Daniel 7 and Acceptance of Scripture – an Open Letter to Bru
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.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/incarnation-and-definition-of-marriage/
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/landscape-of-the-bible-excerpt-from-c-u/
If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FEAQ55Y7MR3E6
Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.
Thank You
Yisroel C. Blumenthal
1000 Verses - a project of Judaism Resources 
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
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
Bru,
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.
Jim
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
H5946
עליון
‛elyôn
el-yone’
(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….
but ….
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.
Eric
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.
part 2
“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.
Concerned Reader
I am not sure why you are apologizing – what you say makes sense. In any case would you mind dropping me a line at iblumenthal@yeshivanet.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?
Hello
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
Paul
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.
Hello
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.”
Hello
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!
Shalom
Hello
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”.
Hi Sharbano,
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.
Thanks,
Dina the Jew Girl
Hello
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.
Thanks.
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.
Hi Sharbano
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?
Thanks
Hello Paul,
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!”
Shalom
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?
Just asking…
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:
7
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.
8
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.
9
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,
10
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.
11
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.
12
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.”
Touché, Sharbano!
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?
Hello CR
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.
1. Lazurus.
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.
Mr. L.,
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
his righteousness
to a people yet unborn,
that he is the one who did it.
Footnotes:
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.
Hello Dina
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.
Dina,
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
Hello CR
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.
Hello Dina
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
blood only
repentance only
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)
Mr. Lion,
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.
Jim
Mr. Lion,
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.
Jim
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.
Mr. Lion,
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.
Jim
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…
Shalom
Shalom Yehuda!
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!!
Lion,
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”?
Nowhere!
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.
Shalom
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…
Shalom
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.”
Hebrew9;15
“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.
Mr. Lion,
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…
Shalom
Hello Dina
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.
Ok thanks.
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.
Dina,
“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.
Sharbano,
“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.)
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.iv.xxxix.html
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.
Hello Dina
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?
Hello Sharbano
Im still replying to your last statement, not this immediate one. How come sometimes there isnt a reply link after some posts? ???
Anyway,
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.
Hello
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.
Hello Dina
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?
Thanks
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?
Hello Dina
(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 :).
Hello
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”.
“Somebody’s nation”??
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.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/isaiah-53-micah-7-and-isaiah-62/#comment-20421
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.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20350
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:
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20530
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.”
Dina,
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.
Thanks,
Jew Girl
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.
Dina,
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,[241] 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.[242][243] 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)[244] Maksymilian Ernest Gumplowicz,[245] and by the Russian-Jewish anthropologist Samuel Weissenberg.[246] In 1909 Hugo von Kutschera developed the notion into a book-length study,[247] arguing Khazars formed the foundational core of the modern Ashkenazi.[248] Maurice Fishberg introduced the notion to American audiences in 1911.[249] The idea was also taken up by the Polish-Jewish economic historian and General Zionist Yitzhak Schipper in 1918.[250][251] 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”,[252][253] a thesis that was to have a political echo in later opinion.[254][255] 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.[256] 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.[257][258] 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.[259] 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.[260] Poliak’s work found some support in Salo Wittmayer Baron and Ben-Zion Dinur,[261][262] but was dismissed by Bernard Weinryb as a fiction (1962).[263]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
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.
Hello Dina
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!
Paul,
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.
Hi Paul,
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.
Hello
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)
he says:
“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.
Dina,
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?
Hi Yisroel,
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).
Secondly,
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.
Hi Yisroel,
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?
Hi David,
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
Shalom!!
Isaiah 9:21
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.
Isaiah 11:13
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.
Ezekiel 37:16
“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.’
Ezekiel 37:19
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.”’
Hosea 5:5
The pride of Israel testifies to his face; Therefore Israel and Ephraim stumble in their iniquity; Judah also stumbles with them.
Hosea 5:12
Therefore I will be to Ephraim like a moth, And to the house of Judah like rottenness.
Hosea 5:13
“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.
Hosea 5:14
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.
Hosea 6:4
[ 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”
Lol, hilarious!
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.
Dina,
You 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.”
And
“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.”
My response:
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:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12697-resurrection
“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:
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/life-after-death/
“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.”
Dina,
You wrote concerning the NT position with regards to gaining life in the age to come:
“It contradicts the Torah.”
My response:
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).
You wrote:
“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.
Hi David,
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.
Sharbano,
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.”
Sharbano,
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
Isaiah 26:9b
Isaiah 26:19
Daniel 12:1, 13
Jeremiah 23:5
Psalm:
5:12
14:5
32:11
33:1
34:15
64:10
68:3
69:28
140:13
146:8
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,
Dina
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.
Sharbano,
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.
JPS:
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.
In DENIAL??
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.
Hi Dina
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.
Hello Dina
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.
Hello Sharbano
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.
Hello CR
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?
Hello Dina
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.
Hello
ps
Some of that grammatically, was written very poor.
Hope you still got the picture?
Paul,
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?
Hello Dina
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.
Hello Sharbano
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.
Hi Eric,
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.
Hebrew 8;5
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.
Sharbano;
“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.
Continuing;
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.
sharbano,
“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.
Sharbano,
“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.
Sincerely,
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 ‘
he is afraid how he will make it to the other side ( eternal life). God just says; “trust me” “Everyone will see my salvation one day.” He doesn’t says too many details . The person says whatever way you save me , I trust you.
The third person similar turns back to God according to Ezekiel and knows he can make it to the other side of the road with God’s help. But he is able to know God’s answer how it is possible. He askes “God how will you save me?” God answers;” trust me, I am sending you my son to reach you so you won’t fall completly. That is the way I take you to the other side of the road. The person says ” I believe you Lord about your son that you send for me”
The fourth person just goes; I trust you God to take me to the other side. God says ;” I will send my son for you to reach you so you won’t fall completly.” The person says ; “no thank you Lord , I don’t believe I need your son. You just take me anyways there because I am pretty good and never sin or if I did you can forgive me” I don’t need any human, just save me!
God answers; “you know through whom is that ‘crack on the road?? Made though a human too. My son is able to reach you.
Maybe not the best illustration. Jesus seems not needed but NT explains that like though one man death came on all man, so through one man God is able to reach us to life back with Him forever. Like through Adam we all die, so through Jesus ( al lwho repented ) can be restored back to life.
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20561
This illustration proves my point. The Hebrew Bible doesn’t point to Jesus at all, in any way, shape or form, as you said, “Jesus seems not needed but NT explains.” Not only that, but the idea of Jesus contradicts Torah, as I explained in my recent comments (and older ones as well). You have to first believe your NT in order to believe all this stuff. Not only are there so many good reasons not to believe it, as Jim and I have shown you, but the very fact that it contradicts the Torah is the only reason we need to reject it.
“Jesus seems not needed but NT explains.”
Why would God teach us all these things I showed you–that we control our spiritual fate, that the promise of resurrection was given before Jesus ever entered the scene, and most important, that we must never change the way we were taught to worship God at Sinai–and then contradict Himself by sending an entirely different message? Do you not see that the concept of God having a literal, physical son who shares His authority contradicts God’s own teachings in Deuteronomy 4 and other places such as Isaiah 43:11 (“I, only I, am the Lord, and there is no savior aside from Me”) and Isaiah 42:8 (“I am the Lord, that is My name, I shall not give My glory to another”)?
Eric, you must surely see by now that religious Jews like Rabbi Blumenthal and me take the word of Hashem in His Torah with deadly seriousness. We hear His call to repentance through the Hebrew prophets, and we strive with all our ability to heed that call. We listen to His remonstrance about obedience to His Law, and we attempt with all our might to adhere to it. God left us no room, no loophole, for any other type of worship than the one that He revealed to our fathers as they stood quaking in terror at the foot of Mount Sinai. There is only one course of action for us to take: “We will do and we will hear” (Exodus 19:8).
Hi Dina the Jew girl,
You wrote
“Christianity is very exclusionary with regards to who gets “saved”: only those who accept Jesus…”
“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?”
My response:
My point is that you mischaracterize the reality of both Judaism and Christianity with regards to whom and under what conditions one gains life in the age to come.
In addition to that, you speak condescendingly and ignorantly of Christianity’s acknowledgement of the importance of considering our thoughts and actions, not only because of immediate consequences of our relation with God in this life but because this finite life has a direct bearing on our infinite life in the age to come.
Christianity’s position is actually far more inclusive than you disparagingly portray it.
The “narrow gate” is not because of any rule of the Lord Jesus or God, but is a statement of the reality of the majority of people choosing to reject God and his Son in favor of the wide gate of the destruction because of obsession with selfish personal gain in this life.
