If one needs to keep repenting for what he has done then the sacrifice hasn’t really accomplished the task.”
Did the animal sacrifices ever ‘accomplish’ the task? Weren’t they repeated all the time? Sacrifices weren’t to stop you sinning. You would have to be a robot to be automatically set for one type of good action. You decide to stop sinning out of your own will , not because someone offered sacrifice.
Sacrifices were repeated simply to remind people that each sin cost loss of life. There was no ‘magic’ in sacrifices to make you perfect. Each time they repented and came to the temple they knew sin cost loss of life.
Comparing jesus to ancient pagans’ human sacrifices is wrong. That would have to be the case if we took Jesus , killed him and offered to God. That is NOT what took place.
Animals had to be offered in Judaism ‘for blood shed’ and they were not pointing to the fact that one day we have to take a human and offer him to God like pogans. They were pointing that one day someone will pay the price for our sins with HIS life.
I DID say that. What do you think T’shuva is. There is no J’sus in Ezekiel and Isaiah, therefore he is a moot point.
Blood is NOT necessary. Learn the sacrifices. Also, ONLY UNintentional sins would a sacrifice be brought. As is taught, if a man didn’t know and ate Chelev and found out Later that he did, THEN he would bring that sacrifice. If he deliberately ate Chelev he could Not bring a sacrifice. These details of Korbanot literally Destroy the entire purpose of Xtianity. Do you even know the meaning of the word, Chatat (sin) in Hebrew.
Where do you come up with your ideas, “Sacrifces were repeated simply to remind people”.
This is One thing about Xtians that I really really have issues with. These people come Here and other places; in person or not, and attempt to “Instruct” those who know about what Judaism is all about. It reminds me recently when we had a driving class, which took all day, and at lunch the group went to a restaurant. Needless to say I sat there and didn’t eat. One person, assuming he knew Jewish Tradition, told the others that a “Rabbi had to bless the food”. Obviously I had to correct him.
So, don’t come here and profess to “Know” what Judaism is all about. This is a common practice among Xtian teachers. How many times have they said “this is what Judaism teaches” and it ‘misses the mark’ by a long shot.
Well, if you were to have J’sus BE a sacrifice, That is exactly what would have to have been done. Therefore you Really don’t know what you are talking about when you say “Animals had to be offered in Judaism”. You have NO CLUE.
Sharbano, you still avoid the answer; why the shed of blood at all in the sacrificial system? You never answered that.
The use of blood are for those who can afford such sacrifice. What of those who cannot afford such and instead offer the meal offering. Blood isn’t so important as you would like.
Sharbano, but there is a reason behind that offering . Or else you would be asked to bring veggies, fruit, milk etc, not involving the shed of blood. And in the temple there was no replacement for blood.
The meal offering isn’t a blood sacrifice, yet is just as valid. As far as atonement there are also other methods other than the altar.
Sharbano, Why wasn’t high priest allowed to come with milk but with blood before the altar? There was a reason.
You certainly have an obsession with blood. That obsession has clouded your mind to Everything Else. You have to go to the well of “milk” in order to avoid Torah teaching which is evident by the ignoring of meal offerings and other methods of atonement. The impetus is upon you to explain WHY blood isn’t solely a method. But since Xtianity wants to derive from Torah and if Torah states otherwise then the Xtian narrative is questionable at best. The end result IS, you have a serious problem in making Torah “work” with your beliefs. I would suggest this: G-d ultimately Knew that Xtianity would come about and he put “stumbling blocks” in front of that religion so as to deter frum Jews from joining such a religion. Whether it is the above or the Requirement that this sacrifice need a “female” offering. If this J’sus is suppose to “fulfill” Torah as a “metaphor” then it has to be a metaphor in all respects. Otherwise it is nothing short of fantasy.
Sharbano, “Why wasn’t high priest allowed to come with milk but with blood before the altar? There was a reason.”
I don’t have the obsession with blood. I have been simply waiting on your answer to that specific question I put. So when it is not there I keep bringing it up. You fail to address that simple question. You could have said; I have no clue why God didn’t allow milk in the temple.
Paul explains in Hebrew 8;5 Priests (…)serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.”
Hebrew 9;1;14 explains;
“Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
What is your fixation with “milk”. This is a non-sequitur. What IS your point; that because milk comes from the blood of the mother that it too should be offered. This type of question can be asked of anything that is Not purposed for the altar. Since cows eat grass and cows are laid upon the altar then why not grass. Or is it that since cows give milk and for that reason it should be applied to the altar.
It sounds as if Paul is speaking of the Yom Kippur service. Are you aware that the Azazel Was NOT sacrificed on the altar. This refutes Paul’s contention. The other Xtian narrative is the use of the Pesach sacrifice. This too doesn’t work, as it was NOT a sin offering. Therefore what Paul says is of no concern.
Sharbano, “G-d ultimately Knew that Xtianity would come about and he put “stumbling blocks” in front of that religion” Oh really? What Isaiah 8;14 says;?
“It is the LORD of hosts whom you should regard as holy. And He shall be your fear, And He shall be your dread. 14″Then He shall become a sanctuary; But to both the houses of Israel, a STONE to strike and a rock to STUMBLE OVER over, And a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem. (…)
Isn’t THIS interesting. We know the technique of Xtianity is to take even a single word and apply it to some Xtian belief. THIS is what You have done. What I wrote was quite clear and the metaphor was also clear. But instead of trying to understand what was written you literally “JUMPED” on the metaphor and went for a scripture that has NOTHING to do with my point. How much more of an example can one ask for. It proves the only purpose for Xtians is to attempt to legitimize their religion no matter how far afield it is. They are unable to confront what is staring them in the face.
Sharbano, I would suggest you to finish the sentence; ‘“Sacrifces were repeated simply to……..”
You keep claiming I have no clue, I let you finish your logic.
By the way; with high priest doing offering in the temple, there was not even a single person excluded, free of sin whether intentional or unintentional. Not a single person that was free from the ‘ need for atoning’ ‘ including the high priest himself who had to offer sacrifice first for himself before he did offering for the people.
Eric, you wrote: ” God is bringing His plan into light how He redeemed mankind, how our sins are wiped out that He doesn’t have to remember them as He promised.”
God never promised that He has to remember our sins. In fact, he promised the opposite. See Isaiah 1:18; Ezekiel 18:22,31; Ezekiel 33:16.
You have misrepresented the Hebrew Bible, which teaches that we can create a new heart and spirit for ourselves (Ezekiel 18:31) and that when we repent God wipes away our sins completely; they are not remembered. So you see, all the stuff Jesus is supposed to do for you is completely unnecessary because you can do it for yourself. Your argument is not with me or Sharbano but against God’s words in the Hebrew Bible. I don’t think you have read carefully Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 18 and 33.
“When Jesus says he is the fulfillment of the law it means he is the only one who fulfilled it completely!”
How could he possibly? He never married and had children and so could not fulfill the laws that apply specifically to husbands and fathers. He was not a priest or a Levite and so could not fulfill the laws that apply to the priests and Levites. He was not a farmer and so could not fulfill the laws pertaining to farmers. He was not a woman and so could not fulfill the laws pertaining to women. He is not recorded as giving alms to the poor, clothing the naked, etc.–we have no proof that he fulfilled all the commandments. Furthermore, he violated some laws, as we have pointed out to you (such as the commandment to honor your father and mother; he treated his mother with great contempt when she went searching for him).
Dina, This is your judgement. Credibility about who is righteous who not comes from God . And He proved Jesus’ righteousness by resurrection. There was no sin to hold Jesus back in death.
As far as fulfilling the law it is about not getting involved in sin. Jesus didn’t have to be tied to being for example a farmer and show you he didn’t break farmer’s law.
God promised we can renew our hearts by turning from evil and chooses the way of life but He still talked about ‘cleansing us from sin’. ( Ezekiel and Isaiah)
Eric, I present logic backed by Scripture; you present a statement of faith. I leave it to the audience to decide who has the stronger case.
Dina, what is not backed by Scripture but statement of faith? based on genesis 1-3; sin results in death not eternal life.
Let me ask you Eric, WHAT was Adam’s sin.
Sharbano, “Let me ask you Eric, WHAT was Adam’s sin.”
Read genesis 1-3 for your answers.
I wasn’t looking for answers, I was asking You.
Sharbano, Adam disobeyed God’s command , did something he was not supposed to do, simple story, not sure what you want to hear from me more on that subject.
Okay, I’ll narrow it down for you.
What does Gen 3:12 tell you.
“God promised we can renew our hearts by turning from evil and chooses the way of life but He still talked about ‘cleansing us from sin’. ( Ezekiel and Isaiah)”
Eric, you conceded partly here what is in our hands, but neglected to mention how Ezekiel and Isaiah say that the cleansing from sin is to be accomplished. Go on, then, give it another read. Does it say anything about Jesus?
Dina, Still finishing yesterdays messages;
” All it means ( being preserved) is that all the other groups eventually die out.”
“Of course there are always non-observant Jews–but they are not preserved” That ‘preservation police’ is simply ridiculous.
They didn’t die out physically but they ‘died out’ because they do not act like you or maybe their parents weren’t listening to God so they are not in the ‘preserved righteous chain’. You can’t judge based on that as even the wicked can become righteous at the end of his life when he turns back to God. And even his next generation can produce righteous people although the previous wasn’t godly.
You said “Their ( Jewish) identity is not preserved.” Identity is on peoples’ heart, not the title or name.
You put judgement on other Jewish groups by saying that only your ‘orthodox chain’ belongs to righteous ones. I do not measure righteousness of others by the ‘chain’ they belong too. Besides it is God who measures not us. I have nothing against admitting that there are righteous Jews , I have something against ‘the chain’ you introduced.
I showed you in Is 1;11-17 that the denomination or a title means nothing. There can be people who do exactly as you do participate in all Jewish festivals, observe Sabbaths etc , but they can be far away with their hearts from God. That was the point but you happily focused on no need for sacrifice because God says ; ” Why do I need your numerous sacrifices?” So does He say; : ” As for the New Moon and Sabbath (..) I cannot abide by mendacity with solemn assembly.”
Does that means Sabbath is also not needed? No, but everything counts with the right heart, with a wrong heart even so called by you ‘preserved’ ones are not righteous as we see above.
It would be easier for Xtians to understand the points if they didn’t pick and choose verses to suit their needs.
Why not start with the FIRST verse instead. You’ll learn what is at issue here. Clearly Isaiah is speaking to those of the nation who Did depart from Torah. They were NOT part of that chain, which the prophets also were part of. They were part of the Men of the Great Assembly. I said it before and I’ll say it again; Xtians simply cannot bear the thought that Jews were Torah observant from the time of Moshe until this day. They want to view ALL Jews as the pejorative that stems from the term Pharisee. You want to acknowledge that pejorative in your perceptions of Jews. Needless to say this is nothing short of anti-Semitsm and a racist ideology. This belief is not too far from Hitler, Y”S, in the sense he considered All Jews to be evil and wicked. Clearly there is a reason SO many Xtians use events in the past that criticized and condemned Jews for their actions, at That time, and apply it to Jews from that time to the present. Certainly there is an underlying assumption that creates such thoughts. This was also present in the opinions against Blacks and Indians. It tells me there is a nature to Xtianity that lies just below the surface and requires very little effort to surface.
hSarbano, “You want to acknowledge that pejorative in your perceptions of Jews. Needless to say this is nothing short of anti-Semitsm and a racist ideology. This belief is not too far from Hitler, ”
You know, you must be filled with such a strong conviction of us hating you that you see these feelings in every message no matter what.
This what you wrote didn’t even come to my mind! Read more carefully what I said, maybe there will be some light there, not just darkness. I didn’t express my position that I can’t stand someone keeping the Torah. I wrote about that categorizing’ righteous ones’ based on a ‘preserved chain’ or belonging to a certain group is not a measure of righteousness and it doesn’t exclude others from being righteous. It is simply not about ‘ We are the ones’ but whom God considers righteous.
You know, Eric, it wouldn’t even be a consideration if it weren’t for Xtians taking the words of the Prophets that applied to generations before and try to apply it to other Jews of different times, and even essentially to the entire nation of all times. Whether you want to accept it or Not, THIS is the message of Isaiah 53. The Gentiles will realize finally how they have missed the mark.
Sharbano, You should read the whole Isaiah and all other prophets to see how the Jews missed the mark instead of focusing on gentiles. If you only were able to include yourself in the crowd of the ones who missed the mark Isaiah 53 would be more clear who it is talking about.
Eric, and likewise, you should focus on the 2000-year moral legacy of Christianity. While you ponder that, you should compare it to the moral behavior of the Jewish community during the same time period. I believe it would be instructive to do some real, serious research. I would like to recommend a few books to get you started:
A History of the Jews by Paul Johnson
The Anguish of the Jews by Edward Flannery
Constantine’s Sword by James Carroll
Holy Hatred by Robert Michael
Christian Antisemitism by William Nicholls
The Origins of Antisemitism by John Gager
You see, we do focus on ourselves. For millennia, we have studied and continued to study our own Scripture, which highlights our own moral failings. After 2000 years, don’t you think the time has come for you to do the same?
I really think Xtians have no actual knowledge of Jewish living. It’s all about assumptions. It’s almost a prejudice against anything related to Jewish culture, especially related to observance. How many have read the prayers of Selichot, or even a Machzor. Needless to say I doubt few of them have ever entered a Shul.
Most of their perceptions of Jews comes from Hollywood Jews, and maybe some Jewish cuisine. Of course we’ve all heard how they blame all the ills of the world on “liberal Jews” in Hollywood and elsewhere. When it comes to religious Jews their sole perception seems to come from only that which is written in their Xtian text. From what I have heard from different Xtian ministers their perceptions of religious Jews is highly distorted. It’s rather amusing to hear them say, the Jews believe such and such, when that is no where near the truth.
None of us, or any Jew for that matter, would have any focus on Gentiles whatsoever if it weren’t for the incessant interference in Jewish life by these same people. WHY are YOU here, if not to “Convince” someone of YOUR religion. Jews throughout these past 2000 years would have been quite satisfied to live out their lives in peace, without such interference. It’s certainly clear to all who have read that it wasn’t words that were used but the sword. Jews were paraded in the square for public ridicule was the mildest of Xtian transgressions. As with virtually every Xtian these days they point to the prophets and say, “See how you Jews are”, YET, when it is pointed out YOUR transgressions they complain and repeat the same “You Jews”. Well, we should TURN the tables. Why did YOU kill, murder, rape, pillage the Jews. Why did YOU kill Six million Jews who did nothing to YOU. You have the blood of millions upon millions of Jews on your hands. As Torah says, the blood cries out from the land and G-d’s anger will not be satisfied. Have you repented for all these sins.
Sharbano, Why I am here? Somebody send mt the invitation to join the blog? But Who?? Anonymous.
“Why did YOU kill, murder, rape, pillage the Jews. Why did YOU kill Six million Jews who did nothing to YOU. You have the blood of millions upon millions of Jews on your hands. As Torah says, the blood cries out from the land and G-d’s anger will not be satisfied. Have you repented for all these sins.”
Why are you mixing us with Nazi? Do you think Nazi were only killing Jews??? Read the estimates how many non- Jews died in concentration camps.
To answer your repentance question;
Jews want us to repent for what our fore-fathers did, if they really were our forefathers. Just people among my nation , somebody’s nation.
But don’t you have to repent for the sins of your forefathers, as well? Can you make yourself guilty because some people from the past among your nation did something wrong / sinned? The same can I feel guilty for the works Nazi did? Do I agree with them??? No! But I should be guilty they killed.
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20602
Christians keep going on about our sins in the Bible, so our point is only that you should focus on your own. There is a lot more there.
Yes, Christians do need to do soul searching about their moral legacy, which to Jews represents the horror of nearly 2000 years of unspeakable oppression. And anti-Semitism among Chrisitans is still ongoing, especially in Europe. Don’t fool yourself, Eric. The Jews are still the most hated group of people on the planet, and where they are not hated, they are barely tolerated. We in America today are stupendously grateful that we are left alone in peace to live our lives and worship as we please with the same opportunities to succeed as our gentile neighbors. This has never before happened in our long and dark exile. But the horrific anti-Semitism that preceded this ended only about a half century ago. This is a tiny blip in American history, and therefore, the refusal of Christians to confront their legacy and repent may be a sign that this tiny blip is temporary. I pray it is not! May it last until the Messiah comes, speedily in our days!
Are you saying that Xtians didn’t do as Nazis. In true form, when it came to the Crusades the Xtian went to the “Jew first”.
That nation was the Xtian community. Most everyone “took part” in these events, not unlike Nazi Germany. See Kristalnacht.
The issue HERE is, and why it was brought up in the first place, is Xtians have and continue to come to the Jew using words of the prophets in a modern form of condemnation when their arguments don’t sway the Jew. No doubt this originates with their text of “on our heads”. How can we trust those words when J’sus lies about Jews killing all the prophets etc. How many times here has it been said “stiffnecked people”. It is that character trait that has also kept the Jew true to the Torah.
Hey, Eric, over on the Isaiah 53 comment section I posted a new comment for you to review explaining the Jewish position…just in case you were getting bored of this conversation.
Dina, that is long to read, whenever I find time to deal with it, we will see.
Take your time, Eric. I appreciate the time you have spent on this conversation, and I respect your sincerity and passion even as I see them as misguided. Unlike other Christians on this blog (such as David, Paul, and Lion), while you have shown some contempt for Jewish positions, you have displayed nothing but respect and kindness to us as human beings. I want to thank you for that.
Dina, don’t blame others, they are nice to you too, we might sometimes get frustrated …
“Dina, don’t blame others, they are nice to you too, we might sometimes get frustrated …”
Eric, you’re one of the few Christians I’ve spoken to who has not called me a liar, a hater, arrogant, particularly bad because I’m a woman, or who has said things like the Jews deserved the Holocaust, or the Jews have a tradition of killing their prophets (the Hebrew Bible does not support this lie), or the Jews have a tradition of genocide which they are continuing against the Palestinians who just want to be left in peace.
No matter how frustrated you get, you never said anything like these vicious attacks. When people say these things, I don’t consider that they are being “nice to me too.”
I back up everything I say. Lion has called me a liar, hater, arrogant, particularly bad because I’m a woman. Paul said the Jews deserved the Holocaust for their rejection of Jesus, and more and worse is coming our way if we don’t accept him. David said that the Jews have a tradition of killing their prophets and that the Jews have a tradition of genocide which they are continuing against the Palestinians who just want to be left in peace.
Not nice, not nice at all.
“I have nothing against admitting that there are righteous Jews , I have something against ‘the chain’ you introduced.”
Eric, your argument is not with me but with historical facts and present-day statistics. You cannot make the history go away to fit with your beliefs. Because we are talking historical fact, historians acknowledge it as well. These historians have no reason to support God’s Biblical promise that a righteous remnant would survive; thus they present a neutral, third-party observation.
Your argument is also not with me but with God, since He is the one who introduced the idea of the chain of transmission. I presented several Scriptural citations to support this position. If you wish to rebut this, then cite Scripture, not your opinion.
“I showed you in Is 1;11-17 that the denomination or a title means nothing. There can be people who do exactly as you do participate in all Jewish festivals, observe Sabbaths etc , but they can be far away with their hearts from God. That was the point but you happily focused on no need for sacrifice because God says ; ” Why do I need your numerous sacrifices?” So does He say; : ” As for the New Moon and Sabbath (..) I cannot abide by mendacity with solemn assembly.”
This statement of yours ignores my careful wording: “God is much more concerned with meaningful service, with true repentance, than with empty rituals.” You can read the rest of the comment here, which also contains the references to how God wants us to transmit the message of the Torah.