As to your other point, God cannot be mocked. Those who feign a show of service and love for God and Jesus for their own personal gain will not fool anyone in the Day of Judgment.
There is ample Scriptural proof of the inclusionary nature of Christianity now and in the age to come; one need only believe in the Lord Jesus.
The offer is for all, the whole world; it is not limited to those who have lived a righteous life. It is for the non-righteous as well, even murderers, and yes even to serial killers, terrorists, and the worst of the worst such as Hitler himself.
One need only accept the Lord Jesus.
John 3:16
Romans 10:9
Acts 2:38; 16:30,31
Judaism on the other hand, as you stated yourself, requires one to lead a righteous life. You qualify that by including the adjective “basically.” Either way, those who have not led a “basically” righteous life are screwed, out in the cold.
And there are no last minute conversions in Judaism for the unrighteous such as was the case for the penitent thief crucified along with Jesus.
The other problem with Judaism regarding this is that it has flip-flopped throughout history on who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come. There is no scriptural standard. As you admitted, and I agree, there is not much to go on in the Hebrew Scriptures whereas the NT is crystal clear. One, especially the unrighteous, the atheists, ect., can’t turn to the Hebrew Scriptures for any guidance in this matter.
God wants to save the whole world, not just the Jew.
David, perhaps you can clarify your position for me.
You wrote that all one needs in order to be included in the age to come is belief in Jesus. It matters not if he is wicked or righteous; if he believes in Jesus he is right with God.
Did I understand you correctly?
The wickedest of the wicked, people like Hitler and Stalin and Mao who are responsible for millions upon millions of murders, if they just accept Jesus they’re good to go. Nothing more needed.
On the other hand, people who lead exemplary moral lives or even just ordinary good ones, if they do not believe in Jesus, they’re damned.
And perhaps even if they do believe in Jesus–your scripture teaches that many will seek to enter but won’t be able to. You can add your explanation, but I go by plain meaning. (If you can presume to tell us how to understand our own Scripture, it’s only fair for me to then get to decide how to understand yours.) We teach the opposite–that whoever seeks God will be close to Him. All you need is the desire.
So let’s do some number crunching. The world population numbers about 7 billion, with about 2 billion Christians.
According to you, five/sevenths of the world population–the majority–are eternally damned. According to us, since the overwhelming majority of people are not murderers and thieves but are basically good, most of the seven billion are going to heaven.
You say Christianity is inclusionary, but the numbers don’t add up.
Furthermore, in your worldview, if Hitler accepted Jesus, he gets to celebrate in heaven, while his millions of innocent victims–whose only crime was not believing in Jesus–roast in hell. Only someone with a broken moral compass would not find this idea repugnant. There is zero justice or mercy in this picture; it’s a picture of a cruel and vindictive god.
You wrote: “Judaism on the other hand, as you stated yourself, requires one to lead a righteous life. You qualify that by including the adjective “basically.” Either way, those who have not led a “basically” righteous life are screwed, out in the cold. ”
Your argument is not with me, but with God. In Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18, and Ezekiel 33 God teaches us clearly that the choice to live or die depends on our choice to do good or evil. The concept of reward for obedience/righteous behavior and punishment for disobedience/wicked behavior is Biblical. Furthermore, the idea that those who have not led a righteous life but repent will be rewarded is also a Biblical concept.
The notion that goodness goes unrewarded and evil goes unpunished and that the only thing that is rewarded or punished is belief in Jesus is not to be found anywhere in Hebrew Scripture.
“And there are no last minute conversions in Judaism for the unrighteous such as was the case for the penitent thief crucified along with Jesus.”
You made this statement with no evidence. If you think it is wrong of me to “speak condescendingly and ignorantly of Christianity,” it is equally wrong of you to do the same. To date, you have yet to substantiate many false claims you have made about Jews and Judaism. You have neither substantiated, retracted, nor apologized for your libels (examples: the Jews persecuted the early Christians, killing many; the Jews have a tradition of genocide which they are continuing now against the Palestinians, the original descendants of the Canaanites, who just want to live in peace in their own land; the Jews have a tradition of killing their prophets–I showed you why the evidence you presented for this last one does not justify this charge but you did not respond).
Regarding your latest statement, I suggest you read again Ezekiel 18 and 33, which teach that as soon as the wicked man leaves his evil ways his sins are no longer remembered against him. The Talmud which Jews hold as authoritative teaches the concept of יש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת, which means that there are some who acquire their portion in the World to Come in one instant, based on a story about someone who led a promiscuous life but repented right before he died.
A final note. While it would be ideal for us to always maintain a respectful and civil tone in our dialogue, ultimately whether or not you or I find each other’s tone condescending or arrogant is not important. The question is not, “Is what he or she said condescending or arrogant?” but, “Is what he or she said true?” Each statement must be presented with evidence, and we must strive to evaluate it as objectively as we can despite our biases. This is why I always demand that you back up your statements with historical/scientific/Biblical evidence (such as your claim that the Palestinians are the original Canaanites’ descendants, or that the Jews are attempting genocide against them).
You demanded that Con present you with Biblical evidence of deification of humans, so you ought to hold yourself to the same standard.
So to your statement that “there are no last minute conversions in Judaism for the unrighteous such as was the case for the penitent thief crucified along with Jesus,” I say, back it up with evidence or retract it, or show me why the Scriptural and Talmudic evidence I presented doesn’t refute that statement.
I do hope that this time you will substantiate, retract, or apologize for all your claims that I keep reminding you of. Why? I’m just real optimistic, I guess. I don’t give up hoping on people.
Oh bother, I’m not done.
Looking at what you wrote yet again: “Judaism on the other hand, as you stated yourself, requires one to lead a righteous life. You qualify that by including the adjective “basically.” Either way, those who have not led a “basically” righteous life are screwed, out in the cold.”
I could paraphrase it this way: “Christianity on the other hand, as you stated yourself, requires one to believe in Jesus. You qualify that by saying it’s the “only” thing needed. Either way, those who do not believe in Jesus are screwed, out in the cold.”
I rest my case.
Well, actually, no, I still have more to say.
You wrote: “The offer is for all, the whole world; it is not limited to those who have lived a righteous life. It is for the non-righteous as well.”
And I say the same: “The offer is for all, the whole world; it is not limited to those who have lived a righteous life. It is for the non-righteous as well. Everyone can choose to turn away from evil and do good. Everyone can choose to repent from a wicked past.”
The Bible says as much, in Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18, and Ezekiel 33.
You wrote: “The other problem with Judaism regarding this is that it has flip-flopped throughout history on who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come.”
I don’t know what you’re talking about, so please provide evidence for this statement.
“There is no scriptural standard. As you admitted, and I agree, there is not much to go on in the Hebrew Scriptures whereas the NT is crystal clear.”
This statement is inaccurate in light of the fact that we both accept the Hebrew Bible; then you have your Christian scripture but you forget that we have our Talmud. And our Talmud is clear on the afterlife. Therefore there is indeed a place to turn to for guidance.
Finally, I think it would be fair to explain why the Hebrew Scriptures don’t spend a lot of time on the afterlife. That’s because we live here, in this life, and our task is to live our lives here on this earth according to God’s will. The Torah teaches us how to do that, and we don’t need to know anything more. We do it because God commands it, not because we want to be “saved.” We love God. Children want to please their parents; we want to please our Father. And to our Creator, we owe nothing less than our obedience anyway, whatever the consequences. Even if He were to send us to hell for our efforts we would be required to obey. But He is merciful and His loving-kindness knows no bounds; that is why He gives us commandments that are good for us, and then rewards us for doing that which anyway benefits us.
Con, “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” Oh really?? Show me what did you prove , as I haven’t seen that.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/06/25/what-does-the-resurrection-prove-by-concerned-reader/ Here you go Eric.
St. Methodius of Olympus 250 – 311″
Even the Antichrist will enter Jerusalem, where he will enthrone himself in the temple AS A god (even though he will be an ordinary man of the tribe of Dan to which Judas Iscariot also belonged).
St Ephrem 300-373
The man of evil will prepare and coming he will enter Jerusalem; he will build up and establish Sion and will make himself God and entering he will sit in the temple as the apostle has written as if he were God
St. Hildegard 1098 – 1179
Antichrist will make the earth move, level mountains, dry up rivers, produce thunder and lightning and hail, remove the leaves from the trees and return them again to the trees, make men sick and cure them, exorcise devils, raise the dead to life. He will appear to be crucified and RISE FROM THE DEAD. All in all, Christians will be astounded and in grievous doubts while the followers of Antichrist will be confirmed in their false faith.
Didache
and then shall appear the world-deceiver AS Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet come to pass since the beginning. Then shall the creation of men come into the fire of trial, and many shall be made to stumble and shall perish; but those who endure in their faith shall be saved from under the curse itself.
St. Iranaeus
In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to the Lord’s disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now rules [the earth] shall be partitioned. He teaches us what the ten horns shall be which were seen by Daniel, telling us that thus it had been said to him: “And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten Kings,
St. Hildegard shares my reading of revelation 13 Lion, as do several other fathers of the Church. My point was that miracles and resting your faith on a belief in the deity of the messiah, or his ressurection are not indicators of the truth of anything. Following the commandments and being careful in their observance is the sure indicator of truth value according to both Hebrew Bible and New Testament. The false messiah is lawless, so how do you avoid being lawless? By being lawful. Horns and beasts represent kingdoms and kings in revelation. Simon the magician (according to the NT said that he was “the great power” from G-d, and he was considered an arch heretic by the early Christians. Humans fancy themselves as being divine, but scripture unambiguously teaches that they are not divine. You say the resurrection and claim to deity are the unique mark of the true prophecy of Jesus, but scripture, and even Christian tradition disagree with that assessment.
Con, how can you write about anti-christ when you don’t believe in Christ??? Can somebody act against the other that didn’t exist or was false anyways???
Con, you presented many distorted views of people I do not support . They do not go along with what NT said.
“How can you believe in anti Christ when you don’t believe in Christ.” I don’t Eric. I’m pointing out to you that Even your own New Testament tells you plainly to be weary if someone claims to be G-d, and rises from a deadly wound to prove it. (if it’s not your Jesus) your NT says plainly that you are to regard them as a false one.
Judaism would teach that It’s the Tanach’s view that anyone who claims he is G-d, and who claims to be legitimized by a ressurection s a false prophet, because miracles prove nothing, only faithfulness to the commandments.
It is only you Christiahs who point to a supposedly ressurected human and say, That proves he is G-d, and that all nations must pray to him as lord and savior.
Con, ’”I a m pointing out to you that Even your own New Testament tells you plainly to be weary if someone claims to be G-d, and rises from a deadly wound to prove it. (if it’s not your Jesus) your NT says plainly that you are to regard them as a false one.”
But you know who said That? Jesus himself . The false prophet one warning against the false one?? What’s the point??? So if Jesus undermines his own right to life as only for a righteous one , and tells you the fake one can do that too, what does it serves for?? That would not benefit him at all.
Second, if Jesus is not trustworthy to you , you should be not concerned by what he said about any other prophets. There might be no anti-christ no false prophets wounded deadly at all.
But what he said is clearly understood for us. It tells you all details how to recognize a false anti-christ in the future.
C.R.,
Obviously you’re twisting Scripture to read what you want. Nowhere does either the Hebrew Scriptures or the NT say that all prophets who perform miracles or rise from the dead are false. That’s a ridiculous conclusion.
You are plucking out this and that to say what you want.
Both the Hebrew Scriptures and the NT testament have warnings to be cautious of false prophets are nothing more and nothing less than that.
Neither makes a judgment about all claims to being a prophet. That task is left up to the individual to weigh the entirety of the bible against such claims
and not cherry pick as you’ve done to predetermine you’re own prophet’s qualifications or lack thereof.
David wrote: “Obviously you’re twisting Scripture to read what you want. Nowhere does either the Hebrew Scriptures or the NT say that all prophets who perform miracles or rise from the dead are false.”
On behalf of Con, he never said that “all prophets who perform miracles or rise from the dead are false.” I read all his comments, and the closest he came to saying that is that all prophets who perform miracles and rise from the dead and claim they are God are false. You left out the part about claiming they are God, a context which changes the meaning of what Con wrote.
from the Jew girl
Dina, Show me Dina, where did Jesus say after risen back to life; hi guys I am God!
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20532
“Dina, Show me Dina, where did Jesus say after risen back to life; hi guys I am God!”
Did I say that? Not sure what you’re responding to.
“Jesus didn’t have to become anybody else as he was ; the Messiah. He fulfilled the things God sent him for.”
Eric, Christians argue that Jesus fulfilled the entire Law so no one else has to. Now you’re changing the argument. Do you disagree with that premise?
Eric, Iranaeus isn’t a real Christian? Saint Ephrem isn’t a real Christian? Hildegard isn’t a real Christian? Don’t delude yourself. If Tyese aren’t Christians, nobody is.
Con, we know them by their works not by the ‘great’ name of the church they belong to. Whatever they added to NT , it is not in my interest.
Eric, (respectfully) this leaves me with the impression that you are literally making your religion’s truths up as you go along according to what sounds right to you in your own judgement. If you can’t even listen to the Christian religion’s historic theologians, why should anyone bother to listen to your claims? Do you know who St, Irenaus was? He was a hearer of Polycarp, who himself was a purported disciple of John the Evangelist. In other words, he was A 3rd generation follower of Jesus. If his reading is unimportant, or corrupt then you have no direct link to the teachings of the apostles or of Jesus of Nnazareth. Which Church do you think it was that codified your NT and preserved Jesus’ sayings in writing? It was the Church of Irenaeus! Which church Decided which books were authoritative for the NT and which weren’t? It was the orthodox Churches of which Irenaus was a part.
I am merely telling you, that your own NT text tells you to be very careful about a person who makes claims to divinity. There are many people who claim to be G-d himself, and who demand worship from people based on miracles. This warning in revelation 13 explains partially why Jews cannot ever embrace your religion’s theology about Jesus. Deuteronomy 4:19 tells us explicitly not to worship the “whole host of heaven,” namely hashem’s entourage. So, when you Christians point to (as an example) the captain of hashem’s host in Joshua 5 and say, “that’s Christ, the son, the logos before his incarnation,” can you blame us for refusing to serve him? We are forbidden by Tanakh to worship the host of heaven, that includes the captain of the host of heaven.
The vast majority of Christians want Jews to look at a person (who by all rational definitions) lived, breathed, and DIED in appearance as a man. The NT reinforces a sense of scepticism when revelation 13 and 2 Thessalonians both say that an imposter will come, say he is G-d, and lead people astray with miraculous signs. The Torah doesn’t stand or fall on signs, but on content of godly conduct.
Eric, (respectfully) this leaves me with the impression that you are literally making your religion’s truths up as you go along according to what sounds right to you in your own judgement.”
Not my own but based on what NT says. It tells you a simple truth ; jesus is a call to repentance, message about God’s forgiveness, message of hope, call to turn back to the living God. That’s how so many all around the word come to know God, He is a light to gentiles. You do not have keep making it more than it is. adding this and that what some believe what some not.
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20596
” jesus is a call to repentance, message about God’s forgiveness, message of hope, call to turn back to the living God.”
Jews hear the “call to repentance, message about God’s forgiveness, message of hope, call to turn back to the living God” in the Torah. Since we hear all that already, why do you insist on belief in Jesus, a belief that contradicts Torah?
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?
Eric, forgive me for offering an answer, but seed of the woman is a common Semitic idiom for one who is born of woman, meaning human beings. Scripture uses the phrase born of the/a woman all the time. John the Baptist in the NT is even called “greatest of those born of women.” So, the importance you place on seed of a woman in Genesis 3:15 is slightly overzealous and misplaced. All Genesis is teaching in 3;15 is that humans struggle with sin, but G-d designed it that way, that’s where Jews and Christians differ. Sin is there so that you have free choice and agency, G-d’s plan did not go awry, it went as he intended for nothing is beyond G-d.
It says the serpent was the most cunning of all the beasts of the field. Therefore there is a relationship between This serpent and all other beasts. Also, given this then, was all the other beasts part of S’tan’s entourage. Another point the interesting point is the use of the word “cunning” and where it’s used.
Arum (cunning) Arumim(Naked) well stated Sharbano. Humans in their innocent nakedness (Arumim) are in the same state as the crafty (Arum) serpent.
It’s somewhat unfortunate that the Xtian really doesn’t realize what the Hebrew has to offer. It seems they only consider what Torah records as “mere stories” and not much more. The beauty is reflected in the 8th chapter of Mishlei (Proverbs) in that there is much more than what it seems to the superficial reading.
If it were merely a book detailing “history” and outline “commandments” WHY would David spend to much ink on the subject of Torah in the 119th chapter. Clearly there is something more and it cannot be realized Unless it’s pursuit is in the Hebrew, a language that literally “defines” reality. Once we understand Torah was created even before the earth then we realize its greater purpose. As one Rabbi puts it, The Torah doesn’t “tell us” that which is clean and unclean but the clean and unclean are such Because of Torah. It can be a difficult concept to grasp.