If you look at what I wrote, you will see that I did not say that God is not interested in rituals, but in empty rituals. Just as Isaiah says (and I’m lifting this from your comment: “As for the New Moon and Sabbath (..) I cannot abide by mendacity with solemn assembly.” God didn’t say He can’t abide solemn assembly; He said He can’t abide it with mendacity.
Do you think Isaiah, himself a Sabbath-observant Jews, is telling his people to abandon the New Moon and Sabbath observance?
“There can be people who do exactly as you do participate in all Jewish festivals, observe Sabbaths etc , but they can be far away with their hearts from God.”
I agree with you. Of course not every single individual Orthodox Jew is up to scratch or automatically has God’s protection (many were killed throughout history, including righteous ones; God only promised to preserve a remnant, not every single member of it), but why do assume that most (or all) Orthodox Jews who observe the Torah are like that? Is it because that is what your NT tells you about us? Maybe you should hang out with some real, live Orthodox Jews, see how they observe the Sabbath, before casting judgment on them. You might be disappointed. You might discover that these real, live Pharisees have nothing to do with the caricature of the Pharisees in Christian scripture whom Christians love to hate.
Why do assume that God would prefer that those whose hearts are far away abandon their observance? Rather, God wants them to infuse their observance with meaning. How do I know this? Because in the Torah God commanded us to keep all His laws, such as the Sabbath, forever. He didn’t give us the option to abandon them, and any prophet who came to change, add, or subtract anything from the Law was deemed a false prophet.
In the end, you have used only emotional arguments–not logic; not reason; not historical fact; not cold, hard statistics; nor Scripture–to refute the obvious fact that the only surviving chain of Jews always and forever are the ones who follow in the Pharisaic tradition. They have God’s protection, because by all natural laws they should have been wiped out centuries upon centuries ago. They are the surviving righteous remnant of Israel.
Dina Eric does not seem to understand that there is a promise for a contiguous observance – let us day Sabbath for example – there is only one observance of Sabbath that has a credible claim of being contiguous throughout the generations – read the opening section of Council of My Nation
Exactly! I’m recommending this to Eric. https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/the-council-of-my-nation/
ypfriend, But that doesn’t mean all who simply keep Sabbath belong to righteous ones. It doesn’t mean that every single person who keeps it really follows God. That was my point. You can’t simply say this only this group ; we are them , the righteous ones. There are tons of people who do nothing and might turn to God at the end. I know so many who at the end of their lives turned to God . And I know some whose families are so religious and their kids do things by obligation but they do not care.That’s why I do not like categorizing.
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20589
“It doesn’t mean that every single person who keeps it really follows God.”
We never argued that. But Jews who do not keep it are certainly not following God. Sure, some Jews return to Torah observance late in life, and some Jews’ children leave it. But among the observant, that’s a minority. God said that the Sabbath is an eternal sign between Him and the Jewish people, and there is one group of Jewish people that has never stopped observing the Sabbath: those who carry the Pharisaic tradition. Jews who stop observing the Sabbath all share the same fate: they lose their Jewish identity within a few generations unless their children return to Sabbath observance.
The same is true for Jews who worship Jesus.
Eric Its not a matter of judging the people if they are righteous or not – it is a matter of determining which testimony is God talking about when He calls Israel His witnesses. What does God mean when He says to follow His Law – which group of people are the repository of His truth.
Dina, responding to this message ; ” You said Jesus was not mentioned in Ezekiel,” He was mentioned in other books.
Peoples’ responsibility is repentance, to God belonged the time when He was to send His son for our atonement. God didn’t have to speak in every line about every detail as without repentance that message is useless. Jesus was not a focus of people’s responsibility towards sin as one who ‘fixes’. everything. Where there is no repentance, Jesus is no help. God also doesn’t explain how He made eternal life possible every time he calls people to repentance or speaks about ways of turning to Him. He only speaks in one book about time where there will be no death, does it mean that there is something missing or not important?
Eric, in response to my comment, https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20381, you wrote https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20432
But you did not respond to my challenge at all. Ezekiel (18 and 33) says that through repentance our sins will not be remembered and that through our own actions we can renew our heart, and he does not mention a need for Jesus to accomplish that; neither do any of the other books of the Hebrew Bible as you claim. How do reconcile the fact that the Hebrew Bible teaches us that we have complete control over our spiritual fate with your belief that repentance must be combined with belief in Jesus to be effective?
Dina, There is simply no time to focus on all; I am not like you sitting all day at the comp.
“But you did not respond to my challenge at all. Ezekiel (18 and 33) says that through repentance our sins will not be remembered and that through our own actions we can renew our heart, and he does not mention a need for Jesus to accomplish that(..) ”
All that in Ezekiel doesn’t tell you that you will ‘pass over’ death – I mean that you won’t die
( which is consequences of the sin) Jesus is the one through whom God accomplished our way to life back. in NT God tells you how He did it that you can have your life back , why you can live again, , etc why it is so hard for you???
Eric, I am referencing your comment:
And quoting: “in NT God tells you how He did it that you can have your life back , why you can live again, , etc why it is so hard for you???”
Eric, the Hebrew Bible lays out a complete path to repentance and eternal life that leaves no room and no need for a man-god savior, a type that may have been typical for pagan religions but is unacceptable to Jews.
(Now, I know you don’t believe Jesus is God, but most Christians do, and your belief that he is somehow the literal son of God and the center of your religion renders him a man-god anyway; it is also a belief that is totally foreign to the Torah.)
On a lighter note, I just have to respond to this: “I am not like you sitting all day at the comp.”
I am a stay-at-home mom with five kids ranging in age from 16 to 1 1/2, my house is neat as a pin, dinner is ready when my kids get home from school, and I still find the time to write books. Am I a supermom or what? 🙂 Just really lucky to be blessed with good organizing and time management abilities which leave me with more free time than most busy moms–which I then squander on this blog!
Dina, finishing previous mail ; another words Ezekiel tells you what is your responsibility; repent ,turn away from evil , turn to God so you will live.
This is what we do what belongs to us, what is required from us. But that still didn’t free us from dying one day.
Repentance is our part, Jesus is God’s part . He is what God has done for us to make that life possible.
There would be no reason for us to die at all if repentance and forgiveness was what’s needed.
You know, Sharbano, it wouldn’t even be a consideration if it weren’t for Jews talking the words of Prophets and insisting without biblical justification that all prophesies are limited to one event and nothing else. I’ve challenged this misplaced non-biblical concept and to date there has not been one Jew to provide an adequate explanation why you think this way and/or your biblical justification.
That’s because Jews don’t make that argument, David. Each event is examined in context, and that is what determines whether it is limited or timeless.
“Ezekiel (18 and 33) says that through repentance our sins will not be remembered and that through our own actions we can renew our heart, and he does not mention a need for Jesus to accomplish that.”
And with that in mind you’ve also just argued against the need for a Jewish Messiah as well as Judaism itself.
Oops. Back to the drawing board. Time to go back and reinterpret Ezekiel.
Really, David? Why? This Jew girl does not see what the Jewish concept of the Messiah has to do with personal repentance, except in the sense that when all Jews repent he will come. And a major theme of Judaism is repentance.
You need to back up your assertions.
That’s because the one event limitation on prophesies is a non-biblical Jewish invention that you can’t explain.
David, Abraham received a prophecy that he would beget a son and call him Isaac. He had a son and named him Isaac. One-time prophecy. Don’t know what your point is. Jew people read the Bible in context.
“That’s because the one event limitation on prophesies is a non-biblical Jewish invention that you can’t explain.”
Where do you find this “invention”. Xtianity has the concept the text says One thing and means another, such as “Heylel”.
Sharbano and Dina,
You put your own limitations on Scripture, interpret things your own way and then say that Christians are wrong to see it your way such as the arbitrary and unsupportable claim that God stopped revealing himself prior to the time of Jesus.
You just make things up without scriptural evidence.
WHO uses the method of Eisegesis and who does not. Certainly Xtians do. We see things as they were taught by Moshe, from Sinai. It goes without saying how Xtianity uses the Hebrew text and distorts that actual text, adding what is not there, leaving out parts that clarify etc.
David, look who’s talking. You say that Genesis 3:15 is a prophecy about Jesus overcoming Satan/sin without Scriptural evidence. Or that Isaiah 7:14 is talking about Jesus’s virgin birth although the word “virgin” does not appear and Jesus wasn’t called Emanuel (among many other problems). That’s just making stuff up.
As usual, you make unsubstantiated claims. If you make an accusation, then you need to back it up with a specific example in order to be credible, like I just did above. It’s impossible to answer vague charges.
Give me an example where we Jew people just make stuff up without Scriptural evidence, and then we can have a debate about that.
P.S. We Jew people are the target audience of Tanach, so it’s the height of audacity for people outside the audience to tell us how to understand our own Book. –JG
“WHY are YOU here…”
To offer an alternative voice to the slander and hate directed towards Christianity and defend God’s Scriptures (including the Hebrew Scriptures) from those who malign His message by twisting His words to suit their needs.
David, there are two billion of you out there and only a tiny handful of us on this itsy bitsy little blog. Why do you feel the need to defend your faith from us, when the only reason we are talking in the first place is BECAUSE YOU GUYS STARTED UP WITH US. That’s a little kid’s way of putting it, but very accurate. You guys haven’t been able to leave us alone to practice our religion in peace since your inception, and the minute we have the safety and protection to answer back you get all huffy and indignant, accusing us of spreading slander and hate while you do that for real. Jew men, Jew temple, making false claims about us which I presented numerous times and which you were unable to substantiate yet refused to retract. On the other hand, I back up what I say with specific examples.
And you are not one whit disturbed by the slander, libel, and hate directed at Jews for nearly 2000 years and which has not been entirely eradicated. There is a hell of a lot more Christian anti-Semitism today than, um, wait, there is no term for Jewish hatred of Christians BECAUSE IT DOESN’T EXIST.
Dina, you seem so soaked with the feeling that we hate you all so much , that is becoming really detestfull. Maybe you can try to forgive , you will feel better and anyways no one will be forgiven unless he himself forgives others. We are not motivated by hate to be here on that blog.
“Dina, you seem so soaked with the feeling that we hate you all so much , that is becoming really detestfull. Maybe you can try to forgive , you will feel better and anyways no one will be forgiven unless he himself forgives others. We are not motivated by hate to be here on that blog.”
Eric, maybe you should read some more of David’s comments to me before you make that judgment.
I do not think you all hate me. Not at all, and certainly not you, although you have absorbed negative stereotypes about religious Jews that are simply unfortunate.
“Maybe you can try to forgive, you will feel better.” I feel perfectly content, and I don’t feel the need to forgive you because you haven’t hurt me. However, I do not forgive the crimes that were committed against my people. God Himself does not forgive those crimes; I will not be more forgiving than God. And where I see anti-Semitism, I will call it out.
And if I see Jew hatred in your scripture, which has led to the persecution of the Jewish people, I will tell you. I will speak the truth as I see it even if you find it detestable. If instead of investigating my claims to see if they are true, you want to believe that I am wallowing in hateful feelings, then that is your choice. But you are an earnest truth seeker. I hope that you will investigate.
to Sharbano, exactly, also to explain why “the nonsense ” I believe is not a nonsense.
I’ve already challenged you and you find yourself unable to respond.
You hold that Scripture doesn’t allow for prophesy to be fulfilled in more than one event.
You just made that up without scriptural support.
And this is an example of why I’m here (when I can stomach it)
“I will be speaking ill of Christianity and its founder. … The time has come to end that silence.”
“it has exploited the truth for the advancement of the lie”
“…every doctrine of the Church will be revealed as a lie.”
“This lie must be exposed.”
“as humanity is moved inexorably towards the Messianic era, the truth must be disentangled for the web of lies that the Church has woven around them.”
If you’re too thin-skinned to handle our speaking truth to power, then you don’t have to come here. Every statement that you quoted is backed up with examples about why we believe the Church has lied about us. Obviously we believe Christianity is a pack of lies, or else we’d be Christians. Can’t stomach that? Why? Do you believe that Judaism is the truth, that our rituals and observances are ennobling, uplifting, and bring us closer to God? Really now. You have said some pretty harsh things about us.
The thing about you thin-skinned, un-self-aware Christians is that you can dish it out but you can’t take it. Well, shame on you, sir.
The only reason for debates on the matter was the interactions the church has had with the Jews. If it weren’t for conversions, forced or otherwise, there would not have been all the dialogues.
I don’t know What aligning with Jewish scriptures you are speaking of but for certain any prophetic references of the Xtian text to Tanach are flimsy at Best. It is mostly vague and ambiguous references that Xtianty claims clarity, when there is no Real clarity.
What unpardonable sin. What is this based upon. The words of a man? Certainly it is not part of Torah. If it’s not in Torah then it is adding to its words.
Sharbano my Post Scriptum is not from Arab origin but Jewish before our 1948 born state. Obviously some European so-called Jews put it on the back of the Arabs but there is the Jewish source for you to check:
”Abraham Eliyahu Harkavi then suggested as early as 1869 that there might be a link between the Khazars and European Jews, but the theory that Khazar converts formed a major proportion of Ashkenazi was first proposed to a Western public in a lecture by Ernest Renan in 1883. Occasional suggestions emerged that there was a small Khazar component in East European Jews in works by Joseph Jacobs (1886), Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu, a critic of anti-Semitism, (1893) Maksymilian Ernest Gumplowicz, and by the Russian-Jewish anthropologist Samuel Weissenberg. In 1909 Hugo von Kutschera developed the notion into a book-length study, arguing Khazars formed the foundational core of the modern Ashkenazi. Maurice Fishberg introduced the notion to American audiences in 1911. The idea was also taken up by the Polish-Jewish economic historian and General Zionist Yitzhak Schipper in 1918. Scholarly anthropologists, such as Roland B. Dixon (1923), and writers like H. G. Wells (1921) used it to argue that “The main part of Jewry never was in Judea”, a thesis that was to have a political echo in later opinion. In 1932, Samuel Krauss ventured the theory that the biblical Ashkenaz referred to northern Asia Minor, and identified it with the Khazars, a position immediately disputed by Jacob Mann. Ten years later, in 1942, Abraham N. Poliak, later professor for the history of the Middle Ages at Tel Aviv University, published a Hebrew monograph in which he concluded that the East European Jews came from Khazaria. D.M. Dunlop, writing in 1954, thought very little evidence backed what he regarded as a mere assumption, and argued that the Ashkenazi-Khazar descent theory went far beyond what “our imperfect records” permit. Léon Poliakov, while assuming the Jews of Western Europe resulted from a “panmixia” in the Ist millennium, asserted in 1955 that it was widely assumed that Europe’s Eastern Jews descended from a mixture of Khazarian and German Jews. Poliak’s work found some support in Salo Wittmayer Baron and Ben-Zion Dinur, but was dismissed by Bernard Weinryb as a fiction (1962).
By this passage you see that he was a real debate put now it has been silenced for obvious reason. But truly you brought the debate of who was a Jew and questioning my Jewishness. How about you are upfront as I did expose my origin…
That’s rather selective editing of Wikipedia. You paste only the parts that suit your needs. But everyone can go to the link and read it in its entirety. Everyone has their speculations on this matter, but to “Conclude” that Ashkenazi are NOT Jews because of a wiki entry is rather loose.
If you researched you would find the name Sharbano comes from the area of the Persian empire.
Sharbano as brothers we seek the truth. The Ashkenazi debate brought up by our brothers (most Jewish historians) is important to know to shed light on who is really from the house of Yehudah and who is a stranger. We could extend the polemic but personally I would have much difficulty to listen to a rabbi that could be compromised in his blood line. Unless you think that Israel and Yehudah are to be understood metaphorically…
“We could extend the polemic but personally I would have much difficulty to listen to a rabbi that could be compromised in his blood line.”
This is blatant racism. Racism is a moral disease. All races, ethnicities, and nationalities are created in God’s image. Have a problem with that, Lion?
Dina I do not know if you are Jewish for your response may seem that you are Askhenazi intermixed and not from Israel seed…
To identify your blood line is not racism. That Israel will reign over the nations is it racist? It is a promise from the Elohim. Your interjection seems very strange from a Jewish point a view!!
”6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts of the Apostles ch.2)
THAT is about as non-sequitur as anyone can write. What does the quote in Acts have to do with a bloodline. Geeeeeez.
To obsess about pure bloodlines, mixed bloodlines–that is racist.
One thing you fail to realize is the chain of transmission. Many a Rabbi can trace who their teachers were and their teachers, etc, etc.
When you state Jesus shows contempt for His parents when they are searching for Him. How and under what idea is that contempt?
your views are totally biased on your thoughts and not on the written word.
The whole point of the verse, is Mary snd Joseph are naturally worried about the absence of their child. Jesus is just making the point that he is now at the age where He is reckonising His coming ministry and His lifes purpose.
He is not showing contempt, He is showing the Fathers will! And reassuring them not to worry.
Sometimes Dina, your views???!! You would argue the moon was made out cheese if it supports your view. LOL!
Ask Dina about all the many ways in which Jesus was non-Torah observant. You’ll get a good laugh.
She also makes the argument more or less that he and the writers of the NT were hate mongers going around spewing hate speech against their fellow Jews which later became preserved historically by way of their writings in the NT.
Then she makes the argument that, not withstanding their many blatant Torah violations, and their hate speech, the Jewish hierarchy at the time would have paid no mind; the thought of even internal discipline per the Law of Moses was something of the past. They were a generation of advanced thinkers, not like their ancestors who attempted to muzzle the speech of the prophets (even imprisoning and threatening some with death) as a way of censorship.
But apparently, according to Dina, the Jewish hierarchy in the time of Jesus must have been free speech advocates. Who knows, maybe that’s where the founding fathers who signed the declaration of independence and framers of the U.S. constitution got their inspiration.
We have the leading Pharisees and Chief Priests to thank! Declare a holiday! Instead of the 4th of July, let’s call it Pharisee Day!
Hi David and Paul,
I answered David on this in another thread. I will summarize my points:
According the NT, I recognized Jesus as a Torah-observant Jew in the Pharisaic tradition who played hard and fast with the rules.
There is, sadly, nothing unusual in the idea of the self-hating Jews. We have suffered from them for centuries. But much of CS was anyway written by gentiles, according to many scholars. It does indeed contain vicious descriptions of Jews that were used as justification for Christian hatred and persecution of the Jewish people. This is an undeniable fact, not my personal weird and biased opinion. If it were up to me, it would not be true. I do not want it to be true. I do not want all that persecution to have happened.
As for the Pharisees, they would indeed have ignored the early Christians because the historical record shows that they co-existed peacefully with many factions, some whose transgressions were even worse, like the Sadducees and the Zealots (who actually murdered their fellow Jews who disagreed with them politically).
And actually, the Pharisaic teachings that are recorded in the Talmud do teach things like “What is hateful to you do not do to others” and “Judge everyone in the scale of merit,” which breed a spirit of tolerance for those who are different from us.
Jewish values have had an enormous impact on the Founding Fathers, who quoted Hebrew scripture often (the inscription on the Liberty Bell is from the Hebrew Bible, for example). That is why so many Christians themselves say that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian values.
You can laugh, Paul and David, but without our Torah, you would have nothing.
When I read that story in Christian scripture I was shocked by the disrespect Jesus showed his parents. You do not see it as disrespect because of your own bias.
If you had read that story anywhere else with different character names, without having first read it in your CS, you would not be defending such a child.
If I went looking for my 12-year-old, and I found him giving a stand-up comedy show to a large and admiring audience, and he gave me the same answer as Jesus, he would be SO grounded.
In fact I have a 12-year-old son, and he could be pretty cheeky sometimes, but he would never dare say something like that.