When we look Into Torah, in Hebrew, we soon realize there are issues all over the place. This is where Rabbis such as Rashi come in. He lays out these issues and brings down the clarity to the confusion. Torah was written in such a way that one cannot help but to “ask questions”, as why is there a vav here but not there, etc. Rashi takes one approach in expounding Torah and others enlighten other aspects. Such as, Rabbi S.R. Hirsch, Ba’al HaTurim, Ramban, Sforno etc. There is a purpose behind it all, G-d’s purpose. By writing a Torah in THIS manner it has enabled to be sustained throughout time.
Sharbano I agree but you fail to see the deeper meaning of Torah each time it differs from your own limited view or the view of your sect.
The Torah existed even before creation for the living Torah is the Eternal Dabar Elohim. That is why Yahushuo the Dabar in the Flesh said that He is Master of the Shabat!!
Still you do not understand Numbers 12:
Mosheh saw the FORM OF YHWH … Does YHWH have a form??
In no way would I conform to such an adulterous view of G-d. Your “enlightenment” is of your own imagination. Yours is NOT the G-d Moshe Rabbeinu spoke to us of.
“Mosheh saw the FORM OF YHWH … Does YHWH have a form??”
Lion, how long will you continue to ignore my and Con’s response to you on this question? You ask it repeatedly and ignore our answers repeatedly. It’s getting tiresome.
Hello Sharbano
Unfortunately I feel that your ideas of the hebrew texts are quite confusing and contradictory.
Im I reading you correctly??
Are you stating such ideas that Gen, in particular chapters 3,4 are mythology and not real time historical events? Surley this view of your theology leads you into a very fragile and anti scriptural minefield. All things must be kept in context. There is no reason from the words that Gen ch 3 is just an anolgy. Moses is scribing an actual event of history.
There absolutely nothing to back up your theory. Infact I would say your views would he better suited to an athiest, who completely refuses any scriptual writtings as historic literature.
You open yourself now for massive counter arguments against the entire Jewish Bible. So where does mere storytelling of Gen ch 3 go into reality of say, Abraham, Issac and Jacob?. I take it Israel as a nation never went into bondage etc. I take it the Hebrew Torah should also be taken as bed time reading for children, a fairytale if you like?
Im way confused on your views.
What! WHAT!!??
How could you Possibly come to that conclusion. WHAT theory. How did I propose a “theory”. This certainly explains some things.
Paul,
When I have argued the book of Genesis with some here, they often go into a mythology or some other similar defense when Scripture doesn’t mesh with the pre-conceived familial and cultural propaganda indoctrination of what they believe the reset of the Hebrew Scripture is telling them.
And I’ve found that many don’t hold to an inerrancy concept of Scripture as Christians do.
Actually many believe (at least in my debates this is what they’ve expressed) that even Hebrew Scripture is fraught with errors and that it is absolutely essential to be cognizant and well versed in other Jewish literature such as the Talmud, Midrash, etc. due to the limitations and the errors of the Hebrew Scripture.
David,
Orthodox Jews believe that the story of Adam and Eve and the serpent occurred as recounted, literally, in Genesis. Christians such as yourself are the ones who added interpretations that are not in the text. I do not know how Paul arrived at his understanding that Sharbano views the stories of Scripture as nothing more than fairy tales. I have read Sharbano’s comments myself and nothing he says even hints at such a thing.
Christians have interpreted the story in the Garden to be a prophecy that says that the snake is Satan, the seed is Jesus, and Jesus will defeat Satan and all sin. This explanation appears nowhere in the text; it is the product of the imagination of Christian apologists looking for confirmation of their theology. To accuse us of inventing explanations to make the text fit our preconceived notions is, then, brazenly hypocritical, even if true!
You have made another false statement in saying that we do not believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. Our Scripture is the word of God and He does not err. Find me the statement of one Orthodox Jew on this blog who believes our Scripture is fraught with error. And if you can’t, you must retract your statement and apologize (I’m not holding my breath).
Of course, we believe that YOUR scripture, what you call the “New Testament,” is filled with a mixture of truth and falsehood and a lot of confusion. But that is not OUR Scripture.
Dina, I remember having that conversation with you on that subject . You admitted it is a simple’ beware of snakes’ story. I just wonder why God didn’t add scorpions and other vicious creatures as they are dangerous too while being accidentally stepped upon.
Anyways satan speaking through snake seems kind of odd..
But talking snake doesn’t seem odd at all to you , so was donkey in another story.
But having a pretty SMART snake that knows exactly will of God is and acts against it is even more odd to me.
Is that the only encounter that ‘evil’ in the scriptures ‘acts’ through other creatures , humans? No, look at Job’s story . Satan is supposed yo be the ‘executor’ of the Job’s ordeal . An angel that doesn’t need to put on a human or an animal form to act on but can act through others. Whatever job experienced was pretty bad and part of what caused that ordeal was caused by other people who killed most servants.
There is nothing unusual God using what is opposing Him for His glory. Adam had choice to listen to God or voice of the snake. And God was not surprised by anything. He knew the plan of redemption ahead.
The plan set there is clear. Banned way to tree of life to eternal life until redemption time comes.
Eric,
If you would stop sneering long enough to actually read what I wrote, you would see that I do not think the Adam and Eve story is a lesson to beware of snakes. You have so much contempt for our intelligence that I wonder why you bother talking to us.
For Jews the plain meaning of the text is always the primary meaning. Of course there are deeper meanings, but we can’t discuss those because I don’t accept your Christian eisegesis and you don’t accept our midrashic interpretation.
The Adam and Eve story in its plainest sense is a story containing the Biblical themes of free will, obedience versus disobedience, reward versus punishment. God laid down a commandment; He sent temptation to test them; they failed; He gave them an opportunity to express remorse, which they did not take; He punished them. It really is that simple.
Why is it so difficult for you to take at face value a talking snake but not all the other unusual events of the Bible? Why all of a sudden in this case it has to be Satan in the form of a snake? Where does the Bible ever support the notion of Satan as a serpent?
Dina, why does God need to punish the snake after all? He made him that way…There is no evil force speaking through the snake so there is only one solution for the source of him being tricky, tempting, leading to rebellion against God. Does God work against Himself? No, but according to your view this is how you show HIm. God gave his wisdom to the snake , understanding what death is, to an animal who never experienced death but knows what it is , the list can be long. Then He has to punish him for what He equipped him with. The snake is doing God’s will (as there is no evil force involved) but then he needs to be cursed for what he does.( for doing God’s will)
Real nonsense.
Eric, the plain meaning of God’s words is nonsense?
Dina, no, but your understanding that God acts against himself based on your snake -story interpretation .
Eric, where did I say God acts against Himself? It’s not my snake-story interpretation. You are the one who comes with an interpretation. I go according to the literal and plain text.
Something of interest to contemplate. The Xtian text speaks of J’sus coming in the clouds. Considering the Xtian proposition that the entire Torah is “about” J’sus we will consider this cloud as the covering that encompasses all of Torah. What is literal in Torah is murky when looking through this cloud. It is a safe zone for the adherents of Xtianity. Nothing will interfere. When someone will disperse parts of that cloud and a ray of light from Torah is seen the fear of the cloud dissipating entirely brings a sense of foreboding. This foreboding causes the individual to search for better cloud cover. Therefore we see the desperate need for the cloud cover of J’sus to encompass the entire Torah. It cannot be allowed that the fires of Torah burn away all the cloud cover.
I have had extensive discussions with Xtians on many of these matters and when confronted with Torah words of light, the discussion takes a decidedly different turn. When someone comes with an idea of Torah that I hadn’t realized previously my first instinct is “that’s interesting”. From there I contemplate everything about it and its relationship to the rest of Torah. Being under a cloud cover, however, the Xtian is unwilling to contemplate these Torah words and instead looks further for that cloud cover. We can remain in the clouds and leave Torah to be hidden or we can see through the cloud with distinctness.
This is just more Xtian hyperbole to say “Xtians” are the bearers of scriptural honesty. How can you Even BEGIN to contemplate such an idea since you cannot even read the language. Your ignorance is compounded by the statement (“due to the limitations and the errors of the Hebrew Scripture”. ) There are NO limitations and there are no “ERRORS” in the text. Everything written in Torah and what is Not written in Torah is for a Specific reason and purpose. Xtianity cannot accept this premise as it creates a conundrum for them and their religion. It is for the same reason they simply Have to Deny the existence of Torah She’b’al Peh, even though every civilization that ever lived had their own. What IS for certain is Xtianity has had to use the method of Eisegesis to explain what is a contradiction.
Con a lesson in Hebrew is required for you. What kind of allusion are you implying here?
עֵירֹם nakedness from the verb עוּר to be exposed
עָרוּם subtle from the verb עָרֹם to be shrewd
Now nobody of your sect will correct your error but when the truth is spoken they denied it proving once again that they are cunning the words like the serpent…
We could argue that the ayin representing the eyes means something in each word.
Plus the 1) word is pronounce ÉROM
the 2) word is pronounce AROUM
Two different meaning like in English the word SON is different than the word SUN … they can have metaphorically some connection but still mean in our realm different realities…
Your Strong’s is failing you here. Once again you have proven your inability to grasp Hebrew grammar. Don’t EVEN come here telling us ANYTHING about Hebrew.
Considering how you want to profess knowledge and Have to be Proven to be misleading; here is the text. Check your own KJV. ” A lesson in Hebrew is required for you”, Indeed!! Now, WHO and which sect needs to correct their error and whose “truth” being spoken is denied proving once again that they are cunning. When will you FINALLY admit the lack of knowledge when it comes to Hebrew and quit correcting others when it is YOU who need the correcting, Once Again.
והנחש היה (ערום) מכל חית השדה אשר עשה יהוה אלהים
ויאמר אל-האשה אף כי-אמר אלהים לא תאכלו מכל עץ הגן
ויהיו שניהם (ערומים) האדם ואשתו ולא יתבששו
Sharbano in psychology your accusation towards me are called projections. Meaning the ignorant in Hebrew is you. You should put the vowels in order to read better.
Genesis 3 v.7: the word עֵירֻמִּם reads like this ÉR(OU)MIM which mean naked in the plural not the same as עָרוּם AR(OU)M Genesis 3 v.1
P.S.: Do you understand that the vowels changes the meaning of a word or not???
Basic example Hebrew 101:
אֵל = EL (The Father Almighty)
אֶל = towards, at, to…
Same consonants but different vowels. The vowels are given in the Tanakh by Holy Tradition (Oral Torah). You should know that but like a fool you just prove how unintelligent, choleric and ignorant you are without counting how you lost credibility with your corrupt human spirit…
Fool!!
P.S.: I hope it is not Mizrachi who taught you that for I heard strange things from him… Or may be a low grade kabbalist taught you something that you believed naively in this case you are just a little sheep following a wrong master…
You’ve shown your true colors once again in regards to Hebrew. If you Could read Hebrew you wouldn’t have selected the WRONG VERSE. I copied just the Hebrew, and yes Without vowels, and you were unable to decipher it.
So now, O great one, who is the fool, who is unintelligent, choleric and ignorant, and who has lost credibility with their corrupt human spirit.
Lion, the only people on this blog who think you have real knowledge of Hebrew are non-Hebrew speakers, because they are the only ones you can fool into believing that. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Actually, I’m not sorry at all. If I have succeeded, which I doubt, it will be very good for you.
I can understand why you literally Despise R’ Yossi Mizrachi so much. He has brought countless Jews back to Torah and a good many Away From your Xtianity. It is hard to swallow isn’t it.
Sharbano and Dina I said:
Genesis 3 v.7 (or Genesis 2 v.25): the word עֵירֻמִּם reads like this ÉR(OU)MIM which mean naked in the plural not the same as עָרוּם AR(OU)M Genesis 3 v.1
P.S.: Do you understand that the vowels changes the meaning of a word or not???
Basic example Hebrew 101:
אֵל = EL (The Father Almighty)
אֶל = towards, at, to…
What is wrong in what I wrote? Nothing that is why again you divert with your insult. Stick to the issue or may be you can not because your heart is full of lies and deceits. Your view is the bubble that will soon burst. As you reject the Beloved you will be rejected for only when you will recognize the Messiah of Israel will you be delivered.
Denigrate the dabarim (words) of YHWH, you will pay your foolishness. Your masters are expert in mockery but are carnal in knowing the One Torah.
Lion, you are the one denigrating the words, the devarim, of Hashem, by worshiping Jesus in violation of the first two Commandments and Deuteronomy 4. I wonder how you justify yourself in light of Deuteronomy 4 and how you dare. You have yet to confront that passage, though I presented it to you many times. What’s holding you back?
Here are all three With vowels. By the way What source are You using.
וַיִּֽהְי֤וּ שְׁנֵיהֶם֙ (עֲרוּמִּ֔ים) הָֽאָדָ֖ם וְאִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֖א יִתְבּשָֽׁשׁוּ:
וְהַנָּחָשׁ֙ הָיָ֣ה (עָר֔וּם) מִכֹּל֙ חַיַּ֣ת הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשָׂ֖ה יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ אֶל־הָ֣אִשָּׁ֔ה אַ֚ף כִּֽי־אָמַ֣ר אֱלֹהִ֔ים לֹ֣א תֹֽאכְל֔וּ מִכֹּ֖ל עֵ֥ץ הַגָּֽן:
וַתִּפָּקַ֨חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיֵּ֣דְע֔וּ כִּ֥י (עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם) הֵ֑ם וַֽיִּתְפְּרוּ֙ עֲלֵ֣ה תְאֵנָ֔ה וַיַּֽעֲשׂ֥וּ לָהֶ֖ם חֲגֹרֹֽת:
Dear Dina, YAHUSHUO is the one speaking to Mosheh and the one who gave the Torah to Israel. Worshipping the Son-Dabar of YHWH in the flesh is not disobeying the commandments but through Him we are WORSHIPPING in truth and spirit YHWH
I know it is hard for you to understand after 2000 years of lies and deceits from your sect. 2000 years of persecution and humiliation for the crime of having rejected the Messenger of YHWH that must not have been a small crime.
If it were not for the intercession of the saints your ordeal could have been much longer for YHWH 1000 years is like a day…
Now we are in the final stage were nations will combat Israel; where Gog from Magog will come to combat us. If then we turn not toward the true Messiah of Israel and we do not listen to Eliyahu then dear daughter of Israel YHWH himself will intervene for it is said in Malachi the prophet:
“5 “See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction.”
You bear here a strong responsibility!!
I just hope and try to open your eyes if you are truly seeking the truth…
Lion, you did not reconcile Deuteronomy 4 with your belief in Jesus (by the way, your silly Hebrew transliteration of his name is…silly).
Deuteronomy 4 teaches that we are to worship God only as He appeared to us at Sinai. He did not teach us about Jesus, nor tell us that Jesus was the one giving the Torah. I suggest you actually read the chapter. Then you will see how you did not even begin to address the issue. (Hey, it can’t hurt to dream!)
I don’t need Hebrew lessons from you Lion. YUD Shin Vav Ayin spells Yeshua, a shortened form of Yehoshua (Joshua) when you call Jesus Yaoshuo or whatever it is, you demonstrate that you are believing in groundless, baseless, speculations about grammar and syntax with no actual authoritative source.
Con you seem very frustrated. Are you ok?
Yahushuo יהושע You should know one thing you speak of ignorance and still are ignorant for having chosen a sect instead of YHWH
For your info ask any Rabbi if the HOLY NAME YHWH has not been hidden in its right pronunciation hindered by not putting the right vowels to pronounce the Name
I know the right vowels to pronounce the Name and YAHUSHUO gets his Name from YHWH
YAHUSHUO means YHWH SAVES in ancient Hebrew ayin can be pronounced like a O although its sound like a A… If you knew other tongues you would understand, example:
SPACIBO in Russian is pronounced SPACIBA it means Thank you but the literal ancient meaning means ELOAH SAVES
P.S.: Con stop your denial and wake up. You have been deceived by clever minds and now your salvation has been transferred from YAHUSHUO to your own self. In the other side the only Name that saves is not you but YHWH saves… You better know and call His Name…
(In NKJV: the Lord should read YHWH)
3 The pains of death surrounded me,
And the pangs of Sheol laid hold of me;
I found trouble and sorrow.
4 Then I called upon the name of the Lord:
“O Lord, I implore You, deliver my soul!”
5 Gracious is the Lord, and righteous;
Yes, our God is merciful.
6 The Lord preserves the simple;
I was brought low, and He saved me.
7 Return to your rest, O my soul,
For the Lord has dealt bountifully with you.
8 For You have delivered my soul from death,
My eyes from tears,
And my feet from falling.
9 I will walk before the Lord
In the land of the living.
10 I believed, therefore I spoke,
“I am greatly afflicted.”
11 I said in my haste,
“All men are liars.”
12 What shall I render to the Lord
For all His benefits toward me?
13 I will take up the cup of salvation,
And call upon the name of the Lord.
14 I will pay my vows to the Lord
Now in the presence of all His people.
15 Precious in the sight of the Lord
Is the death of His saints.
16 O Lord, truly I am Your servant;
I am Your servant, the son of Your maidservant;
You have loosed my bonds.