One of the craziest views ive heard here is that same argument. A jewish God, A Jewish son, a Jewish covenant keeping God, dying to pay the penalty for the sins of mankind, preaching and offering the Messianic kingdom to Jews, fulfilling the Jewish Tanach, fulfilling all the 7 Jewish feasts of Israel, Jewish disciples, Jewish teachings, etc etc,to that end to be labelled the biggest antisemitic non messiah that ever lived.
Not adding insult to injury, the very texts that people stand by, write and explain that all the very rejection that would happen, actually did. And He is still labeled a fraud.
2000 yrs of blind wondering and staggering about the world. Arguing over Gods own given oracles, and actually rejecting them in His Name.
A stiff necked people. (Thats Moses) the giver of the Law, not Christian teaching.
Thats devine given blidness.
Paul, the assumption that we are spiritually blind is found in your NT and is anti-Jewish.
According to the Jewish God, there is only One. According to the Jewish Bible, the concept of a divine messiah dying to redeem mankind of sin does not exist. According to common sense, Jesus could not have fulfilled the whole Torah.
The reason for that is that he never married and so could not fulfill the laws that apply to a husband, never had children and so could not fulfill the laws that apply to a father, was not a farmer and so could not fulfill the laws that apply to farmers, was not a priest or a Levite and so could not fulfill the laws that apply to Temple services, and so on and so forth. The notion that one person, no matter how perfect, can fulfill the whole Torah is ridiculous and impossible.
The horrible things Jesus said about Jews (like calling them children of the devil, murderers, liars, brood of vipers, hypocrites, and so on) I do not believe he said at all. But even if he did say those things, it would not be the last time that a Jew, angry at his people, turned on them. Some of our own worst enemies have been converts to Christianity like Pablo Cristiani, Nicholas Donin, and Karl Marx. The phenomenon of the self-hating Jew is well-documented.
Paul, know that we, the Jewish people, have remained faithful to God and clung to his Torah through fire and water. We have resisted the message of Christianity despite pressure that all other European cultures and peoples succumbed to.
God promised He would never completely wipe out the Jewish people but would preserve a righteous remnant. Throughout the generations, the only group of Jewish people to survive are those who clung to the Pharisaic tradition (today’s Orthodox Jews). This is so obvious that even Christian writers of Jewish history have commented that rabbinic Judaism, another name for Pharisaic Judaism, is the only viable form of Judaism (Paul Johnson in A History of the Jews and James Carroll in Constantine’s Sword). This, my friend, is something to think about.
Dina hope your Shabat was beautiful!
You said: ”another name for Pharisaic Judaism, is the only viable form of Judaism”
Dina the only viable form of Christianity proven during times is Orthodox Christianity.
What does that mean?
Hinduism is still around way before Mosheh and still around with almost a billion followers. Does that signifying that it is the religion?
Those metric means nothing. Why?
Take Noah he was the only one with his sons to have the favour of the Elohim. He was the one having the right religion. The truth is measure by the grace you have from the Elohim which are deployed by the perfect obedience to the will of Eloah.
Religion is a system, persons are the ones chosen by the Elohim:
Abraham was chosen although a pagan
Isaac was chosen
Yaakov was chosen
Mosheh was chosen
David was chosen
Now where is the true religion?
Those who make the will of Elohay:
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.” (Matthew 12; NKJV)
That is not disrespect but the Truth. Those moved by the Ruah holy will always do the will of the Elohim but those looking for themselves and seeking fame and honour will do they own will.
For our parents Adam and Hawah disobey a simple commandment and look what it did for us. Therefore obdedience to the will of Elohay is the way to the truth and life.
Yahushuo was the Obedient One to the humiliation of the Cross to save his People. For that reason He was Resurrected and now He is bless forever.
Dina, “The horrible things Jesus said about Jews (like calling them children of the devil, murderers, liars, brood of vipers, hypocrites, and so on) I do not believe he said at all. ”
The same way that God said ‘ things that weren’t nice to hear ‘ about those who lived in sin in OT. The words of condemnation are there. If He said something against Jews it was not out of hate to them but out of hating sin. And if God said something against some Jews it was not to address every single Jewish person but sin of those who lived in sin . So was no different with Jesus addressing hypocrisy. Your statement about jesus (above) is completely wrong.
Eric the sect of the Pharisees so-called Orthodox by them do not know what is sin. Being stiff neck they still have difficulty to grasp the gravity and the offence due to the Infinite Elohim.
They don’t even know what is original sin and the consequences of it. They still run after a false human justification rejecting the only righteousness that can save us which the justice and innocence of the Messiah.
They do not comprehend that their original sin and they false justice blind them to the truth of the battle in the inner self between good and evil. They think it is a game that millions were killed thinking that the wicked mind is a the will of Elohay as they see the satan as a good angel. Imagine the trick that the enemy pulled out in front of their blinded eyes not understanding still the lesson of History. WOW!!
For they are sick and the word of Paul will befall on them as it is written:
6 And now the one controlling you have perceived, into the one to be revealed him within his own proper time; 7 this indeed mystery already operates of the abolishment of the Torah, alone the one controlling presently until from out of the midst he emerge; 8 and then will be unveiled the negator of the Torah, whom the Lord will refute by the spirit of his mouth and render inoperative by the manifestation of his presence; 9 whose is the presence against operations of the satan in every power and signs and prodigies of falsehood 10 and every deceit of the iniquity among those dying-away, in return for these the love of the truth they did not receive into the one to have saved them; 11 and because of that he will send them the Elohim an operation of delusion into the one to conform them to the liar, 12 in order that they be condemned all those not having conformed to the truth, but having consented in relation to the iniquity.
(2 Thessalonians, chap. 2, translated from the Greek text)
Do you really think the Xtian text has any merit Here. As has been said. Xtianity has no understanding of the “meaning of” sin. Because of that the entire religion is distorted.
sharbano, we have no clue what the sin is?? I beg your pardon. You have no clue what you are talking about.
WHY do you think I put it as “meaning of” sin. Do you Know the Hebrew word for sin and what That Hebrew word means. That is why there is Xtian confusion. Whether its words as “sin”, “faith” as examples, the Hebrew definition is not what Xtianity would have one believe. That is why you have ‘missed the mark’.
Sharbano, I don’t know what sin definition you are looking for and what you wanted to talk about while mentioning ‘sin’ . Did you want to address disobedience of God or what???? I answered you what did Adam do wrong; which disobeying God’s command. That’s it.
I do not use Polish or German vocabulary on that blog for you to figure out what I meant. So you can do the same , say what you wanted to explain while using your Hebrew word.
I pushed this because Xtians cannot relate to the Jewish understanding of Torah. Their lack of Hebrew language stifles the understanding. The sin offering (Chatat) in the Hebrew definition means Only “missing the mark”. You were unable to see the pun here. It is why this offering is for “unintentional” sin. It is also the reason the blood doesn’t have the significance that you want to impart to it. If it were as you believe then All transgressions SHOULD require blood. But That is Not the case.
I cited that particular verse because I had once heard a Rabbi give a shiur and asked what that particular verse was saying. I was surprised at some of their responses. He asked them to read it a second and third time. THEN a light went off. I’ll write it down with inflection to see the difference and how it can change one’s perspective.
“The man said, The woman whom YOU gave to be with me – she gave me of the tree and I ate”
Do you see what is going on here. YOU gave me this woman, as if he didn’t want or need companionship. Previously G-d had said it is not good for man to be alone. So He gave him a gift of a mate, And at the first sign of trouble he “accuses” G-d because HE gave him the woman. What Chutzpah. He didn’t acknowledge his own guilt but put the onus on His creator. It wasn’t eating from the tree that banished them from Gan Eden but lack of repentance. We can see throughout the Bible when there is repentance G-d is quick to forgive. The same would have been the case here. That is why G-d went to Adam and queried him. So it was with Moshe with the golden calf. Did G-d Really need Moshe to “stand aside”. THIS was an invitation To Moshe as it was with Adam. Tell me, has any Xtian teacher Ever taught such a thing. Apparently not. Instead it will be said Jews are twisting the words. So, who will one believe, the ones who wrote it and taught it generation to generation or some johnny come lately.
Sharbano, I am aware ‘sin’ means “missing the mark”. It is well known term.
You said ” It is also the reason the blood doesn’t have the significance that you want to impart to it. ” Did you read my message correct?
It doesn’t have significance towards the wilful sin, delibartly sinning, for those who know the truth but wilfully choose evil and are aware of it. It doesn’t have significance for those who never repented or are willing to. That is what I said! Even NT says that jesus’ sacrifice won’t help them. That is why coming to God is followed by repentance , that means you realize what wrong you did and turn away from it.
” If it were as you believe then All transgressions SHOULD require blood. But That is Not the case.” I didn’t say all transgressions. You have above explanation.
And by the way all wicked have a chance to turn away and be forgiven. All who willfully sinned before but they decide to repent.
I am not sure what you are trying to prove in that story you presented. There is nothing unusual or new you showed in your story. You act as if we were robots automatically redding the bible and not thinking what we read about not making any observation. All who study can make that observation you made. But still a question what did you want to prove??? You think if Adam repented the further story would go differently ? Do you think God didn’t forgive him because he didn’t repent right away? Second we don’t have an account whether Adam repented or not. Just because he is not repenting right away but goes around how to explain himself before God and hides from Him, blames Him and the woman, doesn’t mean he never repented later. After being banned from a nice comfortable place to an uneasy reality, he might have repented. We don’t know. But still what do you want to prove in relation to what we talked about on the blog??
The point Is, Xtianity places such an emphasis on sacrifice, by blood, by J’sus, which doesn’t really comport with Torah. The sacrificial system wasn’t an end unto itself. As I pointed out, if there were a willful sin only repentance could suffice. Blood doesn’t come into the picture at all. Let’s give an example. Say a person took a pen from work. Is this Not a sin. It is theft, it is willful. I’m sure Xtians would assert this is forgiven by J’sus, but according to Torah there is no payment made via blood or any other sacrifice. By your statement then if this man repents and returns the object J’sus death has no effect. If it IS a sin How is it “washed away”, by the mere act of repentance. Then J’sus does nothing for Him.
The purpose of the story about Adam was an “exercise” to show there is much much more to Torah than a superficial reading will show. A person has to take care in each and every word that is written. If it’s such an easy observation why are so many surprised by it. I haven’t yet found a Xtian that could determine what all the text is saying. Of course, if Adam DID repent they never would have left Gan Eden. THIS is the lesson here and is repeated again and again in Torah. Xtians are unable or unwilling to grasp this concept. They assume as soon as eating from the tree doomed them. If this were truly the case G-d wouldn’t have inquired of them. He was giving them an “out”. Now to deny This and assume G-d is so strict as not to allow repentance would deny His interactions throughout Torah. This is where Hebrew comes into play. When G-d comes in the name – “L-rd” he is coming with mercy. Therefore anytime That is used we know His intent. When He comes in the name “Elokim” he is coming with “strict justice”. If He comes as L-rd G-d He is coming with justice tempered by mercy. How He is referred tells us more than what is written by words alone.
J’sus did Not attack their sinning but went after them personally. Calling people “names” is a sign of an attitude. If this is justified why don’t Xtians use the same language against homosexuals. I haven’t heard any derogatory terms against them. Furthermore why did Xtains distance themselves from the Westboro church. They should have been celebrated.
Sharbano, don’t put Christians in one box. many claim they are christians and they do not act as them.
Why didn’t Jesus go after Nicodemus? He wasn’t calling him ‘names’ although he was a Pharisee. It was not about who you are but addressing the sin.
This is just a cop-out to deflect criticism. I must say it has a sense of convenience to it. In other words, these people who do not act as I do, or contrary to what I do, or believe, are Only “claiming” to be part of this collective, but in reality are not. According to the Xtian text ALL one has to do is “believe” that J’sus is who he claims to be, and confesses etc. If they have met the requirements or criteria of what makes one a Xtian then, by default, they would have to be considered a Xtian. Now, if these aren’t Xtians in the true sense then one would have to say the Entire religion is on shaky ground. How then can you say you are and they are not. It may be they say the same thing. Of course, we have seen many a Xtian who claim only they have the ultimate truth.
Sharbano, you will find that among Jews too. There is no perfect group because it goes by some specific name. You do not build on others but on word of God , you are responsible for yourself not what others believe.
The word on homosexual people is clear in NT ( Romans 1;26-27) . If someone puts a blind eye to it , I can’;t help.
Perfection has nothing to do with it. What we have maintained is that the Tradition that came from Sinai has an unbroken Chain of Transmission, which, according to Torah, Would be the case. It is THIS that would never cease. No other group has Been Able to accomplish this task.
Sharbano, God doesn’t look at the ‘Chain of Transmission’ chain of a certain group .
Isaiah 1;13 says it is all about what your heart is toward Him, not the repeated way of worship that makes the righteous. Where ther is no heart , the ‘chain’ or ‘patterns’ of worship carried on from Sinai mean nothing. ( Is 1;11-15)
You DID IT AGAIN! If you can Write the English as you do surely you can read it also. STILL you haven’t been able to understand what Dina has said and what others, including myself, have said. I suspect Xtians just CANNOT stomach the idea that Jews have been faithful to the covenant. No doubt it comes from J’sus and his condemnation of the Pharisees.
Are you REALLY going to suggest Isaiah is speaking about ALL Jews throughout ALL time, that there has NEVER been Jews who faithfully kept Torah.
Eric, you cited Isaiah 1:11-15. You could not have chosen a better passage to destroy your whole case. This passage teaches us that blood sacrifice is not all-important, as you keep emphasizing. God is much more concerned with meaningful service, with true repentance, than with empty rituals. I recommend you read the whole chapter, paying attention to verses 18-20, which further undermine your contention that we need Jesus to wipe away our sins.
As for the chain of transmission, this is a Biblical theme. I’m surprise to see you treat it so lightly! See Deuteronomy 11:19, Deuteronomy 32:7; Deuteronomy 4:9; Psalm 78:5-7.
The Torah itself teaches that the chain of transmission is the primary method of passing the Torah to the next generation. And who’s doing this all this teaching? The Jewish atheists? Reform Jews who don’t even believe the Torah has a divine Author? Secular Jews? No! Only one group of people is doing this: those who are loyal to God and His Torah.
Whether you like it or not, they are the only ones who maintain a Jewish identity. In every generation, whichever Jews are non-Pharisaic lose their Jewish identity within a few generations. This is a very simple fact that even Christian chroniclers of Jewish history have acknowledged.
Eric, you cited Isaiah 1:11-15. You could not have chosen a better passage to destroy your whole case. This passage teaches us that blood sacrifice is not all-important, as you keep emphasizing. God is much more concerned with meaningful service, with true repentance,”
– sacrifice is meaningless if there is no repentance. I stated it many times. Nothing new you brought up here. Jesus dies for those who came to God and repented, not vice verso.
Sharbano, “According to the Xtian text ALL one has to do is “believe” that J’sus is who he claims to be, and confesses etc. If they have met the requirements or criteria of what makes one a Xtian then, by default, they would have to be considered a Xtian. ”
NT talks about that differently what you said; Matthew 7; 21
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’”
Then how do YOU know you are following the will of Hashem. What if your purpose in coming here to dispute the Jews is Against Hashem. What if that is the same disposition of ALL Xtianity. According to J’sus he said he came for the house of Israel. He did Not say go seek out the Gentiles and have THEM go to the Jews and convert them. In this way every single Xtian is going against G-d and J’sus.
Sharbano,Jesus stated what is the will of God in . And as far as this ;
“According to J’sus he said he came for the house of Israel. He did Not say go seek out the Gentiles and have THEM go to the Jews and convert them. ”
Isaiah 49:6New International Version (NIV)
“It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”
Jesus comes first to the house of israel , then the message goes to gentiles.
I suppose you think This is about your J’sus. The narrative doesn’t support that supposition.
Maybe your difficulty lies is in the fact you don’t have the entire Torah comprehended. You see contradictions when there is none. Did you ever consider that a false prophet can perform all kinds of signs and miracles. Given that then, signs are not a determining factor. It is the Totality that has to be accomplished And has to be done as Not to violate Torah. Thus the standard for a prophet is set extremely high.
I don’t understand the nature of it , but Xtians DO seem to have such a singular focus that all else is forgotten or overlooked. When a person reads Torah it has to be done with the totality in mind. Torah takes analytical thinking along with the hermeneutics applied. A child may read it with merely the stories in mind, but as a person grows he needs to grow in study. Hasn’t a Xtian Ever wondered at all the references regarding Torah throughout Tanach. This is where translations may be a hindrance. One wouldn’t be able to really tell when it IS speaking of Torah. This begs the question, Why are Xtians SO hesitant in learning Hebrew. Because of that hesitation the real beauty of Torah is hidden from view.
“Jesus comes first to the house of israel , then the message goes to gentiles.”
Right, Eric, that was Sharbano’s point. Even your scripture doesn’t teach that the gentiles will bring the message to the Jews. But that is how every Jew in history who has converted to Christianity was brought to it: primarily by gentiles. Today it happens that some Jewish converts to Christianity bring in other Jews, but mostly it’s a gentile mission to the Jews. What’s wrong with that picture?
“The same way that God said ‘ things that weren’t nice to hear ‘ about those who lived in sin in OT. The words of condemnation are there. If He said something against Jews it was not out of hate to them but out of hating sin.”
The condemnation of the Jews in Christian scripture is vastly different. First of all, it’s personal (all that name calling). Second, it’s not a rebuke to get them to change their ways; it’s simply a condemnation (Luke 3:7, Matthew 3:7, Matthew 23:33, Luke 11:50-51, 1 Thessalonians 2:15).
But here’s the biggest difference. The Hebrew Bible is a book of internal self-criticism. The harsh rebukes of the prophets are lovingly studied, and we are inspired by those words to repent. The prophets included themselves in the rebuke. Christian scripture on the other hand is a bitter denunciation of Jesus’s theological foes, and it fell, not into Jewish hands as a book of self-criticism, but into the hands of Gentiles who were already predisposed to have hostile feelings to the Jews.
No, Eric, it’s not the same thing at all.
Dina, if he was that hostile towards Jews as you claim how come so many loved him and rejoiced in his coming . They even wanted to set him as a king right away to rule.
Eric, you did not answer about the differences between Jesus’s condemnation of the Pharisees and the rebukes of the Hebrew prophets. Let’s hear what you have to say about that.
By the way, there is no evidence in the historical record of Jesus’s fame and popularity. In fact, the historians Josephus and Philo don’t even mention him (the one reference in Josephus is taken by scholars to be a later Christian interpolation).
Dina, popularity and appreciation for Jesus is not to be read from history. It is described in the gospels and other epistles.
Dina, I don’t know what you mean by here; to describe differences between Jesus’s condemnation of the Pharisees and the rebukes of the Hebrew prophets???
There weren’t as many as you would imagine. In comparison, Rabbis of that time period had a MUCH greater following in Their teachings.
One need only believe in Jesus to gain life in the age to come. That’s very inclusive, not exclusive as compared to Judaism which requires one to be righteous.
Additionally there is clear and repeated confirmation in the NT itself regarding the standard.
compare that with the Hebrew Scriptures which are very ambiguous. Even the Sadducees for example didn’t even believe there was a resurrection based on their understanding of the Torah. And you, yourself must turn to the Talmud for an understanding of who gains life in the age to come. Your references to Ezekiel do not necessarily pertain to eternal life, and there are many Jews who would disagree with you on that.
Christians unlike Jews are in agreement on the standard as presented in the NT. And we have not wavered from one opinion to the other as have Jews over the centuries.