17 I will offer to You the sacrifice of thanksgiving,
And will call upon the name of the Lord.
18 I will pay my vows to the Lord
Now in the presence of all His people,
19 In the courts of the Lord’s house,
In the midst of you, O Jerusalem.
Praise the Lord! (Psalm 116 NKJV)
Lion, you claim to be a prophet. Why should we believe you? Why should anyone believe you?
I had also intended to mention we already proved to you that it is against Torah to pronounce the ineffable name in any place Not designated. Your flippant use is using His name in a superficial manner shows a disregard for Hashem. It is not unlike taking a King and treating him as nothing more than a commoner. In the times of the Kings this would be a capital offense, how much more so for HaKodesh Barchu.
Lion, you are a false prophet because your preaching contradicts Torah, especially Deuteronomy 4, which you are unable to resolve. All you can say is that Jesus is the one who spoke at Mount Sinai, in direct contradiction to Deuteronomy 4. Then you hope that my eyes will be opened. That is not exactly a resolution.
You are advocating worship of a god that was unknown to our fathers.
You cannot produce a sign.
And, you don’t even know Hebrew.
You “Say” you know the pronunciation but are unwilling to disclose Where your information comes from. Therefore we Know you are misleading everyone. From your usage and transliterations it sounds more like you follow an Arabic dialect and Not Hebrew.
Dina and Sharbano, I love you and may YHWH bless you that you may see his Face and proclaim his Name.
I want to settle first the debate around:
Genesis 3 v.7: the word עֵירֻמִּם reads like this ÉR(OU)MIM which mean naked in the plural not the same as עָרוּם AR(OU)M Genesis 3 v.1 which means subtle
You provided Sharbano also Genesis 2 v.25 to back up your claim :
וַיִּֽהְי֤וּ שְׁנֵיהֶם֙ (עֲרוּמִּ֔ים) הָֽאָדָ֖ם וְאִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֖א יִתְבּשָֽׁשׁוּ
עֲרוּמִּ֔ים AR(OU)MIM which is the plural of SUBTLE not naked … again bad translation from translator without knowledge
Here is the correct translation of Genesis 2 v.25:
“And they were both subtle the Adam and his wife they were not disgraced”
Here subtle looks like as the serpent which was also subtle.
Subtle means:
1.thin, tenuous, or rarefied, as a fluid or an odor.
2.fine or delicate in meaning or intent; difficult to perceive or understand:
3.delicate or faint and mysterious:
4.requiring mental acuteness, penetration, or discernment:
5.characterized by mental acuteness or penetration:
6.cunning, wily, or crafty:
7.insidious in operation:
That confirms the Oral Tradition which teaches us that Adam and Hawah bodies were more lighter and more subtle in their capacities than we are now after the Fall
Hebrew is crucial and good translation must be done in the Author of Scriptures, not with human corruption of the Precious and Sacred Text!!
Conclusion naked does not equal subtle although the lost of grace make them loose their subtlety and perceive thereafter their nakedness. Their nakedness being more than bodily … their lost their subtlety of the original innocence confirming that their disobedience was a real tragedy for humankind. Without the giving back of the New Innocence from the Perfect Man Yahushuo, men would have been lost forever like all the rebel angels.
What a great Mercy of YHWH towards his little children the last from the old creation now having become because of the Messiah the first in the New Creation. Baruch YHWH now and forever!!
Do you really thing Strong’s is a “Viable” resource.
Christians always talk of the “power of sin and death,” that Jesus comes to set you free from. This power is hashem’s power, not the power of some external enemy force. G-d has no enemy, G-d is sovereign. G-d created the Satan, he created, uses, and controls the angel of death, he put the tree of knowledge and the serpent in the garden. HE PLANNED IT THAT WAY! The angel of death did G-d’s bidding in the Exodus. The Satan tempts Job by G-d’s permission in that book. You Christians behave as though you are being “saved” from some external evil demonic force, but what you are really saying is that you are being saved from G-d himself, and from his sovereignty. The word Chet means to miss the mark. Everyone misses the mark, but it’s not the end of the world. Sin is not an independent power, it’s not the boogeyman, it is hashem’s will just as good is. You do not need a savior because G-d has never been out of control,
“You do not need a savior because G-d has never been out of control”
CR
Can I use that on a t-shirt? That’s great!
Hello
Im getting one to!
Mine says
“God is in control, and His Son Yeshua is the controlling savior!”
☺
That’s cute. Sounds like something from the Pokeman game.
Paul you missed the point. Christianity says G-d’s son/word had to come and die because man’s sin broke G-d’s perfect creation. If something is created unbroken by an uncreated and perfect being, it cannot be broken by a created and imperfect being. That’s illogical. The point you miss is that
1. G-d created everything including the Satan
2. G-d is the one who set the stage in Eden for the entire temptation and sin to Occur.
3. G-d sets the criteria by which all souls are to be judged.(the Torah)
4. G-d himself in Isaiah says he makes the good and creates evil.
So, if the Satan really is as evil as you say, (the enemy of G-d) if sinners burn In hellfire forever for rejecting the mangod plan of salvation, it is your own god that you are being saved from, and that you should be questioning nothing else.
There can’t be a plan of salvation from sin when the whole thing (including sin and its consequences) was G-d’s plan to begin with. G-d has a plan to “save” you from his own plan? Your view of Salvation, Atonment, etc. is flatly contradicted in Genesis, Job, and Ezekel. The idea that G-d must kill himself in order to satisfy his own wrath, about his own plan is just absurd. Texts like Exodus and Job prove that Satan has no free agency, he does what G-d says and always has, in Job, during exodus, etc. People like Lion can try to putty the verses until kingdom come, but the plain sense wins out every time.
Con, I will address that line in your response to Paul;
“There can’t be a plan of salvation from sin when the whole thing (including sin and its consequences) was G-d’s plan to begin with. G-d has a plan to “save” you from his own plan? ”
Do you mean ‘sin’ rebelling against God was His intention, His plan? Or it is rather wiser to say God was aware of peoples’ rebellion and had a plan in His mind how to save us despite all that?
Claiming that sin is God’s plan is a nonsense. He doesn’t desire our rebellion.
“Or it is rather wiser to say God was aware of peoples’ rebellion and had a plan in His mind how to save us despite all that?”
Nope. God gave us free will. And He taught us what to do to gain atonement for our sins, all on our own, if we so choose. Read Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18, and Ezekiel 33. Read each verse carefully without skipping around, and you will see that Jesus is completely unnecessary for “redemption.”
Dina, only on your own you can’t ‘jump over death’ . You can’t fix what was taken away in Eden. That is why Jesus is needed. His life laid down for us is why we can have our lives back again. Our choice , what we can do on our own, what depends on us is repentance.
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?
Con your exposition is very worrying. It implies that the Beast of World War II according to you is a good beast… Hmmm certainly not! Therefore if you can response: Is the Shoah according to you willed by Eloah?
Don’t forget that bad will exist but that the Supreme One can accomplish his will nevertheless for his Intelligence and Power is Almighty.
Lion, G-d created humans with free choice and agency, to choose good, and to reject evil, but he is the source of ALL OF IT, good and bad, so people accept what happens good or ill. He is in control of all of it. Does a storm that kills millions of innocents prove that G-d is wicked, or do things happen (by his leave,) that we humans must make a reasoned and conscious decision to avoid or confront? G-d created humans with free will, (including hitter.) Good and evil is like an elaborate labyrinth which we walk through, sending us in confusing directions, with extremes of both goodness and wickedness which we confront. On the right side of the labyrinth is the truth, and on the left, is falsehood. G-d has created it all. And has given us instructions to guide us through the labyrinth.
You have suggested that it is unthinkable that G-d could allow hitler to exist, (this from a man whose theology believes that G-d kills his own child in order to appease his rigid justice and allow a pardon for his creatures.
Hitler (like a storm) is something that could have been avoided. European and American universities could have chosen to disavow Eugenics, Jim Crow laws, and other systematically racist ideologies. Social Darwinism could have been disavowed as well. The church could have ceased showing passion plays that vilified all Jews of all generations as a people group. (The doctrine of the wandering Jew) They could have chosen to not wall Jews into ghettos, and prevent them from being involved in society. Are you aware that most Nazi rules governing the seperation of Jews from German society have antecedents in the canons and councils of the Church? Many things could have been done to avoid the Shoah, but yes, HASHEM is the source of all.
C.R.,
Your reasoning is nonsensical and non-biblical.
Just because God is ultimately in control and all powerful doesn’t mean that He has no enemies or that people (or angels for that matter) have no free will to rebel and turn from Him or actively attempt to oppose His will.
The Hebrew Scriptures prove you wrong. God can and has used any and all to further His will and in this sense we all are subject to serve Him and His will whether we like it or not. He has even used His enemies and those enemies of His people, including opposing belligerent enemy armies to discipline Israel often and repeatedly when she strayed from God. Those who oppose Him and yet are used by Him in this manner to further His will are His servants in this limited sense.
Keeping the above in mind, you have made the error of putting into the same category, and equating as equal all uses of the term “servant” as if all those subject to God’s will are “willing” servants solely because you read the term “servant.”
And to say that we don’t “need” a savior is to deny Scripture. We are human, and from time to time as individuals and/or a people we are prone to make poor decisions resulting in the rejection of God and His will. The Hebrew Scriptures state time and again that God saves. And He can and has sent others to intercede and save in this process throughout history. In fact, without God’s saving grace not to give Israel what she deserved, Israel, as a light to the nations (which would include your group, the Noahides) would have been extinguished long ago. Israel in a sense is saving you today because God saves!
Moses stepped in to intercede, dare I say “save” Israel from her own behavior right out of the gate at Mount Sinai. Had Moses not stepped in, God made it clear that He would have started over and built another more powerful nation through Moses himself. Ultimately God saved Israel from herself. And Israel saves YOU.
Check with your fellow Noahides, God saved Noah, and Noah, the only righteous, saved the world. Or, better yet, read it for yourself.
So, If God hadn’t “saved” Noah, who followed the will of God and “saved” the world from extinction due to their own behavior, and the resulting pagan world from which God selected Abraham, through whom God called out a people to be His own set apart, from whom God provided Moses to intercede and save from their own rebellious behavior, thus preserving the oral and then written revelation of God to the world, your namesake and the account of him (Noah) and how he saved the world would have been lost forever.
{Just because God is ultimately in control and all powerful doesn’t mean that He has no enemies or that people (or angels for that matter) have no free will to rebel and turn from Him or actively attempt to oppose His will. }
And WHERE in Tanach will you find such a reference.
{Moses stepped in to intercede, dare I say “save” Israel from her own behavior right out of the gate at Mount Sinai. Had Moses not stepped in, God made it clear that He would have started over and built another more powerful nation through Moses himself. Ultimately God saved Israel from herself. And Israel saves YOU.}
Moshe was merely a conduit for G-d’s action. As He says, (I) brought you out of Egypt. He spoke on Israel’s behalf but that doesn’t say the power came from Moshe. But this is what You want your J’sus to be. Therefore your comparisons to Torah to exemplify J’sus doesn’t hold water. In fact it says the opposite.
Hello Sharbano
I really am getting confused. You seem to agree and totally disagree all at the same time.
Im sure your bible was written by a Jewish gentile who atheist views were written by a non existent God who created you snd I.
Sorry.
Im still confused.??
What led you then to your conclusion. Apparently Dina didn’t come away with the understanding You have. Maybe it’s derived from your very limited knowledge of Judaism.
Sharbano still persisting in your bad faith. All your view comes from your sect not the Torah nor the Prophets. Your apply your Talmudic view on the Torah instead of submitting to the Torah.
Christian has a better interpretation of Scriptures for they follow the Author of Scriptures… Capiche!!
Xtians do NOT interpret scripture, as you allege. What they do in EVERY instance is Change what the words ARE and not even what words mean, although You Do make attempts at changing the meaning, to no avail.
Christian has a better interpretation
That’s exactly it though lion, you only have an interpretation. Your interpretation however isn’t based on the plain meaning of the verses, as even you admit. Christians come with an eisogetical approach to the Torah. You come at the bible to begin with because of an alleged “experience” of Jesus, and that experience is what colors your reading. Jews are coming at the question from another angle. The standpoint of G-d’s commandments that they were given and ordered to uphold by G-d.
Sharbano,
You wrote:. “He spoke on Israel’s behalf but that doesn’t say the power came from Moshe.”
My response: Oh really?! Nice straw-man as is usually the case when I’m debating on this blog with those who cannot accept their own Hebrew Scriptures.
Moses gave the glory to God, we agree on that.
You wrote:
And WHERE in Tanach will you find such a reference.
(that):
Just because God is ultimately in control and all powerful doesn’t mean that He has no enemies or that people (or angels for that matter) have no free will to rebel and turn from Him or actively attempt to oppose His will.
My response:
Concerning His people:
Hebrew Scriptures version J.P.S. Psalm 106:
106:19 They made a calf in Horeb, and worshipped the molten image.
106:20 Thus they changed their glory into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass.
106:21 They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;
106:22 Wondrous works in the land of Ham, and terrible things by the Red sea.
106:23 Therefore he said that he would destroy them, had not Moses his chosen stood before him in the breach, to turn away his wrath, lest he should destroy them.
106:24 Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word:
106:25 But murmured in their tents, and hearkened not unto the voice of the LORD.
106:26 Therefore he lifted up his hand against them, to overthrow them in the wilderness:
106:27 To overthrow their seed also among the nations, and to scatter them in the lands.
106:28 They joined themselves also unto Baalpeor, and ate the sacrifices of the dead.
106:29 Thus they provoked him to anger with their inventions: and the plague brake in upon them.
More examples of defiance against the commands of God continues in Psalm 106:
106:34 They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them:
106:35 But were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works.
106:36 And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them.
106:37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils,
106:38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.
106:39 Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions.
106:40 Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.
Regarding God’s use of enemy nations (most of whom were pagan) which “hated” His people; with a “vile” nation; there are many such examples:
Psalm 106:
106:41 And he gave them into the hand of the heathen; and they that hated them ruled over them.
106:42 Their enemies also oppressed them, and they were brought into subjection under their hand.
106:43 Many times did he deliver them; but they provoked him with their counsel, and were brought low for their iniquity.
Deuteronomy 32:
16 They roused Him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations did they provoke Him.
17 They sacrificed unto demons, no-gods, gods that they knew not, new gods that came up of late, which your fathers dreaded not.
18 Of the Rock that begot thee thou wast unmindful, and didst forget G-d that bore thee.
21 They have roused Me to jealousy with a no-god; they have provoked Me with their vanities; and I will rouse them to jealousy with a no-people; I will provoke them with a vile nation.
The book of Judges is all about God using Israel’s enemy’s to discipline them. Here’s one example of God selling them into the hand of their enemies:
Judges 2:
2:11 And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and served Baalim:
2:12 And they forsook the LORD God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the LORD to anger.
2:13 And they forsook the LORD, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.
2:14 And the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of spoilers that spoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies round about, so that they could not any longer stand before their enemies.
We could go on and on but here’s one last example of the Northern Kingdom which God gave into the hands of her enemy Assyria for their disobedience:
2 Kings 17:
22 And the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them;
23 until HaShem removed Israel out of His sight, as He spoke by the hand of all His servants the prophets. So Israel was carried away out of their own land to Assyria, unto this day.
This is the second time that adherents to Xtianity are unable to grasp what is clear.
What does disobedience by a people have to do with where power originates. As was said, Moshe was a conduit for the power of G-d. He, himself, didn’t have that inherent power to do so. Do you believe the Sea of Reeds split on account of a staff wielded by Moshe.
What was the theme of your proposition and your counter-argument. By Our analysis you have subjected G-d to a “battle” with other forces and to further the argument then used rebellious people. Needless to say, a Savior in Judaism has no comparison to the savior in Xtianity. Trying to make a comparative argument in this sense is ineffectual.
It seems generally some will forget their own narrative and the subsequent responses have them confused.
David, here are a few questions for your to ponder:
Is Israel more wicked, stiff-necked, and rebellious than the other nations of the world?
If yes, then why did God choose her out of all the nations to be His kindgom of priests and a holy nation, His treasured nations (these are Biblical terms)?
If not, then what is the reason for all these harsh rebukes?
Finally, why do you hyper-focus on Israel’s sins and not the sins of your own ancestors, which are far more grave?
Dina you asked question to David that I will respond for they are good questions:
1) you asked: Is Israel more wicked, stiff-necked, and rebellious than the other nations of the world?
2) you said: If yes, then why did God choose her out of all the nations to be His kindgom of priests and a holy nation, His treasured nations (these are Biblical terms)?
or If not, then what is the reason for all these harsh rebukes?
3) you asked: Finally, why do you hyper-focus on Israel’s sins and not the sins of your own ancestors, which are far more grave?
All questions will converge to this response: Israel was chosen not because of its righteousness but because the Elohim chose whom he wants. All after the flood where the sons of Noah the faithful, his sons filled the earth. We are from Shem the firstborn of Noah we were among the sons of Shem to be a nation of priests a holy people because YHWH wills it. No merit from our part pure election and grace from the Elohim.