The fact of the matter is that many Jews throughout history have believed that only Jews Gain life in the age to come. And righteous has most often throughout history been defined as pertaining only to those who believe in the YHWH. This variation in opinions over the centuries is so as I noted earlier because there is no clear standard portrayed in the Hebrew Scriptures which necessitates one to guess at what the standard is or rely on the Talmud (the fallible opinion of others) as you have done.
David I find your argument ironic. Christians have disagreed with each other over the centuries over so many different things and they still differ with each other. Assuming that your assertion is correct – that they always agreed over the way to eternal reward (which it is not) – why does this satisfy you? Is the question of idolatry (difference between Trinitarians and no-Trinitarians) a smaller difference than the question of how to get eternal reward? Look at the history of Judaism and at the history of Christianity with the question of conformity in mind – there is no comparison.
Yisroel once again you contradicts yourself living in a rosy land. Conformity of mind when there is the Liberal Yehudi, the Conservative Yehudi and the so-called Orthodox with their multiple interpretation, pro or anti-Israel, ultra or not ultra…etc.
For what conformity of mind are you talking about?
The smallest of Christian in justice is higher than you so-called man made justice. The Torah and the Prophets accuse you. You are a parody of real Judaism. For if you were saying what you think people would be scared of your perverted mind.
Tell me so-called honest guy: why do women wear wigs in your sect?
A non-response of your part will show how hypocrite you are!!
Eliyahu I said that you need to examine the history of both belief systems – sure we have disagreements – but they pale into insignificance when contrasted with the disagreements that abound amongst followers of yeshua/Yehushuoahha/Jesus I find it interesting that a “non-response” on my part shows that I am a hypocrite – but for you it shows something else. Could you please explain to the readers how you come to these conclusions>
Lion, you have a creepy, weird obsession with women wearing wigs. I don’t know why this bothers you and, frankly, I don’t want to know. But I do have some questions for you. Are you equally bothered by cancer survivors wearing wigs? By women wearing scarves, kerchiefs, or hats? By Jewish men wearing yarmulkes? By Amish women wearing bonnets?
And what commandment of God, exactly, is being violated by the wearing of wigs, hats, scarves, kerchiefs, bonnets or yarmulkes?
The context of my post is the standard for gaining life in the age to come. Therefore when I wrote,
“Christians unlike Jews are in agreement on the standard as presented in the NT. And we have not wavered from one opinion to the other as have Jews over the centuries.”
It is in that context.
Yes there has been disagreements on other matters (including the question of the Trinity as you pointed out since about the 3rd century). But on the critical issue of the standard as presented in the NT regarding gaining life in the age to come, Christianity has been for the most part of one mind.
Compare that with Judaism which has been all over the map on the issue.
Dina falsely claims the opposite, in complete denial of history. I think she really knows but refuses to believe there has been no steady standard.
You could gather 10 Jews over the past 2000 years and get 10 different answers as to who gains life in the age to come.
You and Dina both admit that the Hebrew Scriptures are ambiguous at best as to the standard and point to the Talmud and other Jewish non-Scriptural writings for guidance on the issue.
Ask you-self this while we’re on the subject, why should anyone trust their eternity to a Jewish opinion which may change tomorrow as it has in the past? To cover this obvious deficit you both say with similar words, more or less, that Jews don’t pay much mind to the question of eternal life and Christians obsess over it. Well, maybe you should give it a little more attention. After all, it’s were you’ll spend eternity (depending on your ever changing standard of course).
Dina falsely claims that the standard laid down in the NT is much more restrictive as compared to the Jewish standard which she claims is open.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Although the Jewish standard has been an ever shifting target, quite often it has been limited to Jews only. Sometimes even Jews are denied for one reason or another.
And when the standard has been relaxed to include non-Jews, it is still more restricted than that of Christianity’s NT standard.
For example Dina is fond of pointing out that all who are “basically righteous” gain life in the age to come. What she fails to realize is that even her current standard is a more restrictive standard than Christianity’s standard for the simple fact that to be considered “righteous” in Judaism one must believe in the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Righteousness does not exist apart from God. Atheists. pagans, and others who do not believe in God are considered among the UNRIGHTEOUS. So, not only does one have to believe in God but according to Dina, you also must be “basically righteous” in addition (a two fold test of one’s belief as well as character/behavior).
To put it into perspective, ask yourself, in Judaism would a man like Hitler for example gain life in the age to come if he had a death bed change of heart, repented and asked for forgiveness? Dina has said no in the past. What say you? And what does Judaism say now and in the past about death bed confessions as related to gaining life in the age to come?
David I think the Jewish Bible gives us a very clear teaching on God’s system of reward and punishment – Ecclesiastes 12:14 – God rewards EVERY good deed and punishes EVERY bad one. We understand that repentance wipes the slate clean (Ezekiel 33:16). No one in Judaism ever disputed these basic standards. This would answer your question about death bed repentance – it would have to be a true regret and a true commitment for the future – I would guess that someone like Hitler would die of grief if he would truly face his actions – but that is just my guess. As for “eternal life” – the Jewish Bible is indeed ambiguous about it and we understand that it is God’s way of telling us not to be too preoccupied with this matter. Historically those who obsessed over eternal life tended to forget about obeying God’s commandments in this world. And you are wrong about Christian conformity about getting eternal life – some said that one sin after baptism wipes out your eternal life, others say that there is no repentance for one who accepted and then denied Jesus, others maintain that without belief in one doctrine or another (such as the trinity or the authority of the Catholic Church) then the door to eternal life is closed, the Christian Scriptures themselves tell us that only those who do the will of the Father get eternal life (Matthew 7:21) – and how many people do you know that do the will of the Father?
Yisroel your a case study of hypocrisy: each time you do not response to question candidly. You evade like always because if you responded frankly you will be exposed.
Therefore like a said I will not let go for the benefice of the readers to expose your sect which is not true Judaism but a real perversion.
Questions never responded:
1)For what conformity of mind are you talking about?
2)Tell me so-called honest guy: why do women wear wigs in your sect?
These are only 2 questions that I have asked in my previous post… still not answered
I have plenty of other question that you did not respond yet. Some of your disciple tried to but with insufficient knowledge. Let us hear their so-called master… Let us debate man to man if you can stand the heat.
I could have an army of your sect in front of me and they will be like dogs barking for your arguments proceed from your Idol worship of yourselves infatuated with you so-called goddess called reason.
3)When will you submit to YHWH Almighty and his Torah not your false Babylonian Talmud full anti-Torah principles coming from your other idol Heylel?
4)When you will recognize as an example your introduction of the pagan principle of Reincarnation in detriment of the Resurrection preached in the time of Yahshuo the Messiah?
5)Did you become Sadducee??
Let us see if you a man of integrity not afraid of the truth!!
Eliyahu I don’t have disciples and I am not a master – I never called myself “honest”or anything else for that matter. The purpose of this blog is to judge ideas – not on the basis of who said them but on the basis of the truth they contain. Your rantings do not deserve to be answered because you do not ask in order to discuss – you have not shown once that you respect an honest dialogue. The only reason I have not asked you to leave this blog is because you serve as an example of what Christianity could do to someone.
Now THAT is really Funny. Here you are excoriating Yisroel about “hypocrisy”, for not responding candidly, evading as always, all because he may be exposed.
Haven’t you noticed this has been your modi operandi EXACTLY. You have been cornered on numerous occasions. Remember Stephen, your confusion in a number of Hebrew words. Shall we go on. You have admitted you lack of knowledge regarding Judaism. You admit you weren’t instructed in the ways, and didn’t grow up in a frum environment. What you HAVE done and many here have brought it up, is the fact you quickly turn to some other subject instead of confronting questions. As I said before, and I’ll mention again, You are Afraid of being found out. You have yet to disclose where you Hebrew knowledge comes from. I still maintain you simply consult a dictionary since it shows you haven’t the grasp of the grammar. That’s why your word for word translation. Grammar determines WHICH definition TO USE. Realize This. You are not the First person I have seen use this method.
What is really disturbing is your appropriating the name Eliyah, as if you speak for the prophet, in his name. You are no comparison to such a great man. You wouldn’t even come close to filling his shoes, nor even his socks. You say, “Order of Eliyah”, most likely “Order of Me”. Your words here are more an entertainment factor than anything else.
Why are you acknowledging this Yahshuo. Your own PROOF from Isaiah 53 and the bible codes says Yeshua. Clearly you are following the wrong messiah.
Yisroel incriminating questions will never be answered by someone hiding something.
You are a clever guy used to deform reality to deceive. When someone exposes you, you divert the matter in order to escape yourself.
Now I will let the wise one accuse you:
Proverbs 18 v13:
“A reply of a word prior to hearing
This is stupidity than shame.”
Your fear of being “found out” is getting desperate, EL.
Here’s one For YOU. This too from Mishlei 16.
Before destruction comes pride, and before stumbling [comes] a haughty spirit.
It is better to be of humble spirit with the lowly than to divide the spoils with the haughty.
REPENT!! EL, before your destruction is imminent.
As a personal observation, EL, you certainly aren’t the first the come across this way. It has been my experience for many decades now. There are a great many Xtians today that still have a visceral hatred of Torah observant Jews. This is shown to be true in Israel. It is even More pronounced against Rabbis. They acquired this perception from the Xtian text and no-doubt your perceptions originate there also. There are those, increasing in numbers, that have shed this destructive trait, and will take the time to learn from Rabbis.
Eliyahu It is you who have never heard what any of us has said
Todah Rabah for the advice Sharbano!
I have a good one for you from the Chief Rabbi:
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” (NKJV)
Another funny. You must be just seething over this. Be careful, you may burst a blood vessel.
Sharbano I am not the old guy here you are for you are a senior therefore talking to you his a waste of time for old bad tree can not be bent back to normality. Your strange answers reveals also how perverted you are.
Plus your frum things reveals that your not mizrahi but Ashkhenazi and that you might think that your yiddish is the same as Hebrew. The Ashkhenazi branch like I have cited before from imminent Yehudi has been contaminated by the Khazars which are not Semitic.
That explains why you are so anti-Semitic and anti-Messiah!!
Shows how little YOU know. What makes you think I speak Yiddish.
Also, I don’t think you are Jewish at all. You wouldn’t be the first to come and say a belief in your messiah means you are adopted in and therefore Jewish. You sound more and more like one of those.
Since you are a “cult of one” what you say about all us here are hollow words.
You have no respect for your elders, Lion. Is this what Christianity teaches?
There is a reason why wisdom is associated with old age and foolishness with young. Respect rather than denigrate one who has more years than you.
Shame on you, monsieur.
You started out your post by mixing apples and oranges; that being forgiveness of sins in this life on the one hand and gaining life in the age to come on the other hand.
It’s one of your usual distraction maneuvers.
I’m not talking about Judaism’s position on the former topic.
I’m talking about the latter which originated as a response to Dina’s baseless claim that Judaism is not restrictive and that Christianity is restrictive as compared to Judaism with respect to gaining life in the age to come.
Compared to Judaism, Christianity speaks and has spoken with one mind. The NT is very clear regarding the standard. The issues you raised (such as the Trinity) that have impacted the position on the understanding of the standard in the NT has been a minor divergence in opinion among a minority of Christians in the overall historical agreement regarding the standard for gaining life in the age to come as found in the NT.
Judaism on the other hand has been all over the map. One is hard pressed to find any Scriptural standard in the Hebrew Scriptures. So it is understandable that although much has been written about it outside of Scripture, little has been consistently agreed upon over the centuries.
As expected you dodged the example of death bed confessions including the hypothetical of Hitler I gave you. Dina says no, and you say… he would die? Spoken as a good politician; answer the question which was not asked in hopes of moving off topic.
As you know I’m not talking about the ramifications in this life, I’m talking about the ramifications of a death bed confession’s impact on gaining life in the age to come. Christianity say yes, Dina says no and you say?
David, Dina did not say “no” to a deathbed repentance, or did you not read what I wrote?
I see little point in a discussion where I say, “This is traditional Jewish belief” and you say “No, it’s not” and then you think you win the argument because if Jewish belief is what I claim then that undercuts your position.
But I will try anyway. Why? Because I’m feeling magnanimous today.
You say that your scripture is clear about the afterlife. All who believe in Jesus will earn it, and that’s all that’s needed. All who don’t believe in Jesus won’t earn it, but that’s their choice. Very clear.
Christian scripture is authoritative for Christians, but all that clarity is worthless if it isn’t true. We have shown why CS is not credible, but I will briefly list the reasons again:
1. It contradicts the Torah. Since the Torah is the word of God, and since God does not err, then anything that contradicts His word is false. (By the way, you falsely claimed that Jews do not believe in the inerrancy of Hebrew Scripture but we believe it is full of errors, another statement that you have yet to retract. As usual, I’m not holding my breath. I have yet to meet the Christian who will admit he made a mistake in a debate on this blog. But if you do, I will be happy to apologize). The examples are manifold, but I will cite just one which pertains to our discussion. The Hebrew Bible teaches that righteous behavior/obedience/repentance will be rewarded and wicked behavior/disobedience/lack of repentance will be punished, while CS teaches in contradiction that belief/unbelief in Jesus will be rewarded/punished and that without belief in Jesus your good behavior counts for nothing.
2. The historical record contradicts CS. For example, the historical record paints a picture of the Pharisees that bears no resemblance to the ugly caricature of CS. We know that the Pontius Pilate of history–corrupt (misappropriated Temple treasury funds), murderous (massacred large numbers of Jews with little to no provocation), and cruel–who was recalled to Rome after one massacre too many does not resemble the righteous Pilate of CS. The census taking in Luke, which would have been practically impossible, does not resemble the Roman method of census taking, of which the Romans left records.
3. CS misquotes, mistranslates, quotes out of context, and outright fabricates quotations from the Hebrew Bible. One hardly knows where to begin, but a famous example is “the virgin shall conceive” one, a verse that contains many mistranslations, especially the fact that the word “virgin” appears nowhere in Isaiah 7:14.
The Talmud, which is authoritative for Jews, is very clear on the afterlife for non-Jews and even for pagans (i.e., idol worshipers). What individual Jews believed here and there, even rabbis, is not relevant to our discussion, since all religious Jews accept the Talmud as authoritative. Therefore, the Talmud is relevant to what Jews believe.
Contrary to what you claim, Jews do not teach that anyone who doesn’t believe in God is unrighteous and will therefore lose his share in the world to come (actively and knowingly rebelling against God is another matter, and Christians also do not believe such a person is going to heaven because such a person doesn’t believe in Jesus either).
For example: “The righteous of all nations will have a share in the world of eternal bliss” (Tosefta Sanhedrin, XIII:2).
“No one can become a Kohen or Levite unless he is so born. But if anyone wishes to become a holy and religious man, he can do so even though he is a pagan. Kindness, holiness, and piety are not hereditary and are not the possession of an exclusive race or nation. Justice and piety are acquired through one’s own deeds” (Numbers Rabba, 8).
“Whether Israelite or heathen, if he only executes a righteous deed, God will recompense him for it” (Tanna Devai Eliyahu, Section 13).
I thought it was an odd argument for you to make, considering the fact that Christians don’t believe that people who don’t believe in God will go to heaven. Christians don’t think you can accept Jesus and not believe in God.
According to your belief, about 30% of the world population is saved and the rest is eternally damned. According to Jewish belief, the number is closer to 100%–most people are likely going to heaven. The numbers just don’t support your contention no matter how you slice it.
However, that is for God to decide, and the subject of who gets to heaven has little bearing on how I live my life. My job is to live my life according to God’s will as He laid it our for us in His Torah, in which He did not see fit to reveal all the secrets of the world to come.
In the end, you did not address my arguments at all. You did not address the following:
1. The actual numbers contradict your position that Christianity is inclusionary.
2. The idea of reward and punishment is taught in the Hebrew Bible.
3. You argued that anyone who chooses to believe in Jesus is saved; I argued that anyone who chooses righteousness can get to heaven. You did not address the fact that this is the same standard just with a different criterion.
4. You argued that anyone who is wicked is left out in the cold; you did not address my response that anyone who does not believe in Jesus is left out in the cold–and there are many more who do not believe in Jesus than there are wicked people.
5. I answered you on death bed repentance–Judaism absolutely believes in such a thing. The minute you express remorse and leave your evil ways you are forgiven. But you still repeated to Rabbi B. that I said no to death bed repentance.
6. You are not bothered by the fact that Hitler’s six million victims are eternally damned–six million innocent men, women, and children–for the horrific crime of not believing in Jesus.
By the way, I may be wrong, but people as evil as Hitler have progressed through their own choice to such depths of evil that they are no longer capable of feeling remorse. But can such a thing happen? If someone truly faces the horror of committing murder, he would ask for the death penalty. That’s why I’m cynical about people on death row who “repented” and were “born again” and have advocates asking for their sentence to be repealed. If they truly faced the horror of their crime, they would say, “I deserve to die for what I did.”
So if Hitler were to face the enormity of his crimes, that would totally break him. And maybe that would be a good punishment. Not being God, it’s not for me to decide what should happen to him. By the way, I do not think this because Hitler’s primary victims were my people. I think exactly the same of other mass murderer dictators like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, etc.
Why are you so cavalier about the question of Hitler–do you not appreciate the sanctity of human life?
O no Yisroel! Don’t lie again for each post that go through I read and respond according to my busy schedule and all that I wrote more than 200 hundred pages are responses to some intelligent comments from Con, Jim and sometimes Dina and rarely from Sharbano though sometimes he can be clever and interesting.
In you case being the leader of this place you demonstrated how childish and ignorant you are always accusing your adversaries in character assassination instead of responding to the issues.
Also if you were a man of integrity and a real rabbi you will patiently instruct to show the flaw of any position contradicting the teaching of our Holy Tradition but instead you choose to go the path of the talmud in lies and deceits proving that the Torah and true Judaism is not what you strive for but your own ego and your own idol: yourself.
I could condemn you but after almost 2000 years of animosity between us we must try to bridge the misconceptions, the misunderstanding, the mockeries and do real repentance to do the will of YHWH
Manasseh shall devour Ephraim, and Ephraim Manasseh; Together they shall be against Judah. For all this His anger is not turned away, But His hand is stretched out still.
Also the envy of Ephraim shall depart, And the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, And Judah shall not harass Ephraim.
“As for you, son of man, take a stick for yourself and write on it: ‘For Judah and for the children of Israel, his companions.’ Then take another stick and write on it, ‘For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel, his companions.’
say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Surely I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel, his companions; and I will join them with it, with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they will be one in My hand.”’
The pride of Israel testifies to his face; Therefore Israel and Ephraim stumble in their iniquity; Judah also stumbles with them.
Therefore I will be to Ephraim like a moth, And to the house of Judah like rottenness.
“When Ephraim saw his sickness, And Judah saw his wound, Then Ephraim went to Assyria And sent to King Jareb; Yet he cannot cure you, Nor heal you of your wound.
For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, And like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear them and go away; I will take them away, and no one shall rescue.
[ Impenitence of Israel and Judah ] “O Ephraim, what shall I do to you? O Judah, what shall I do to you? For your faithfulness is like a morning cloud, And like the early dew it goes away.
“I could condemn you but after almost 2000 years of animosity between us we must try to bridge the misconceptions, the misunderstanding, the mockeries and do real repentance to do the will of YHWH”
I think that bridge has collapsed under its own weight of haughtiness.
I think maybe he’s upset because HE quoted Mishlei and I quoted it right back.
Sharbano I am the only one here to my knowledge that I stated the name of my two grandmothers. Check my post! I stated my two grandmothers from Jewishness comes from the mother. If my two grandmothers are Jewish the HAYAT family therefore according to Halakhah I am Yehudi (Jewish)
I am a Mizrahi Jew who know better Hebrew than you Ashkhenazi usurpers. For if you want to play that game I will certainly win. You criticize Yahushuo with you little german mind when the minds that produce Scriptures through the Ruah holy where Semitic and real Yehudi not your mixed kind…
Don’t lecture me on my Jewishness nor my family.
Also my father is Maronite a real Christian from the lost Tribes those who fight with Israel and Ariel Sharon. What did you do for Israel? Nada you just criticize her population and judge them but they know that you are a mixed bag…
Also I am not from a sect like you but from glorious Orthodoxy. Here is the power of Orthodoxy you ignorant old man:
When one states One lie, the other statements are also suspect.
Since you state here you know Hebrew, which you have proved otherwise, then any statement about being Jewish is also suspect.
Your tone shows more testiness. Undoubtedly you are highly frustrated since you cannot belittle me with your words. I find them to be quite humorous. Only one who is aggravated has such a response.
As a side note; I probably have Forgot more than you will ever know.
“I see little point in a discussion where I say, “This is traditional Jewish belief” and you say “No, it’s not” and then you think you win the argument because if Jewish belief is what I claim then that undercuts your position.”
“The Talmud, which is authoritative for Jews, is very clear on the afterlife for non-Jews and even for pagans (i.e., idol worshipers). What individual Jews believed here and there, even rabbis, is not relevant to our discussion, since all religious Jews accept the Talmud as authoritative. Therefore, the Talmud is relevant to what Jews believe.”
You are cherry picking your Talmud to spin your false argument that Judaism has always believed one thing or the other. Currently you are stating that Judaism believes and has always believed that the righteous (Jews and non-Jews who believe in God and live a just life) are the ones who gain life in the age to come. As noted below, the question of the standard of who attains life in the age to come has been, as I’ve stated all along, all over the map within Judaism. There have been times as you can see that it was believed that only Jews were raised from death. At other times and by others it was believed that only the righteous were raised from death.
Read the following excerpts from:
“As to the question, Who will be raised from death?
the answers given vary greatly in rabbinical literature.
According to R. Simai (Sifre, Deut. 306) and R. Ḥiyya bar Abba (Gen. R. xiii. 4; comp. Lev. R. xiii. 3),
“resurrection awaits only the Israelites;” according to R. Abbahu,
“only the just”
(Ta’an. 7a); some mention
“especially the martyrs” (Yalḳ. ii. 431, after Tanḥuma). R. Abbahu and R. Eleazar
“confine resurrection to those that die in the Holy Land”
; others extend it to such as die outside of Palestine (Ket. 111a). According to R. Jonathan (Pirḳe R. El. xxxiv.), the resurrection will be universal, but after judgment the wicked will die a second death and forever, whereas the just will be granted life everlasting (comp. Yalḳ. ii. 428, 499).
As in the course of time the national hope with its national resurrection and final day of judgment no longer satisfied the intellect and human sentiment, the resurrection assumed a more universal and cosmic character. It was declared to be solely the act of God, who alone possesses the key that will unlock the tombs (Ber. 15b). “As all men are born and die, so will they rise again,” says Eleazar ha-Ḳappar (Abot iv. 22). It was believed that resurrection would occur at the close of the Messianic era (Enoch, xcviii. 10, ciii. 8, civ. 5).
Ḥasdai Crescas, on the other hand, declared it to be a specific doctrine of Judaism, but not one of the fundamental teachings, which view is taken also by Joseph Albo in his “‘Iḳḳarim” (i., iv. 35-41, xxiii.). The chief difficulty, as pointed out by the latter author, is to find out what the resurrection belief actually implied or comprised, since the ancient rabbis themselves differed as to whether resurrection was to be universal,
“or the privilege of the Jewish people only, or of the righteous only.”
Maimonides and Albo in their commentary on Sanh. x. 1, Ḳimḥi in his commentary on Ps. i. 5, Isaac Aboab in his “Menorat ha-Ma’or” (iii. 4, 1), and Baḥya ben Asher in his commentary on Gen. xxiii. extend resurrection to the righteous only. On the other hand, Isaac Abravanel in his “Ma’yene Yeshu’ah” (ii. 9) concedes it to all Israel; Manasseh ben Israel, in his “Nishmat Ḥayyim” (i. 2, 8), and others, to all men. Maimonides, however (see his commentary, l.c., and “Yad,” Teshubah, viii.), took the resurrection figuratively, and substituted for it immortality of the soul, as he stated at length in his “Ma’amar Teḥiyyat ha-Metim”; Judah ha-Levi also, in his “Cuzari,” took resurrection figuratively (i. 115, iii. 20-21).”
RABBI LOUIS JACOBS WRITES:
“There is no systematic treatment in the Rabbinic literature of the doctrine of the resurrection, any more than there is of any other theological topic. The ancient Rabbis were organic rather than systematic thinkers.
Among many contemporary Jewish theologians there is a marked tendency to leave the whole question of eschatology without discussion, either because they do not believe in the Hereafter at all or because they believe that the finite mind of man is incapable of piercing the veil and it is best to leave the subject severely alone”
And from the following:
“What happens after we die?
Judaism is famously ambiguous about this matter. The immortality of the soul, the World to Come, and the resurrection of the dead all feature prominently in Jewish tradition, but the logistics of what these things are and how they relate to each other has always been ambiguous.
Jewish conceptions of heaven and hell–Gan Eden and Gehinnom–are associated with the belief in immortality and/or the World to Come, and were also developed independent of these concepts.
Most Jewish ideas about the afterlife developed in post-biblical times.
The Bible itself has very few references to life after death. Sheol, the bowels of the earth, is portrayed as the place of the dead, but in most instances Sheol seems to be more a metaphor for oblivion than an actual place where the dead “live” and retain consciousness.
The notion of resurrection appears in two late biblical sources, Daniel 12 and Isaiah 25-26.
Though some Jewish scholars have tried to clarify these ideas, it would be impossible to reconcile all the Jewish texts and sources that discuss the afterlife.”
You wrote concerning the NT position with regards to gaining life in the age to come:
“It contradicts the Torah.”
Contrary to the Jewish lack of consensus in the literature through the centuries and the ambiguity of the Hebrew Scriptures with regard to the standard of gaining eternal life as noted above (of which you are in denial) is the Christian bible which lays out clearly who and under what standard we gain life in the age to come. Secondly your argument that it contradicts Torah is laughable since even you can see that the Torah barely speaks of it.
Let’s take a look at what the NT says on the issue.
As you know there are many verses in the NT, some of which I’ve already provided for you (which you’ve ignored), but I’ll give the example of just one for now. Romans 10:9 provides a very uncomplicated, easy to understand standard of what is required to attain life in the age to come.
“9 because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”
Common sense should tell you at this point therefore that with regards to your numbers game, Christianity is much more inclusive than Judaism which at times has restricted eternal life to Jews only or only the righteous (those who believe in God and live a just life).
“Contrary to what you claim, Jews do not teach that anyone who doesn’t believe in God is unrighteous and will therefore lose his share in the world to come…”
Excerpts from the Jewishencyclopeia.com
“The righteous man is godlike (see Godliness); that is, he is desirous of reflecting the attributes of God (Soṭah 14a; Pesiḳ. 57a). The state of sin is not inherited. Men might live in perfect righteousness without “tasting sin” (Eccl. R. i. 8; Shab. 55b). Children are born sinless (Eccl. R. iii. 2; Lev. R. vii.). Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Yalḳ. i. 36, 106), and Elijah (Lev. R. xxvii.), among others, are mentioned as having gone through life without yielding to the yeẓer ha-ra’.
After death men are judged either as “ẓaddiḳim” or as “resha’im.” The ungodly are not buried with the righteous (Sanh. 47a).
The “ẓaddiḳ gamur” is he who, like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Samuel, fulfils the whole Torah from alef to taw (Shab. 55a; comp. Alpha and Omega). Of this order were Michael, Azariah, and Hananiah (Ta’an. 18b). It is not necessarily to be assumed that such truly righteous ones were altogether without blame. They may have committed minor transgressions (“‘aberot ḳallot”; Sifre 133a). These are written in the Book of Life on Rosh ha-Shanah (R. H. 16b). They behold the Shekinah in a clear mirror (Suk. 45b). They do not change, while the ordinary ẓaddiḳim are exposed to lapses.
The utterly unrighteous, or the “heavily” unrighteous (“rasha’ ḥamur”), are distinct from the “slightly” unrighteous (“rasha’ ḳal”; Sanh. 47a). The former receive recompense at once for whatever slight good they may do, but are destined to everlasting perdition. Esau is an example (Gen. R. lxxxii.), as are Balaam (Tan., Balaḳ, 10), those symbolized by the bad figs in Jeremiah’s basket (Jer. xxiv.; ‘Er. 21b), and others. Yet even a rasha’ gamur may repent and appear before his death as a ẓaddiḳ gamur (Ezek. xxxiii. 12; Num. R. x.; Ex. R. xv.).
Man is judged according to the dominant character of his intentions and deeds (Ḳid. 40b). If the majority of them are righteous he is accounted a ẓaddiḳ; but if they are otherwise, or if even a few partake of the nature of gross crimes and immoralities, he is adjudged a rasha’ (see Sifre 51b).
The coming of the righteous into the world is a boon to it; their departure therefrom a loss (Sanh. 113a). The ungodly are sentenced to stay in Gehenna twelve months; then they are released at the intercession of the righteous (Yalḳ. Shim’oni, to Mal. 593). In Gan ‘Eden, God will dance withthe righteous (Ta’an. 31a); there they will sing God’s praise (Ex. R. vii.). Resurrection is reserved for the righteous alone (Gen. R. xiii.; Ta’an. 7a). In “the world to be” the righteous sit with crowns on their heads and delight in the radiancy of the Shekinah (Ber. 17a). They partake of Leviathan (Pesiḳ. 188b; B. B. 74b). Their crowns are those that were worn at Sinai (Sanh. 111b; Shab. 88a). The of Ps. xvi. 11 is read (“seven”), and is taken to refer to the seven classes of righteous that enjoy God’s glory (Sifre 67a).
The “righteous” are often identified with Israel, and the “ungodly” with the heathen, non-Israelites (Tan., Bemidbar, 19; Lev. R. xiii. 1). But this should not be taken as a general rule. The non-Israelites of whom the Rabbis had knowledge were Romans, whose cruelty and profligacy made “non-Israelite” and “ungodly” exchangeable terms. Still, righteous ones are found among “the nations” (e.g., Noah, Jethro; see Proselyte), and these righteous will have a share in the kingdom to come (Tos. Sanh. xiii.).
You’re Really going to come here and QUOTE Talmud. The only reason YOU think there is variance because you haven’t LEARNED Talmud. It’s not a “book” like your Xtian text to peruse through. That, by itself, is evidentiary of your misappropriation of the teachings.
I’m willing to concede that the Talmud has differing opinions on the afterlife. It was my error to assume that agreement was unanimous on this point. I say this because the truth is more important to me than winning an argument or scoring points. In that spirit, I would like to remind you that you have yet to substantiate or retract the following statements that you made:
1. Jews do not believe in the inerrancy of the Hebrew scriptures but rather believe that it is full of errors.
2. Following in their tradition of genocide, the Jews continue to practice genocide against the Palestinians, descendants of the original Canaanites, who just want to be left in peace.
3. The Jews persecuted the early Christians, killing as many as 2,000 (you made this statement about a year ago and refused to retract even after Yehuda proved there was no evidence for it).
4. The Jews have a tradition of killing their prophets. To support this statement, you provided the only two references in the entire Hebrew Bible: one, the killing of minor prophet by one individual Jew; and two, an unspecified incident of prophet killing (the only Biblical evidence to support that incident would be the killing of the prophets ordered by the wicked queen Jezebel). As I said, this does not even begin to justify the baseless charge of prophet killing.
Let us see if you have the courage and humility to admit your error and apologize for your libels of the Jewish people.
As for the Jewish view of the afterlife, the ambiguity concerning the afterlife is actually irrelevant, because here is one thing all Jews agree upon, and this belief has never wavered: God is fair. God set up a fair and just and merciful system of reward and punishment, so what happens to someone after he dies only God knows—but one thing is for sure: God will take into account our human frailties (Psalm 103:14) and He’s going to be fair.
On the other hand, Christians can’t even agree on whether God is fair or not. They do not agree on whether someone attains eternal life or gets rewarded for their good deeds if they never heard of Jesus or if they heard of him but were not convinced of his claims. You yourself cannot bring yourself to say that the six million victims of Hitler are not eternally damned. Living among Christians, it’s next to impossible they would not have heard of Jesus, so is it fair for God to forever damn them?
Christians can’t agree on the answer to that question.
Christians don’t even agree on whether belief in the trinity is necessary for salvation.
But why is the question of eternal life so important to you? Why is it more important than knowing what God wants from us in this world? God set up a system of reward and punishment and it’s His job to worry about who gets what. Our job is to follow His commandments.
Ultimately, you did not address my core arguments, so I am reposting them for your convenience:
1. The actual numbers contradict your position that Christianity is inclusionary. (I still include this argument because of the universal Jewish belief that God is fair.)
2. The idea of reward and punishment for righteousness and wickedness, respectively, is taught in the Hebrew Bible. Your argument is therefore with God and not with me.
3. You argued that anyone who chooses to believe in Jesus is saved; I argued that anyone who chooses righteousness can get to heaven. You did not address the fact that this is the same standard just with a different criterion.
4. You argued that anyone who is wicked is left out in the cold; you did not address my response that anyone who does not believe in Jesus is left out in the cold–and there are many more who do not believe in Jesus than there are wicked people.
5. I answered you on death bed repentance–Judaism absolutely believes in such a thing. The minute you express remorse and leave your evil ways you are forgiven. But you still repeated to Rabbi B. that I said no to death bed repentance.
6. You are not bothered by the fact that Hitler’s six million victims are eternally damned–six million innocent men, women, and children–for the horrific crime of not believing in Jesus.
Also, David, another argument you failed to address is that the clarity of the “NT” on any issue is irrelevant if the “NT” is false; I gave several reasons why that document is not credible.
You misrepresented my argument on the contradiction between the Torah and your scripture to say that your scripture contradicts the Torah on the afterlife. I said the contradiction lies in the teaching on reward and punishment. The Torah teaches that reward and punishment is for righteous and wicked deeds, respectively, while your scripture teaches that reward and punishment is for belief and unbelief in Jesus, respectively, and your righteous deeds count for nothing without this belief. That is the contradiction I referred to.
I was responding to Dina’s resorting to the Talmud. The fact that she has to cite the Talmud rather than Scripture proves my point that there is little guidance in the Hebrew Scriptures as to the standard regarding gaining life in the age to come.
As we all know the Talmud does not carry the same weight as scripture and furthermore it does not speak in one voice but rather is a mixture of opinions as is the case here with the standard for gaining life in the age to come.
Dina has mistakenly claimed that Christianity is far more restricted than is Judaism as to the standard of who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come.
Since she has been unable to prove her case with Scripture she has resorted to the Talmud.
This was my point. You really don’t know what you are talking about. About the only way I could explain it is, You don’t “read” Talmud you have to decrypt it. I really can’t explain it any better than that. It’s the reason SO many have taken the Talmud and say it’s perverted or what have you. They DO NOT know HOW to study it.
David wrote: “Dina has mistakenly claimed that Christianity is far more restricted than is Judaism as to the standard of who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come.
Since she has been unable to prove her case with Scripture she has resorted to the Talmud.”
Dina paraphrases: “David has mistakenly claimed that Christianity is far more inclusive than is Judaism as to the standard of who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come. Since he has been unable to prove his case with Scripture he has resorted to the false text of what he calls the NT.”
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Dina has resorted to the Talmud because she finds that the Hebrew Scriptures don’t state what she wants them to state. And as I stated before, the Talmud doesn’t speak with one voice and wasn’t meant to. Therefore you can often find support in the Talmud for either side of an issue which I just demonstrated.
Dina falsely claims for example that those who don’t believe/trust in God can be righteous and therefore under her erroneous understanding from who knows what including supposedly that of the Talmud and contrary to Hebrew Scriptures, gain life in the age to come.
But Hebrew Scriptures clearly tell us that the righteous individuals and righteous nation serves God, trusts God and is faithful to God.
We are taught from Hebrew Scriptures that we LEARN righteousness from God’s just judgments.
In short, Hebrew Scriptures does not speak of the Godless as righteous as does Dina. It speaks of them as: God’s people, those who keep faith, those that God blesses, those whom God is with, those who are glad in the YHWH, those who God is attentive to, those who are exalted before the YHWH, and those who give thanks to the YHWH, etc., etc.
God loves the righteous.
Malichi 3:16 – 4:5
Isaiah 26:2 – 3
Daniel 12:1, 13
It’s just her twisted non biblical way of portraying Judaism as something it’s not to support one of her many anti-Christianism rants in her fantasy land world about how horrible everything is regarding Christianity and how wonderful everything is regarding Judaism.
It’s anti-Christianism, plane and simple, no different really than anti-Semitism. It’s ignorance at best.
David, I’m feeling overwhelmed by your outpouring of Christian love. I’m busy for the next little while, but I will get back to you on this when I have chance. I ask for your patience and to stay tuned.
I wish you well,
The Problem Is you really don’t know anything about Judaism and that’s why you say the Talmud doesn’t speak with one voice. About the only thing Xtians know about Judaism is what they see in the Xtian text, and that is practically nothing. I cannot count the times when Xtians, including ministers, will say “THIS” is what the Jews believe and why its wrong. The problem Is they are way off base.
What you say of Talmud is the same with Xtian interpretation of Tanach. They want it to say what they want. You assume that all nations serve the same role as Israel. Furthermore, you have forgotten what Tanach IS. It is a book About Jews, By Jews and For Jews. THIS is the context of most everything there. Only when nations interact with Israel are they even mentioned. You should read Devarim much more closely.
Regarding those scriptures you cited; it reminds of the countless times I heard Xtian ministers speak concerning the prophets, etc.; and when Israel was mentioned, and if it was essentially a positive tone, they would say THIS applies to the “Church” because of their faith. I couldn’t help but laugh because it DID apply to Israel, THE JEWS, and Not the nations, the church, or anyone else. But they couldn’t accept that. I suspect they just could NOT bear such goodness being bestowed upon Israel.
So, these verses you cite are not about Gentiles.
David, I must point out the irony of your quoting Scripture to prove that God rewards the righteous and godly and punishes the wicked and ungodly when you yourself believe that God punishes even the righteous and godly if they don’t believe in Jesus. Your belief contradicts the Scripture you are citing.
I also would like to address your personal rant against me: “It’s just her twisted non biblical way of portraying Judaism as something it’s not to support one of her many anti-Christianism rants in her fantasy land world about how horrible everything is regarding Christianity and how wonderful everything is regarding Judaism.”
Forgive me for psychoanalyzing you (a process I generally think is quite silly), but I believe that you are projecting your own feelings. Because you believe everything is horrible about Judaism and wonderful about Christianity, you think I believe the same in reverse. I say this with confidence because I have yet to hear you say one kind word about Jews and Judaism and one word of criticism against Christians and Christianity.
Whereas: if you peruse all of my comments since I joined this blog you will see that I have said things like the following:
1. I have said on this blog in the past that I am grateful for Christian evangelical support for Jews and Israel and that it is a positive development in Christian-Jewish relations. I do not by any means believe that all Christians are anti-Semites (although I believe that you most definitely are one). I believe that Christianity is a mixed bag where anti-Semitism is concerned, and it’s more of a problem in Europe than in the United States (following historical patterns).
2. I have said that throughout Christianity’s dark past of persecutions, there were Christians lights in the darkness who came to the aid of Jews, often at great personal risk and even sacrificing their lives; they are truly the righteous among the nations.
3. One of the good outcomes of Christianity, I have said, is the spread of some form of ethical monotheism throughout the Western world. I see this as a good thing and part of God’s plan.
4. I agree with whatever Christian teachings line up with Jewish teachings, such as love your neighbor.
5. I have admitted on this blog that we are in exile because of our own sins, so I obviously do not think the Jewish people are perfect. If we all properly obeyed God’s commandments, the Messiah would have already come.
You have engaged in projection, plane and simple–I mean, plain and simple.
Oh, yes, I know, “plain and simple.” It’s my inside joke, sorry.
Hey, we all make typos, David. There is no shame in admitting error.
You are in denial if you are saying that the Talmud speaks with one voice.
Cite your reference that backs up your ridiculous claim. I’ve already cited mine.
Furthermore, the Talmud as I noted before does not carry the same weight as Scripture. I wasn’t using the Talmud to support my case, I was demonstrating the point that one can find opposing views within the Talmud and that she was cherry picking.
Furthermore the Talmud does not carry the same weight as Scripture.
Are you in denial on that point as well?
And I never said anything about Gentiles being righteous or not being righteous in the context of gaining life in the age to come. I was pointing out the evolution of Judaism’s thoughts and beliefs over the centuries (of which Dina is in denial claiming there has been no change) regarding the standard of who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come.
Now, regarding the failure of the wicked, ungodly, or unrighteous to gain life in the age to come as noted in Hebrew Scripture which you seem to have a problem with, in addition to some of my previous citations, there is also Psalm 1; Note verse 5.
1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
1:2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
1:3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
1:4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
1:5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
1:6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Let me ask you This. Have you ever sat in Yeshiva, or learned under a Rabbi. Do you Know and understand the ‘Construct’ of the Talmud. You still have the impression that it is simply a set of books to be perused. It is Not. It is So complex that not everyone can master the whole of it. It’s not unheard of for someone to take decades to reach a level to be a Poskim.
And YES, the Talmud DOES carry the same weight as Torah. It IS Torah.
What I have read in Dina’s arguments it was in reference to the non-Jews. She has spoken regarding the Rghteous of the nations.
I will render the translation of that Tehillim
Praiseworthy is the man who walked not in the counsel of the wicked, and stood not in the path of the sinful, and sat not in the session of scorners. But his desire is in the Torah of Hashem, and in His Torah he meditates day and night. He shall be like a tree deeply rooted alongside brooks of water, that yields its fruit in its season, and whose leaf never withers, and everything that he does will succeed. Not so the wicked, rather they are like the chaff that the wind drives away. Therefore the wicked shall not be vindicated in judgment, nor the sinful in the assembly of the righteous – for Hashem attends the way of the righteous, while the way of the wicked will perish.
First of all this is related to Torah that says, do not follow the majority to do evil. If one reads Tehillim 119 you will find how much Torah is loved by David. It is more or less what the point her is.
This actually relates to what Dina has been saying over and over again about the Righteous being preserved throughout the ages. Those who do not adhere to Tradition are like chaff that blows in the wind and are no more. You will not find ancestors and their descendants of those who abandoned Torah.
Therefore, this is about Jews and their obedience to Torah. There is nothing here related to Olam HaBa.
I completely agree with last your paragraph, about God preserving Jews. That is biblical and historic. Im not sure what you mean though about the ones surviving, surviving what exactly?
I take it you mean, there teachings survived?
Again that might be true, teachings surviving, but that doesnt prove or teach that the stance of Orthodox is correct due to its longevity . Infact it actually shows my point.
The rejection of Jesus as your Messiah proves that, that was the point of my text about devine blindness. Biblically only a small number of Jews in any one moment in history have been the believing remnant.
You are confusing the facts of Jews generally being preserved into the next generation and Jews who believe in Christ.
You forget that it was The God of Israel who stated that you are stiff necked and rebellious. Moses made it very clear that Israel have already rebelled and walked contrary to God before they had even done so.
God also warned Israel of the consequences if they failed. If you insist on blaming Jesus and His church for your misery, I honestly would look again at your Texts, and look a little closer to home.
Jesus was just repeating those facts. To that generation who did not listen, not to those who believed. He was very specific not general.
Also I also believe and agree that you should never lose your Jewish identity. The world might have tried to do such. I know plenty of Jewish believers who say there lives as Jews are now complete etc.
The point of the Law is this. Jesus fulfilled the Law which applied to Him. I have said this before. The Law of marriage cannot apply to one if one is single. The Law only comes into affect when one marries. The Law never states One has to be married in order to fulfill the Law. Nor does it say one has to be a farmer. If your logic was ever tried to be practically real, it would mean that a woman would have to become a man and visa versa!
Paul, to clarify:
The only group of Jews to physically survive the destruction of the Second Temple and the ensuing exile from the Land and to pass on their Jewish identity to the next generations were the Pharisees (also known as rabbinic Jews and Orthodox Jews).
Throughout history, factions arose and splintered off, but eventually disappeared, either through assimilation or being reabsorbed back into the fold (or both). The original Christian movement, which consisted entirely of Jews, did not survive as a Jewish movement. All Jews today with the small exception of converts are descended from the Pharisees, but we have no identifiably Jewish descendants of any Jews who converted to Christianity from previous generations. This is the fate that awaits all Jews who leave Orthodox Judaism: eventual loss of the Jewish identity of their line.
I know that’s of no concern to you, but if God’s promise to preserve a righteous remnant is in any way meaningful, then it’s worth investigating which small group of Jews manages to survive every onslaught and every persecution into the next generation–survive PHYSICALLY. This is so notable that even Christian writers of Jewish history, as I previously pointed out, have noted that Pharisaic Judaism is the only viable form of Judaism.
Your “reassurance” that Jews who convert can maintain their Jewish identity is an empty promise, because the assimilation rate through intermarriage for Christian Jews is likely higher than the 80% rate for non-Orthodox Jews in America, compared to 3% for Orthodox Jews (Pew Research Poll).
Christians need to ask themselves the hard question of why God has chosen to PHYSICALLY preserve the element among Jews they hate the most: the Pharisees.
Your contention that the persecution we suffered at the hands of Christians because of our rejection of Jesus is astonishing. It’s like the rapist who blames his victim for his. Christians killed our people and they were pleasing God by doing so? And you think that’s going to make Jews want to join Christians who inflicted the most awful tortures and persecutions on our people?
You know, the Muslims have said the same thing, that the persecution the Jews suffered at their hands was because of their rejection of Mohammed. Ironic. It would be funny if the consequences weren’t so tragic for my people.
The Hebrew Bible teaches that the nations of the world persecute the Jewish people because they thought God rejected them (Jeremiah 50:7; Psalms 94:5,7), but that it was actually the wickedness of the nations that caused Israel’s suffering (Jeremiah 2:3; Jeremiah 10:25; Zechariah 1:15; Zephaniah 2:10; Psalms 79:4-7; Psalms 83:1-4; Psalms 94:3-5).
So I advise you to take heed of what the Bible teaches.
As for Jesus fulfilling the law, I never said anyone has to do completely fulfill the law. It’s a Christian contention that Jesus fulfilled the law so completely that no one else has to. It’s a nonsensical position, as I have shown.
You wrote: “You forget that it was The God of Israel who stated that you are stiff necked and rebellious. Moses made it very clear that Israel have already rebelled and walked contrary to God before they had even done so.”
The Bible is a work of internal self-criticism. You, reading it through the distorted lens of CS which views the Jewish people as inherently evil and spiritually blind, see it as an eternal condemnation of the Jewish people. And that is too bad.
My last point is to address your accusation of “divine blindness,” a frequent rejoinder of yours to our arguments. If we suffer from “divine blindness,” then how is it our fault that we reject Jesus, and what kind of God would punish a whole nation whom He afflicted with spiritual blindness in the first place? How is this just and merciful?
Jews do not believe anyone is supernaturally blind. God gives free will to all mankind, and we have the ability to choose our own spiritual destiny, to become cleansed of sin through our own actions. See Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, and Ezekiel 18 and 33 (I presented these to you a while ago and you never responded).
I meant to write, “It’s like the rapist who blames his victim for his crime.” Sorry for the other typos. Can’t edit once it’s posted.
Dont worry about typos, im the worst here.
Thanks for making it clearer on Judaism and the future generations etc. Even though, my views dont sit equally with yours.
What im trying to say is, either one generation passes onto into the next through natural physical means, obviously, but in that natural process, it makes no difference if some remain in there orthodox views. You will have, orthodox, athiest, traditional, beievers in Christ, agnostic, some who dont care, and anything else you can think of. Jews remain Jews by there blood decent. What they believe in doesnt change there ethnicity.
The preservation of The Jewish people is paramount in Gods sovereign will. He declared His redemption of mankind through the Jewish line. Thats why Gen ch 3 v15, is so important.
The Jewish blood line has been under threat right ftom the biginning of time. It balances from the Gen 3 v15.
Gods uncoditional covenant does not balance on what man does, it balances on what God has promised and declared. He has promised the survival of the Jewish people, because redemption comes through the Jew, and only the Jew.
I think Dina you do need to re read your statement about Moses and what he said. Its not my distorted view. Im not saying Moses is stating Jews are evil, He is saying you have already rebelled against Gods statutes.
Yes we, you have free will. And its on that, that God is righteously sovereign to judge and deal with sin. And all sin will be judged. Thats why I believe Jesus took that judgement on Himself, to qualify Gods redemptive means for yours and my sin.
The Hebrew Bible teaches that the nations of the world persecute the Jewish people because they thought God rejected them (Jeremiah 50:7; Psalms 94:5,7), but that it was actually the wickedness of the nations that caused Israel’s suffering (Jeremiah 2:3; Jeremiah 10:25; Zechariah 1:15; Zephaniah 2:10; Psalms 79:4-7; Psalms 83:1-4; Psalms 94:3-5).
If you look at these passages, you will see that it was Israels sin that caused there own punishment from God. God allows nations to hurt His people because of there own fault. Its called correction. However, because of Gods promised covenant He will then turn it around, when Israel repents.
God will not allow the apple of His eye to be touched if they dont warrant it. Harsh but true.
Zep ch 3 v13 is pointing to the remnant believing, ( 2nd coming) of course then that states a unbelieving part who will not adhere, will suffer His consequences.
Dina, the true body of Christ, The Church, not the church of wich you speak, but the Church of the NT, cannot and does not hate Jews. The true Church recognise that the Jewish people are vital, pivotal, central to Gods future redemption in the Messianic Kingdom. Without the Jews there is no Kingdom. No Jews, no second coming. It is not logical to destroy the very people who will bring in the Messiah’s kingdom.
Have Jews been brutally murdered, yes, by Jesus plans, no! Satans yes. It is not Gods plan to destroy Jews, it is satans. Are Jews punished, yes, by Gods sovereignty. He clearly states that Israel will receive double for her iniquities.
If you believe in curse for curse and blessing for blessing, then look at it this way.
The God of Israel sends His Son in Human form to walk among His people. He authenticates His Messianic credentials, by teaching the Torah, performing signs and wonders, showing Judaism love proper, however He is despised, rejected and aligned with lord of the flies.
If Israel reject God directly through His Son, then there will be a subsequent consequence. God dealt with Israels sin long before the advent of the church.
To say that Gen 3:15 has any esoteric meaning is so utterly ridiculous it takes a twisted mind to come up with the correlation. All one has to do is read the previous verse to see this. But that is not the Xtian method of interpretation. One has to Ignore literally Everything Before and After. But of course words, in the Xtian context, don’t have inherent meaning, only what that person WANTS it to mean. The serpent is “cursed” among all the other animals. If the suggestion is the S’tan is he then one of the animals. He shall eat dust, does the S’tan eat dust and crawl upon the ground. Apparently when Torah was written they were unable to speak in clear words.
I have brought up previously this whole concept of sin. In Hebrew the sin offering is Chatat. Do you know the meaning of that word. If not, you are falling short and missing the mark. Furthermore it is NOT for intentional sins. It is Only for the unintentional. As previously stated, and as is taught, if a person ate Chelev and was unaware but found out later he would bring the Chatat. If he had done so deliberately he could not bring the offering. Also, the offering that is brought is “Female”. By Xtian thinking the messiah Should be a female.
No one EVER said Hashem would not punish for transgressions. But it DOES say the nations overstepped their bounds. As it says in Isaiah, Assyria oppressed them Without Cause. Certainly Israel did wrong, but the nations were not only merciless but arrogant in doing so. This is WHY each of those nations lost their power of once a great nation, Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greek and eventually Xtian Rome will succumb.
Always when the “people of the church” refuse to accept their own role in the matter do they come and say “Not Those Xtians”, they aren’t the “real church”. I have noticed, more so in the last decade, how Xtianity is being dealt with. Look at the near annihilation of “the church” in the middle east. Is this Not a warning to the adherents of the religion. You apply similar circumstances to Jews then too, should it apply here. To deny it is to deny the events are happening.
Just looking at the last paragraph.
Im not denying anything. Jews have always been persecuted. Right from the denial of passage in the sinai wonderings. Satan has been on the war path against Israel since Gen Ch 3 v15.
The Church has also been persecuted. The 11 disciples were killed in the infancy of the Church.
You are still confusing the true church with the visible church that you see today and through history. You are still applying your logic only.
Its not impossible for satan to take the control of a snake and do his bidding through that snake. I would never under estimate his power. If you look at the text it quit clearly tells you satan is talking through the snake. Whats the alternative? ?? Just a normal snake trying to trick eve, whats the point??
Eve doesn’t know its satan, its just a snake as far as she is concerned. Satans motives are not on show to eve. Not until she is convicted of her wrong doing, after the event.
Im just reading the text as it is written.
Man, woman, Serpant, satan, earth are all cursed. Eating dust is a sign of judgement.
The promise of Gen 3 v15 is a seed, a seed from a woman who will overturn and destroy everything that satan has just done. The language is slightly vield, yes, but in the broader pitcture, looking at the scriptures, you can see the promise of a Man bring tempoary afflicted, but ultimately the other being destroyed by the stamping if its head. Infact eve understood the theology of the passage. She begot Caine, and stated, “A son Jehovah”. Her application was wrong though.
I dont see anything obsurd here. The very passage that talks about sin and the fall of man, has also Gods first prophecy of a means to anul sin.
Shall I look for tinker bell with these invisible Christians Paul? If we can’t examine the behavior of visible Christians and ask them to mend their ways of treating others, whatever shall we do? As far as I’m aware, both Jesus and Paul taught “by their fruits ye shall know them.” Your whole exposition of a belief in a sin nature is a distraction contradicted in Genesis, Ezekiel, and Job. Nowhere in the Hebrew bible does it teach about invisible righteous people.
Yes exactly!! By there fruits you shall know them!!
Thats my point.
Good fruit vs Bad fruit.
Im not talking about invisible as in literally thin air. Im talking about invisible as in not the visible church that you see and perceive as Christ believers.
When Jesus said “I will build my Church” He wasnt talking about the building on the street corner with the white fencing per se. He was talking about a body of believers who are living stones, people, not granite, brick, wooden buildings.
“He was talking about a body of believers who are living stones, people, not granite, brick, wooden buildings.”
Paul, I shouldn’t presume to speak for Con, but I don’t think he meant a church building either. He was also talking about believers, and there were a lot of bad fruit among them. If by their fruit you shall know them, then if you compare the history of Christianity with the history of Judaism, then Judaism wins hands down.
You should re-read the Entire narrative.
Where does it say the man and woman were “Cursed”.
Your image doesn’t make sense, even allegorically. The S’tan will be destroyed by stomping his head. In return the S’tan will bite your heel. Geez. Get real. Xtians have to defend the analogy because it is taught. no matter how absurd. It’s utter nonsense no matter how one looks at it.
Sharbano, Adam and Hawah were not cursed you are right for YHWH is Mercy and He loves Adam and Hawah but they were banished from Eden.
Actually the fault of Hawah and Adam brought us the Messiah to save us from the power of Sin and Death. The Mercy of YHWH by his Messiah reopen the doors of Paradise… By the Righteous we are clothed by the Faith to enter rightfully the dimensions of Life for the Righteous earn us the mean to obtain the true liberty to observe the will of Elohay and thus become sons of Elyon…
Paul, good points Paul, but for some Gen 3;15 is just a simple ‘beware of snakes’ story. Unless it is understood, it won’t bring a clear light into the view. This is the first story where we see ‘evil’ playing game with God’s words, by placing doubt on them. We boy it, we end up in sin.
The ONLY reason you even consider Genesis 3:15 is what is written in the Xtian text. If not there it wouldn’t be under consideration.. The problem IS the method of “proof”. It is said “seed” as one and not “seeds”. This is a statement for the ignorant. I don’t go to the Grass Pad and ask for grass seed(s). THIS is how ridiculous the analogy is. When G-d told Avram he would give the land to his “seed” did he mean only J’sus. This is how stupid the remark IS. THIS is where the doubt comes from, common sense.
Sharbano, I just want to hear your answer what gen 3;15 is about; ‘ beware of snakes’ etc story or not?
What does the text actually say of the serpent. He was more cunning than any Other Beast of the field. Clearly This shows a “relationship” Between the serpent and the other beasts. You would have to assume all the others were equally the S’tan. Otherwise This one wouldn’t be “more cunning” than the others.
Sharbano, “What does the text actually say of the serpent. He was more cunning than any Other Beast of the field. Clearly This shows a “relationship” Between the serpent and the other beasts. You would have to assume all the others were equally the S’tan. Otherwise This one wouldn’t be “more cunning” than the others.”
So I see you confirm it is just a ‘beware of snakes’ message.
It is odd not to see that there was a reason the snake was more cunning than the others. Do you see all snakes more cunning nowadays more than the other creatures? I don’t.
What about the source of the snakes’ ‘wisdom’ ‘ smartness’ that includes knowing God’s word? Where did he learn that what God says? What is the source of his desire to lead a man into rebellion against God???
As an observation, do ALL Xtians read the Bible and overlook the entire narrative. You are SO focused on the Xtian narrative of the “seed”, which is clearly misleading, you habitually ignore the whole. If the text Says “More” cunning, then obviously, the other beasts had Some cunning. Wouldn’t it be understood that something more was going on in Gan Eden than what we are observing today. So does anyone expect snakes today, or any other animals, to be as they were in Gan Eden. None of us have any concept what it was like there. What we Have found out is the snakes of today have the remains of what once were places for legs. So, apparently, at one time, snakes Could walk on the earth. And Certainly Chava didn’t seem at all surprised that she was being spoken to by this serpent, nor surprised of his knowing what G-d spoke to them. The answers that you desire are speculative and anyone can speculate on what was. We only have the words IN the text to base anything upon. And those words don’t support the Xtian interpretation.
Paul, you wrote: “You are still applying your logic only.”
Did you really mean that? What else are we supposed to apply, other than logic?
You wrote: “If you look at the text it quit clearly tells you satan is talking through the snake.”
I do not think you know the meaning of “the text clearly says.” “The text clearly says” means that it literally says it in such a way as to leave no room for dispute. “The text clearly says” would mean that if it meant that Satan was talking through the snake, it would have said “Satan spoke to Eve through the snake.”
“Whats the alternative? ?? Just a normal snake trying to trick eve, whats the point??”
The alternative is the plain story that the Torah recounts, with the obvious lesson that God gives us free will to obey or disobey Him and then rewards or punishes accordingly. This is confirmed shortly thereafter in Genesis 4:7. As Con said, Satan didn’t sneak in here with any surprises; it all went according to God’s plan. Satan has nothing to do with this story.
“Im just reading the text as it is written.” No, you are not, as I’ve just shown you. You’ve imposed an entirely different meaning on the text, one that conforms to your theology.
I always read this story literally. When I learned of the Christian interpretation a few years ago, I was shocked! That’s how NOT obvious it is.
The rest of your comment, that this is a prophecy about Jesus, is not supported by the plain text or by the rest of Hebrew Scripture, as Con has shown you.
As I recall, that entire supposition about Genesis is based upon the word “seed”, as not being many, but “one”. If that writer, may have been Paul, Actually Used this method then he really and truly showed his utter ignorance in Every way.
I think later I’ll go buy some grass (seeds) for my lawn.
Dina, if in book Job there was not mentioning of the conversation between God and satan regarding Job, you wouldn’t even know satan was behind all what happened , either. It would be just evil people, misfortune, sickness, natural disasters, God’s testing. No place for satan involved.
“Dina, if in book Job there was not mentioning of the conversation between God and satan regarding Job, you wouldn’t even know satan was behind all what happened , either. It would be just evil people, misfortune, sickness, natural disasters, God’s testing. No place for satan involved.”
What is your point, Eric? Perhaps that conversation is recorded specially so Jews can rebut the Christian notion of Satan :).
You see, that conversation is indeed very bothersome and inconvenient for Christians in maintaining their concept of Satan, so different from the Biblical one.
inconvenient maybe to you if you can ‘t find the answer.
There wasn’t a question.
Sharbano, “Now, if the sacrifice of this J’sus is supposed to correlate to the temple then How can “his” blood do any good for people with intentional sins.”
No difference what
Hebrew 10;26 explains “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins”
“Apparently, according to Xtianity, we should have a female messiah.”
God said that atonement is in the blood, not female or male blood but in the blood.
The point is NOT after, but Before. The intentional sin wasn’t covered by ANY sacrifice, therefore J’sus doesn’t benefit actually anyone. I daresay Everyone has committed intentional sin at one time or another.
It isn’t that J’sus blood is the MAIN point, but the MAN. The entire text is about J’sus. Furthermore, atonement isn’t by blood alone.
Sharbano, “The intentional sin wasn’t covered by ANY sacrifice, therefore J’sus doesn’t benefit actually anyone. I daresay Everyone has committed intentional sin at one time or another. ”
Everyone that means all people including Jews in the past and now, so non- intentional sacrifices should not benefit them all either, whenever they were offered. That means all was useless.
Read your bible. It is pretty clear the details of the sacrifices. It’s quite easy to understand, even in English. There is no Hebrew needed for that. I doubt it would do any good to post the text since even then it seems difficult.
You didn’t address what I said. I know the details and I showed you in NT regarding what is ‘covered’ by sacrifice what not.
Sharbano, so what is your understanding of the story in Genesis 3? Just an encounter with a smart snake who doubts God’s words and persuades others to doubt them too, and disobey God’s words? And that encounter with talking reptile results in all the curse we read including death followed by guarded way to the tree of life, from which if Adam ate he would live forever, why????
Yes, Sharbano, I have often wondered about that double standard. Wicked Christians are not real Christians, but Jews can never say that wicked Jews are not real Jews. How unfair and dishonest is that?
Interesting Paul! Deuteronomy 9 confirms:
4 After the Lord your God has driven them out before you, do not say to yourself, “The Lord has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness.” No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. 5 It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 6 Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the Lord your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people. (NKJV)
Okay, Paul and Lion, here are two questions, then:
1. Is the nation of Israel more wicked and stiff-necked than the nations of the world? If so, why did God choose her? If not, why the rebuke?
2. Why do you focus your criticism on the Jewish people when your own history is full of wickedness? In terms of crimes against humanity, there is no comparison between the rivers of blood shed by Christians and the complete non-violence of the Jewish people during the same period. Why the double standard?
Sorry for lack of response sometimes. Life and that gets in the way.
Of course the world in the human nature are naturally conceived and born in sin. Either Jew or gentile. No genitive disorder is more apparent in any race. Through history some nations have become more wicked than others, that is obvious. Germany early last century as a case study.
Answering your question. Is Israel more stiffnecked than others? The point to keep in mind is thus, The Lord God hadnt chosen any other nation His attributes, law, statutes etc. God chose Israel to reveal is Name to mankind, through Israel. Gods grace and love was manifested through a nation who had first hand account, the oracles of God etc. There wasnt another nation that God chose. It was Israel. The plan was set, right from the beginning.
Israel wasnt chosen because they were better, Israel was chosen becsuse Gods grace can be revealed through a typical human sin natured nation. Thats why Israel are Gods chosen people. Its not about how good or bad Jews can be, its abouts Gods redemptive grace of salvation for the man who repents and believes in the Lord God of Israel.
Your 2nd question is just your blind view, which you keep repetitious writing.
Some of that grammatically, was written very poor.
Hope you still got the picture?
You and other Christians who debate on this blog focus obsessively on the stiff-necked and rebellious nature of the Jewish people. That is why I asked you if you think the Jews are more stiff-necked and rebellious. I did not ask if you think they are better, I asked if you think they are more wicked. Are they? Are they more wicked than the other nations of the world? Answer that honestly.
And while you’re at it, do you know the Scriptural reason for God choosing Abraham and the Jewish people? Scripture gives a reason. Do you know what that is?
As to my second question, all you can say is that is my blind view? That means you have no argument. You have effectively admitted that you have a double standard when it comes to the Jewish people, hyper-focusing on our imagined historical flaws (who did we hurt in the last 2000 years?) while ignoring your own (lots and lots of bloodshed, persecution, and torture).
If you want to know the truth, study the history of Christianity over the last 2000 years.
A blessing and a curse: Deut 11:26 a blessing for obeying the commandments of the Lord your God, and a curse if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord you God “but turn aside from the way “I” ordain on you “Today” to “follow other gods” whom “you have not known”. What does curse mean? and what does today mean?
Paul, I find you are in a contradiction.
On the one hand, you say that it is not God’s plan to destroy the Jews; it is Satan’s. Therefore, the killings of Jews that have amounted to the millions over the centuries emanate from Satan. On the other hand, you say that God punishes the Jews for rejecting Jesus, so events like the Holocaust befell us for our rejection of Jesus.
Which is it, then? You cannot have it both ways. And here’s another contradiction: “God will not allow the apple of His eye to be touched if they dont warrant it.” How then does He allow Satan to harm them?
Yet another contradiction is to some of the Scriptures that I provided, where the prophets state that the nations punished the Jewish people far more than they deserved.
You must not have read the Scriptures I presented carefully. They clearly teach that Israel suffers from the wickedness of the nations far more than she deserves, and not because God rejected her as the nations of the world believed.
Obviously, punishment in exile is for our sins–but not for the supposed “sin” of rejecting Jesus. You have yet to honestly confront Deuteronomy 4, which teaches that we are to worship God ONLY according the knowledge of Himself that He imparted at Sinai, that we are to NEVER associate Him with any form whatsoever. Jesus was not taught to us at Sinai, he is a form associated with worship of God, thus we would be committing the grave crime of idolatry were to worship him as you do, God forbid such a thing.
In light of Deuteronomy 4, how do you justify worship of God alongside Jesus? How do you dare?
You wrote: “Yes we, you have free will. And its on that, that God is righteously sovereign to judge and deal with sin. And all sin will be judged. Thats why I believe Jesus took that judgement on Himself, to qualify Gods redemptive means for yours and my sin.”
This is the opposite of what Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18, and Ezekiel 33 teach. Read these carefully and see how they contradict the idea of a divine messiah dying to redeem mankind of sin. If this is such an important teaching, so important that our very souls depend on it, why is it not taught in the Hebrew Bible AT ALL?
You wrote: “The true body of Christ…cannot and does not hate Jews. The true Church recognise that the Jewish people are vital…It is not logical to destroy the very people who will bring in the Messiah’s kingdom.”
I say to you, Paul, that you have to ignore 2000 years of history to make such a statement. Too many times throughout history Jews were maltreated, expelled, tortured, and killed out of religious fervor. If you want to say that people like Augustine, John Chrysostom, and Martin Luther, who inspired and encouraged these actions against Jews, were not true Christians, then it would be hard to take you seriously. The overwhelming majority of Christians hated the Jewish people, did not even view them as proper human beings, until the horrors of the Holocaust finally brought them to their senses (at least sort of).
You may have convinced yourself that true Christians don’t hate Jews, but you have not fully investigated the facts to be sure that your conviction is based on truth rather than on what you wish were the truth.
You also wrote: “God dealt with Israels sin long before the advent of the church.”
So Israel was guilty of rejecting Jesus before Jesus?
The answer is no. Jews are no more able to sin than gentiles. No more wicked. We are all co equally in the sin nature.
However Israel are more responsible for the Standard of Gods Law, because God gave and showed Israel His statures etc. Israel was put in Egypt by God to ultimately show His redemptive plan for Israel as a nation, and to the world as a whole. Israel was, is Gods ordained plan to reveal His salvation plan.
Israel were not guilty of rejecting Jesus the man prior to His birth, however history tells us that Israel rejected God since the beginning. Even in Egypt.
Israels sins before the advent of the church were dealt with through the temple service.
You keep insisting that persecution comes from The Church. The church of Messiah Jesus, is not the church which you know. Only the “church” that you see. Unfortunately the church that you see, is real, ie, its here, doing bad. But that is not the true church.
You give me your definition of the church, and I will show you a biblical, scriptural definition of the church.
Where do you find that Israel “Rejected” G-d. Disobedience is Not rejection.
Of course everyone claims to be the “real church”. It was ALL done in HIS name. You don’t make the same distinction when it comes to Jews, however. Xtians consider all the Jews from the beginning until now as one in the same. How many have questioned Dina’s continuous point about the faithful and righteous of generations. Has there been anyone who has read about all the great Rabbis in all these generations. Instead they are all viewed the same as those who followed Ba’al.
Ok, Disobedience, rejection. Its both the same, well I meant the same.
Yes, that’s my point. Everyone claims to be the real church. The only standard, or measure of truth regarding the true church is to define the word church scriptually and listen to testimonies personally, aliening all with scripture teachings. Once you can do this, and understand this, then you can start to see who is wheat and who is a tare.
Jesus made it very clear, and the real danger was present in the book of acts for example, that certain people will be among the flock. It is and should be no surprise to anyone to understand this, as it was written about for us to see.
Previous and present crimes done in Christ’s Name doesnt prove Christs Name as the originator or the creator of His presupposed plan to destroy the Jews.
Ive pointed out earlier that its the Jews who need to survive, call on Jesus to return. No Jews, no return. If there are no Jews then scripture cannot be fulfilled.
There is no better place for satan to hide in or behind the One who ultimately will destroy him. Satan cannot hide in Christ, but a counterfeit church which looks and sounds very christian is a good place to work. The best place for satan is to do his work against the jewish people who he hates, is through a very deceptive and cunning way. So why not use the “very name” that saves, to use that name to destroy?
The One who came to save you and reign over you Jesus was rejected by you. The One who still loves and saves the Jewish people today, will one day return for His people. However until one repents of that rejection, satan will continue in his plans to try and keep you from the truth in a perverted way, using the Jesus Name, to keep you from seeing the truth.
Having said that, The Lord God of Israel is sovereign and all ultimate authority is His. As seen throughout your scripture God will and does use wicked kings etc to punish Israel for there sins.
Your rejection of Christ is your responsibility and your suffering is a long drawn out punishment which ultimately will get worse before it gets better. Your scripture warns you of this.
The more you argue against Christ, the more you reject Your God and King.
“Behold your King”
Ceasar is our king!
You want a gentile to rule you, ok Israel, have the gentiles rule over you. You ask for a king, I will give you one.
Nothing new under the sun. 1 sam ch8 v7.
Eric, Jesus’ alleged resurrection doesn’t prove one bit that Christianity is true, or that it comes from G-d. Read revelation 13. Your own NT and Christian tradition teaches clearly that miracles prove nothing. You have also said that Jesus fulfilled the law in its entirety perfectly without sin. This is impossible as has been demonstrated with scripture. Some mitzvot only apply to women, was Jesus a woman? You say that is “our judgement.” No different than your belief is “your judgement.’ Our reading unlike yours however is backed by the Hebrew Bible’s plain stated meaning as the words are written. Your beliefs are based on types, shadows, miracles, things G-d could or might do, etc. To embrace the Christian messiah would mean that Jews would need to abandon the simple meaning of the text of the Torah as written. G-d says Israel is not to do that. To embrace Christian theology means to make scripture like putty in our hands.
Con, you are twisting the truth. It is not just resurrection that proves him being the messiah. It is not the miracles themselves. That is why he said; evil generation demands only a sign. He was not indulging in that and performing more miracles just for show , to use them to support his power and deceiving people.
Second, you are repeating that nonsense ; some laws apply to women, some to man, some to farmers. etc. I wonder what law applies to an infant. Whoever you are it is about not harming others and loving God. That is what the law was given for and what it is based on whoever you are and whatever your responsibility is. You don’t have to be a farmer to prove you fulfilled the law( of a farmer) . Jesus didn’t have to become anybody else as he was ; the Messiah. He fulfilled the things God sent him for.
So we can conclude by your statement, regarding J’sus, that He considered Torah “evil”.
Sharbano, “So we can conclude by your statement, regarding J’sus, that He considered Torah “evil”.”
No, that is ONLY your conclusion. Now you act worse than me , since I not a native english speaker but I would not expect such conclusions of yours based on my simple answer.. My message was simple enough.
What Jesus said confirms the same as in OT. Sign is not everything!
I hadn’t actually realized that. For one who is not an native English speaker I certainly couldn’t tell.
The statement was rhetorical in nature. The Torah says to “prove” a prophet with a sign etc. If he really is saying that it is “evil” to ask for a sign then that speaks Against Torah. What they were asking of him WAS a Torah commandment. Is it any wonder, people as myself, really question the Jewish nature of the Xtian text. I find it rather suspicious a JEW, would not know the requirements of Torah. But he seems to have a lack of that knowledge. Either that or he is just that arrogant and what he says must be without question. And That is not typically Jewish either.
Sharbano, oh now you are reversing the point !
“The Torah says to “prove” a prophet with a sign etc.”
Then while discussing the credibility if the miracle or sign you all are are AGAINST any sign! How many times I heard that on that blog ; “miracles , sign mean nothing. It is God testing us!
No matter what sign, it is just testing. ” do no rely on signs etc”
“Then while discussing the credibility if the miracle or sign you all are are AGAINST any sign! How many times I heard that on that blog ; “miracles , sign mean nothing. It is God testing us!
No matter what sign, it is just testing. ” do no rely on signs etc””
Eric, it’s not a contradiction. A prophet is expected to produce a sign. But the sign isn’t everything. The second the prophet contradicts Torah, the sign is meaningless.
Eric, now You are just spiritualizing the commandments when its convenient for your argument.You have no basis in the Hebrew Bible to do that with the text. You have argued that only the righteous can be resurrected, I have shown you that this is a false notion, even according to the New Testament narrative. Any false teacher can be exonerated by his followers when he fails in his mission by his students saying “he had the best intentions, his miracles weren’t for show, etc.” He fulfills the role of messiah spiritually etc. These are excuses with no basis in the plain sense of the text. Christians, Mormons, Sabbateans, and Lubavitcher messianists all use exactly this line of reasoning.
You are now changing your story. 1st you said that the resurrection proved Jesus was from G-d. I have shown that this isn’t necessarily true. What else did your Jesus do to prove he was Moshiach?
Eric it is not a sin to request a sign, but a sign does not validate a prophet. Look at how often Israel spoke against Moses. His prophecies were validated on Sinai, not before. It was after G-d spoke to everyone that they knew for sure that Moses was from G-d. When people were unimpressed by Jesus’ miracles he chastised them. When Moses did Miracles, the people complained against him. Did Moses condemn them harshly? Call them vipers? No! He knew before his mission began that his people would doubt him. He endured until he was vindicated on Sinai. Jesus expected obedience for bread and fish, but not Moses.
Jesus didn’t call them evil because they requested a sing but because they were already hypocrites to whom sign won’t do any good.
How convenient. You’re evil, you won’t believe anyway, so no sign for you. But for those who already believe, now that’s a different story.
That’s not how the Torah works. Sorry, but any prophet can use that oh-so-convenient argument.
Dina, they had enough signs, sign after sign , all healing predicted in OT , poor pharisees weren’t deprived of them. Do not make it so pitiful.
Resurrected Lazarus was a sign and what did they desire? To kill him too. the list can go and go.
Eric, I don’t think they were pitiful because I don’t think the stories are true–but they are the poor Pharisees–maligned in your scripture in a horrible and undeserved way which had horrific consequences for generations of my people.
You believe all these vicious charges about my ancestors too. Libels. I should be used to it by now, but I suppose one doesn’t get used to this stuff.
Anyway, it doesn’t change the fact your own scripture undermines itself by reporting that Jesus promised them a sign which he failed to fulfill. You say they were evil and didn’t deserve it, they wouldn’t have believed anyway. That doesn’t excuse not keeping your word.
Dina, “Anyway, it doesn’t change the fact your own scripture undermines itself by reporting that Jesus promised them a sign which he failed to fulfill. You say they were evil and didn’t deserve it, they wouldn’t have believed anyway. That doesn’t excuse not keeping your word.”
You focus on the one sided conclusion. How many times I wrote the sign was his resurrection not personal show up before a group of people? All could witness that whoever wanted! Do our scriptures say they( pharisees) never heard of anything, or that they couldn’t come and see?? No, the opposite! The shocked guards gave the testimony about his resurrection and what we read? that group of the same pharisees bribes them to distort the story changing it to a stolen body!
Why should anyone believe in the account of a resurrection when there are SO many inaccuracies in that Xtian text. It reminds me of the part about all the children being killed by Herod. Where is the proof. Josephus wrote about 40 chapters on Herod alone, yet he doesn’t mention any of this, or even J’sus. As I recall he Did mention John the baptizer and he states that John’s purpose was only for purification, as in a Mikveh, whereas the Xtian text says, as I recall, for remission of sins.
Have you ever considered singling out ONLY the text where your J’sus is speaking to others that are Not his disciples. You are under the assumption that everything HE said was said to Everyone. Clearly this is not the case. You are looking at a distorted reality which your text has left you with.
Sharbano, Just finishing your email from yesterday.
“Of course, if Adam DID repent they never would have left Gan Eden.”
First of all there is no account whether Adam repented or not. Just because it didn’t happen right away , we can’t say he didn’t. I think I already mentioned that in my previous message. So we can’t say that he would definitely NOT suffer consequences written in Genesis 3;14-23 including other people. But even if he didn’t he would still suffer what God said
‘ you will die”.
Before Adam had a chance to even disobey God and repent God said that Adam would die if he takes from the tree he was not supposed to. That was not depending on repentance or not, that was to be a consequence if rebelling against God’s command. That was a consequence resulting in God’s justice. God put strict guard to the tree of life that was giving eternal life. Even the righteous ones , those who are forgiven, those who repented are still not free from death which is a result of sin in Eden. Even if Adam was forgiven right away he would still suffer that what God said before.
All God’s redemption plan is based on His mercy. He does something to us we didn’t deserve. He restores our privilege to have that lost eternal life back and He accomplished that through His son. Like through one man death came to people so through one righteous we can be resurrected to eternal life.
Do you think your J’sus was the ONLY righteous one that ever lived. The Xtian text completely Distorts Tanach statement about righteousness in that no one can be.
There is such a thing described as a “child wallowing in the mud”. I see all this about the Adam in the same way. Xtians are wallowing in the mud of Adam and his supposed “original sin”. It goes so far to say Adam was “cursed”. THIS is not the case. In addition, what Was cursed was lifted later on.
Sharbano, Jesus was the only one without sin. This is what NT says. There are many whom God would call righteous but that doesn’t mean they were without sin. Big difference.
Anyways you didn’t answer that question; do you believe that death came to the world because of Adam’ disobedience?
It’s as I said about perception. You look at your J’sus as being “sinless”. We all see J’sus as just the opposite, a man who sinned on several occasions.
Sharbano, ” It’s as I said about perception. You look at your J’sus as being “sinless”. We all see J’sus as just the opposite, a man who sinned on several occasions.” Oh really??
Like when??? You say you can prove him sin, and that does exclude him from being righteous ? Yes? But sin does not exclude the ;righteous remnant ( in your interpretation) ( who has to acknowledge guilt) in Is 53 from being called righteous. ? Doesn’t it???
Anyways, the proof that Jesus was sinless was confirmed by God , not by us. Only sin holds the one in the grave. God proved , that there was no sin to hold Jesus dead. If he was sinful he would not accomplish our redemption. He would be like us who have to die ( not be killing, but die one day) .
This Has been covered and Xtians simply make excuses for J’sus in much the same way many people react when confronted with transgressions. It’s somewhat like the meeting we had regarding Ethics, etc. in the workplace. One part brought up was the excuses people bring when confronted. At one point there was a question with three answers. None of the answers truly fit the proper conduct. At best, one of the lesser of the evils. In discussion, my point was none were right as the question should never had been done in the first place. Later I expounded on the matter and said that Ethics, morals etc., are inherent in one’s nature and nearly impossible to “teach”. It’s almost impossible to teach right and wrong to an adult.
We can see similar actions in the way J’sus responds to his critics. Dina has covered this quite well.
” So we can’t say that he would definitely NOT suffer consequences written in Genesis 3;14-23 including other people. But even if he didn’t he would still suffer what God said
‘ you will die”.”
Eric, let us imagine that instead of hiding and denying, Adam and Eve had thrown themselves to the ground, confessed their sin without making excuses for themselves, expressed remorse, and begged God’s forgiveness. Do you think that God would have responded exactly the same way to their repentance as He did to their denial? The same God who repeatedly teaches us that repentance wipes away sin (Isaiah 1:18; Ezekiel 18:22; Ezekiel 33:16)?
The lesson of Adam and Eve, among many others to be gleaned from their story, is what happens when you don’t repent. If the Bible doesn’t record something, it’s because there isn’t a lesson to be learned from it. You cannot argue from silence (” there is no account whether Adam repented or not”). Surely, if they had repented, they would have changed history, and we would be reading a different story today.
” He restores our privilege to have that lost eternal life back and He accomplished that through His son.”
According to the plain meaning, Adam was supposed to live forever on this earth. His sin brought death into the world. As far as I can see, believers in Jesus don’t live forever. The Biblical promise of resurrection is never referenced with belief in Jesus. Obviously, one does not need to believe in Jesus to be resurrected, or the Bible would have noted that.
Dina, there are about 80 comments from today, definitely I won’t have time to discuss all so my silence to some doesn’t mean I agree with what is said. I don’t want to ignore my family and spend all day at the computer . I will just pick some to go over;
“According to the plain meaning, Adam was supposed to live forever on this earth. His sin brought death into the world. “- I finally see something to agree with!
But then you go “As far as I can see, believers in Jesus don’t live forever.”
What is that? Does anybody live forever right now? Jesus didn’t say that since his death we all will stay alive, but said we will be resurrected. That what sin brought is death and resurrection means we will be set free from it ( staying dead). . And God has his time for that ( us risen back to life) , at the time of coming of the Messiah to reign. So said Jesus, when he is coming those who died are risen back to life.
“The Biblical promise of resurrection is never referenced with belief in Jesus.”
It is referenced with belief and trust in God. Since God revealed to us
that Jesus is the one through whom God brings us our life back ( lost by sin in Eden) rejecting him would mean rejecting God.
“Obviously, one does not need to believe in Jesus to be resurrected, or the Bible would have noted that.”
NT that you rejected tells you about God’s plan of freeing people from death. It explains you why we die and it tells you about the whole future to come. Future for those resurrected ones and for those who will be born . Rejection of it is your choice , it is not about God who didn’t say anything .
OT books were written during the long period of time. God didn’t reveal all details to just one prophet so all mankind would have every detail given about God’ s entire plan. Until Isaiah or Zechariah was born there was no message given that they carried in the same details by others. During Moses’ time there was no Isaiah’ book . No details given to Moses what Isaiah said later . Just an example. One prophet was completing the other. The whole picture of God’s plan came up by many prophets during a long span period between them. Now in NT God brings up all about our restoration, redemption and future and ho wit was accomplished.
Because of the high volume of comments, I’m going to try to reference my responses to your comments. In this one I am responding to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20526
I do not understand your belief that Jesus redeemed the world from death (well, not the whole world, but those who accept him).
The Hebrew Bible teaches us that repentance wipes away our sins as if they never were (Isaiah 1 and Ezekiel 18 and 33). That anyone who reaches out to God with sincerity is close to him (Psalm 145:18). That God gives us free will to choose between life and death, good and evil–our spiritual fate is entirely in our hands (Deuteronomy 30). That we can rule over sin (Genesis 4:7).
So all the reasons Christians give for believing in Jesus are superfluous in light of what the Torah teaches.
As for overcoming death, long before the advent of Jesus, but after the sin of Adam and Eve brought death into the world, the Hebrew Bible promises resurrection. The promise of resurrection–death after life–is given thousands of years before Jesus was born. The Bible teaches that the righteous will be resurrected, and the Bible teaches how to be righteous. Where does the Bible teach that if you don’t believe in Jesus (or the Messiah) you won’t be resurrected? Nowhere! In fact, the doctrine of belief in the Messiah is not taught to begin with. Even your interpretation of Isaiah 53 doesn’t claim that the suffering servant conquers death on behalf of mankind and that now that he has done so God can fulfill His promise of resurrection (which, if we follow your logic He could not fulfill until Jesus came on the scene).
This brings me to the challenge of Deuteronomy 4 and 13. If a prophet comes along and teaches a new way to worship God–and make no mistake, your worship of Jesus whether as man or God is foreign to the Torah–then he is a false prophet. For this reason, the books of Christian scripture are books of false prophecy, and that is why we reject them. Sure, it’s our choice. You choose to accept books of false prophecy–that is your choice too.
In fact, the obsession with eternal life is a Christian one. The Hebrew Bible does not dwell on it.
Dina, it is not an obsession, It is a plan revealed by God. We might see your ‘obsession’ in other things. But it is not important to dig in it.
Sharbano, You said that the Jewish sacrificial system is not matching what Jesus accomplished. You said the sacrifice was offered on the altar , Jesus was not. ect
Before Paul ( in Hebrew NT ) explains everything , in the previous chapter we read that the temple and all ‘rituals’ are SHADOWS ( REFLECTION) PATTERN of what is happening in the heavenly temple.
They ( Priests) serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Since the altar is a place of offering before presence of God , Jesus comes with his own blood before God;
Hebrew 9;24 “For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us”
All chapter 9 explains everything; Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.”
Your “shadows” , pattern is exactly the issue. If it’s a shadow or pattern than it would HAVE to be true in all respects. As I said the sacrifice for sin Has to be female. For this shadow to work the messiah would have to be female. Otherwise it is Not a shadow or pattern. You cannot just pick and choose which is a shadow and which is not. A shadow doesn’t fall on one item and not another. You had also brought up the comparison of Yom Kippur as similar. As stated, the Azazel goat that had sin imparted was Not sacrificed but let go. The Priest’s bull was for him only. Therefore shadows aren’t falling where they should. It’s nothing but a distortion. Of course, Paul wasn’t speaking to an audience that KNEW Torah so he was able to get away with it. Those with the knowledge aren’t swayed by these inaccuracies.
Sharbano, You see distortion because you don’t understand that many details present with sacrificing were to symbolize how God deals with people’s sin, what the costs of sin is etc. The goat that was ‘ sent off’ with people’s sins was to symbolize our sins being removed far away to be never seen and remembered again. So Jesus didn’t have to ‘play’ a goat and a lamb and a dove and whatever else and be in every other detail . He was just the one who sheds his blood for us. The one whose blood is brought before God ( sprinkled on the altar) .
God used symbol of blood for a purpose .
The same question about purpose of Jesus’ death that seems illogical to you, would be for us the question why sacrifices at all involving killing and blood sprinkling etc.? Don’t you think God could have never even introduce anything like that? He doesn’t just came up with a weird idea that has no purpose and fulfillment whatsoever. All He chose to do was to point to the future events. . Even during passover night, the blood marked on the door was for a death angel to pass over. ( Again is was a sign of protection and freedom and saved life). Don’t you think God was unable to pass over his peoples houses just without any blood mark on the door? That was not a sign to Egyptions , that was not because an angel of the Lord might have gotten confused and kill Jewish firstborns. It was for a sign that through the blood of a lamb we are free. And if any house wasn’t marked , the firstborn would have to die no matter whether he was Egyptian or Jewish. That all doesn’t also mean Jesus blood had to be marked on our house- doors either. Marking the door was a sign of obedience to God, that you believed Him about what He told you to do. We are told to trust His son in what he did for us, and this is what we do.
Egypt was a symbol of life in slavery. So is our life in sin that results in death. Jesus’ offering is the price we are bought out by into freedom and everlasting life with God not death. God chose a lamb as a symbol of innocence also for a purpose, that the one who is without sin would pay the price.
Whatever Christian apologists can take from the Bible and twist to fit Jesus somehow, they take. And everything else, they ignore.
Like Deuteronomy 4. How come no one wants to talk about that?
Christians read the Bible through the prism of Christian scripture. If they could read it through the eyes of a Jew, try to be a little bit objective, they would see an entirely different picture.
They would understand why the Jew is astonished by their interpretation of the Adam and Eve story, an interpretation that never occurred to him.
They would see why the Jew is incredulous that the Passover sacrifice could possibly be a prophecy about Jesus.
They would get why the Jew shakes his head in dismay over the belief that Isaiah 7:14 foretells the virgin birth of Jesus.
They would empathize with the Jew’s amazement that Isaiah 53 has anything to do with Jesus.
And maybe, just maybe, they would grasp the Jew’s pain over the hijacking of his beloved Bible and the twisting of his God’s word for idolatrous purposes.
I think it was Paul who said, you seek that which is convenient.
If the goat is a symbol for sin removed then there is no need for a sacrifice. But One issue is at the heart of the matter. WHERE does this symbolism come from. We know from the historical record that paganism was predominant in that era. The idea of a “sacrifice” of a human to appease an angry G-d was prevalent among pagans. Yet G-d copied THIS?? To say the devil copied G-d denies His ability to circumvent those pagans And that devil.
Of course then there’s Ezekiel. During the Messianic Era of the Third Temple ALL those sacrifices will be once again offered, Including “sin sacrifice”.
How is a lamb any more innocent than a young calf. Every animal sacrificed has its own innocence. What it Did have was a message to the Egyptians and their idolatry. It was a slaughter of THEIR god and even More of an insult putting that blood of that god on a doorpost. What it DOES say is paganism is Not the way of Hashem. Yet Xtians want us to believe that G-d would later on use that same imagery.
“If the goat is a symbol for sin removed then there is no need for a sacrifice.” You are forgetting that it was not all . There was the sacrifice offered, beside the goat .; the question why???
( sorry there will be blood content again…)
There were two features that distinguished this day of worship. First, it was the one day of the year that the high priest, and only the high priest, entered the Most Holy Place (Holy of Holies) of the Tent of Meeting (tabernacle) where he presented sacrificial blood as atoning sacrifice for the sins of Israel and the purification of the Tent of Meeting.
-so the goat wasn’t all to show that sins are just kicked off.
Inside the Most Holy Place was the Ark of the Covenant (a rectangular box) that represented the resident presence of God. The high priest SPRINKLED BLOOD on the lid (“mercy seat”) of the Ark of the Covenant, achieving the forgiveness of sin for the priest and the congregation
Next, the high priest SPRINKLED BLOOD in the outer room of the Tent of Meeting. The blood “decontaminated” the ceremonial impurities accumulated by the sins and the ceremonial uncleanness committed for the year. The purification of the Tent of Meeting was national in scope, giving a comprehensive purging of sins and impurities.
We would say just a complicated ceremonial ritual – but there was connection between a symbol ( ritual) and the thing symbolized ( message). the spiritual meaning they represented.
But you do not see any meaning in that. Just a ritual especially with that sprinkling b…..d ?ohh..
You said ” The idea of a “sacrifice” of a human to appease an angry G-d was prevalent among pagans. Yet G-d copied THIS?? ”
Did you see Jesus being tied and killed for God?? No, he gave his life out of his own initiative. God didn’t say ; “hey guys let ‘s offer Jesus for me. It is not angry God requesting human sacrifice.
Animal offerings symbolized the price paid for sin. There was no other reason to involve blood shed. They pointed to more spiritual meaning that one day somebody will pay price for our sins.
Did you wonder why during the third temple all those symbols are coming back? What the need for it if it is enough to just be sorry and repent. The only reason to have them is the same reason they were before. Lessons and symbols what God did for us, what our sin costs.
You said that passover lamb in Egypt -” It was a slaughter of THEIR god ( Egyptian) and even More of an insult putting that blood of that god on a doorpost. ”
So it looks like it was just a sign to ‘tease’ the Egyptians. Wow, but for some reason God ‘s angel would not pass the house not marked with blood and he would strike the firstborn.
And I do not think Egyptians cared as they worshiped their god still long after Israelities left.
Your references with blood dispel your conclusions. Was that cross of wood sprinkled and purified BEFORE it was used.
I believe your J’sus also negated the idea of this piece of wood as being “the place” He speaks to the Samaritan about Their place of sacrifice. EL has also fell into this trap. She calls the cross of “wood” an altar, and Torah speaks of “wood and stone”.
You have also mixed the sacrifices that leave them without proper meaning. The Kohen Gadol offers a bull for his own. The goat that IS offered is a communal sacrifice and not individual transgressions. This would mean that his death instantly cleared the sins of Israel then, and for all time. By the same token you cannot use the Pesach because it is Not for any sin. The individual sin IS laid upon the goat of Azazel though. And it is HERE the symbolism has to be drawn from. The death for That animal is falling off cliff. The symbolism there is that Xtianity has fell off a cliff.
What you said regarding the firstborn is profound. And this imagery of Egypt is predominant in Xtian teaching. What is of substance here. Egypt was fighting against a G-d whom they did not know. They were harming this “new” G-d’s “Firstborn”, so THEIR firstborn was hit. All Moshe was asking was to let his people go and worship his G-d. Is it sounding familiar yet. So, we have a group of people, the Egyptians, that want to keep Israel hampered from following their Torah. It is THEIR firstborn that is killed because they are afflicting G-d’s firstborn. Eric, you have enlightened us more than you can imagine. So was the Egyptians preventing Israel at that time and so it has been now for 2000 years. And the “Passover Lamb” is at the heart of it all. Amazing.
There is an interesting Midrash that speaks to this. There will arise a man with great stature and claim to be the One who will say to the Rabbis, “bring me your Torah”. When they bring the Torah scroll he will tell them, “this is not the Torah I have given you”, and will subsequently kill them. In the end the real Mashiach will destroy HIM.
“I believe your J’sus also negated the idea of this piece of wood as being “the place” He speaks to the Samaritan about Their place of sacrifice. She calls the cross of “wood” an altar, and Torah speaks of “wood and stone”.
Who is the ‘she ‘ calling the cross as altar? Samaritan woman? You really confused the text as there is no such information in the gospel. Read John 4 and tell me where does she say so…
Also you focused on one side of the story concerning the need for the lamb’s blood on th e door posts;. Ex 12;1-7, 11-13
12 “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord. 13 The BLOOD will be a SIGN for you on the houses where you are, and WHEN I SEE THE BLOOD , I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.”
Why not just a letter ‘J’ on the door ? That would help too to be a sigh that no Egyptian leaves there in the house to God to pass over.?? You would speak all about everything else but skip that answer.
I was speaking about EL, as I wrote, but mistakenly wrote “she” instead of He.
You didn’t counter ANY of the points I brought up.
“Why do I trust the Jews? Because it is their bible, it is their historical chronicle, they are the ones entrusted with the Torah and its observance, the covenant, and the law.” I would also add that they testify of God’s salvation plan for all people .
Why DO I trust also Jews in NT? Because they witnessed how God carried on His salvation plan to give a chance to all people to be saved.
I wouldn’t believe the Xtian text because of all the errors and contradictions, among other things. I see it as an unreliable document. Not only that but the text has authenticity problems. Apparently there are parts added later that wasn’t in the original etc.
Of course, there is also the fact they aren’t first hand accounts. The first was written nearly a generation After the death of J’sus.
Sharbano, “Have you ever considered singling out ONLY the text where your J’sus is speaking to others that are Not his disciples. You are under the assumption that everything HE said was said to Everyone. Clearly this is not the case. You are looking at a distorted reality which your text has left you with.” What are you pointing to by your statement??? I don’t see how that relates to my message.
It is as I said, you seem to base your perceptions of the interactions of the people from the reading of the Entire text. Much of it is written of conversations between J’sus and his followers. All the other people weren’t privy to these conversations. Therefore you can only determine what is of concern by separating out Only the dialog between the relevant parties.
There are many other issues at work here. There is the fact that the text was written nearly a generation AFTER the events and some well after. Furthermore, the Order of the books do not follow the sequence of events. There is a professor who analyzed the text in the Order in which they were written and when read in That context it was clear there was an evolution in thinking among the writers. What stood out was the first books had no indication of any deification. As the books progressed it became more and more the authors were creating this concept. By the time one gets to the last books written, the text has went fully to the belief of deification. There are just TOO many reasons NOT to believe in any of it.
I mean ‘ sign’ not sing.
“In fact, the obsession with eternal life is a Christian one. The Hebrew Bible does not dwell on it.”
Oh but Dina, you want it both ways don’t you.
You claim that Judaism is not discriminatory as is Christianity with regards to eternal life. Yet when it comes to someone like Hitler, you day no way!
You obsess over Christianity’s non discriminatory policy of who might get in that you believe shouldn’t while Christians obsess over getting in as many as might possibly turn their hearts to God regardless of who they are.
David, you are making up arguments I did not present. Christianity is very exclusionary with regards to who gets “saved”: only those who accept Jesus as their lord and savior–and maybe not even those, for “many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to” (Luke 13:24) and “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter” (Matthew 7:13-14).
On the other hand, Jew men and Jew women believe that anyone who leads a basically decent life gets a place in heaven. The gate is wide open to all who seek it. Anyone who tries to enter is helped along the way, according to our tradition (this is according to the Talmud, since the Hebrew Bible barely mentions the afterlife).
And of course evil people are punished. Why, do you think Hitler ought to be in heaven, while his victims are roasting in hell? I do not believe you are trying to say that, so what is your point?
At any rate, it is indeed a Christian obsession–that’s why Jew men and Jew women only have conversations about this topic with Christians. With each other, we don’t talk about it much.
Dina the Jew girl
Dina, with claiming that we trust God but want to reject Jesus is like in that ilustration;
Let say; ‘ the road; ilustrates our life.
‘Big crack/whole in the middle of the road’ illustrates death.
“The other side of the road” – illustrates life back ( eternal life with God)
Then we have a few situations;
First; a sinner who doesn’t want to repent. He doesn’t learn from Ezekiel about turning back to God. He goes the road down which is his life. On his road he faces that “the big crack/whole in the ground” which is death.
Second person listens to the warning, turns back to God after hearing from Ezekiel.
He knows he has promised life, he repented but he can see there is that ‘ crack/whole down the road ‘