Now the Pharisees may see that we were chosen because were the most bright and smart of all but that is racist for the love of Eloah is given to all but accepted by a few even among Israel. Therefore only a humble heart and full of Faith can let the Elohim do his plan on him for indeed those who say yes and obey to Elohay and have the faith like Abraham will become what they were called to be… sons of the Elyon.
Here is Deuteronomy 9 responding also to your questions:
“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.”
Lion, does the Bible give a reason for why God chose Abraham, and if so, what is it?
Does the Bible give a reason for why God chose the Jewish people, and if so, what is it?
By the way, Lion, you did not answer any of the questions directly.
Sharbano,
Be specific and state a point I actually made (rather than your invention) and your counter argument.
You might as well be arguing with yourself.
Are you enjoying yourself? Fine with me but don’t attach my name to it please.
Bye.
Sharbano, sorry to interfere;
{Just because God is ultimately in control and all powerful doesn’t mean that He has no enemies or that people (or angels for that matter) have no free will to rebel and turn from Him or actively attempt to oppose His will. } you asked ;
And WHERE in Tanach will you find such a reference. ?
Look at the countries and kingdoms opposing Israel in Daniel , Zechariah, Isaiah Do they oppose God and God’s people? Yes. But that doesn’t mean God is not in control , He knows how to turn all into His glory and accomplish His purposes using even opposition.
He created the opposition Eric, to be the opposition. Do you not see that? G-d is never out of control of any forces. This is what makes the Christian notion of Satan so baffling. How can the Satan war with G-d? How does G-d have no other choice but to kill his son in order to appease his strict justice? He is G-d, he could do anything.
Con you are ignorant of Ezekiel chap.38:
”‘Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal.”
You said Con: ”He created the opposition Eric, to be the opposition”
Now Con compare your statement. In your logic Gog is the opposition created by YHWH where YHWH will be the opposition against is own opposition…
Don’t you see how distorted your interpretation is… like a serpent and the follower of your sect you have become twisted… Pathetic.
Now the correct interpretation is that The Elohim did not created robots but free beings who have a choice to obey or disobey him. The fallen angels can not be restore having committed the blaspheme of the Ruah Holy they can not be on the forces of good but serve in the forces of evil.
We know already the winner. The Resurrected!! We are now in the final stage… Stay tuned!!
David, it is true that God acts through human agents. But they are simply His tools. We have never relied on human saviors, even Moses, understanding that God is the One Who is doing all that saving. We also see each agent as a temporary tool, so once a leader is dead, he is no longer God’s saving agent.
That is why comparisons of the Christian doctrine that you must accept Jesus as your lord and savior to Moses’s temporary intercession for the Jewish people always fail. There is no comparable doctrine in Judaism. We put not our trust in princes nor in a son of man in whom there is no salvation (Psalm 146:3).
Con, if God has no enemies how do you explain Hitlers murder of the Jewish kid? How wouold you explain the fact of torturing others? Will of God???
I would be not surprised you would consider Hitler a friend of God as he did what God told him to do.
Eric, you wrote, “I would be not surprised you would consider Hitler a friend of God as he did what God told him to do.”
Either you are not serious, and thus too emotional; or you are serious, and you’re wicked because it’s simply evil to accuse such a nice, respectful gentleman as Con of believing such a thing :).
I think you are not serious and too emotional, because I don’t think you believe that Con sees Hitler as God’s friend. Of course God has enemies, but not enemies who operate independently of Him or who have power independent of Him (Psalm 139:21-22).
Jews believe that every historical event occurs according to God’s plan, whether it’s a tsunami or a mass murder. This does not absolve the murderer, although the tsunami remains blameless.
ok, Dina, so whose intention was to murder the kids, whose will was to murder others in gas chambers? Whose intention, will was to burn others alive? God’s? As His enemy operates according to His will?
Well, that means those who came to rescue to this people were acting against God’s will as God’s will was to let the enemy carry on the terrible executions. ( especially on the innocent little ones)
Open your eyes a bit.
Eric, the people who did the murdering acted of their own free will. The people who did the saving acted of their own free will. And it was God’s will to allow it to happen.
So let me ask you this. Scripture teaches that God uses the nations to punish Israel, but in the end He will punish them for hurting Israel. Why would God punish them? Aren’t they doing His will?
Take your head out of the sand.
Dina, God is not punishing others for carrying on His will. There you have the answer in which will they operated. You were exposed to evil , punishment because of your own sins- that is what God mean by saying He was using the nations to punish you, but He is not the author of ordering an individual to torture one, hang the other, burn the third one.etc
Exactly!
“The word Chet means to miss the mark. Everyone misses the mark, but it’s not the end of the world. Sin is not an independent power, it’s not the boogeyman, it is hashem’s will just as good is. You do not need a savior because G-d has never been out of control.”
Well said!
Hello Dina
Not sure if you will see this?
Is the above your quote or are you simply pasting somebody’s else post to make apoint of view??
Catching up here on old quotes.
I will ask anyway.
Are you stating that “sin”, to miss the mark, is Gods ultimate sovereign will to be placed either in front of man, say temptation, or another way, the indwelling sin nature that can be nutured and controlled through obedience etc? Or simply put another way, sin, was inputed into man by God?
Thanks
Paul, it’s Hashem’s will that people freely choose, but it’s also His will to test us and give us challenges. And if we fail, we get up again. And it’s okay, because He understands what it’s like to be human, having created us Himself. He gave us the gift of repentance, of starting over, every time we miss the mark. We cannot fathom His loving kindness.
Those challenges are different for the type of individual. I couldn’t stand in the Heavenly Court and say how well I overcame the tendency to murder. But one who Has murdered can stand and say I fought off the urge to murder.
A righteous individual, on the other hand, will have the strictest of challenges. Even the slightest mishap can cause punishment. For lack of an example, he may not have the proper Kavanah in prayer, and would be judged on that, or maybe he forgot a blessing on water.
In other words when looked at properly we all have challenges for the sole purpose in achieving that higher level of godliness.
Hi Dina
So the sin nature which Yourself believe in, the indwelling sin, to miss the mark, where did it come from. Sin must have a start point.
What I mean is a origin. Sin, It is now in man. Sin is to miss the mark. So its not Gods standard, or even a fraction of His statutes, because in God, there are no, “missing the mark”.
We are made in the image of God. That’s not a visible image. Why would God create man in His image, which at the same time has the ability to sin, if one wishes, when for God it is impossible to sin, because by His very nature God cannot sin.
God doesnt tempt man. Yes God can and does put us through trials and tribulations, but thats not the same as tempting us to do something which is contary to His Name. Infact its totally the opposite, trials and tribs are there to encourage us to seek After Gods love and stand in faith through hardship. Only satan is the tempter of bad, not God.
I find it difficult to reconcile your views that the God of Israel created man in such a condition that he, man will stumble, because God created him to stumble. That must be true, in your view, because the origin of sin is in Gods image, and the origin of man is of God. So the start point of sin is God.
To that conclusion, God must have sin.
Thats why I find your views totally alien.
Ouch!
Sorry for the double post.
Lion, Paul, Eric. G-d created humans with free choice and agency, to choose good, and to reject evil, but he is the source of ALL OF IT, good and bad, so people accept what happens good or ill. He is in control of all of it. Does a storm that kills millions of innocents prove that G-d is wicked, or do things happen (by his leave,) that we humans must make a reasoned and conscious decision to avoid or confront? G-d created humans with free will, (including hitter.) Good and evil is like an elaborate labyrinth which we walk through, sending us in confusing directions, with extremes of both goodness and wickedness which we confront. On the right side of the labyrinth is the truth, and on the left, is falsehood. G-d has created it all. And has given us instructions to guide us through the labyrinth.
You have suggested that it is unthinkable that G-d could allow hitler to exist, (this from a man whose theology believes that G-d kills his own child in order to appease his rigid justice and allow a pardon for his creatures.
Hitler (like a storm) is something that could have been avoided. European and American universities could have chosen to disavow Eugenics, Jim Crow laws, and other systematically racist ideologies. Social Darwinism could have been disavowed as well. The church could have ceased showing passion plays that vilified all Jews of all generations as a people group. (The doctrine of the wandering Jew) They could have chosen to not wall Jews into ghettos, and prevent them from being involved in society. Are you aware that most Nazi rules governing the seperation of Jews from German society have antecedents in the canons and councils of the Church? Many things could have been done to avoid the Shoah, but yes, HASHEM is the source of all.
Con, “Hitler (like a storm) is something that could have been avoided.” If his free will let him do whatever evil he desired then the disaster was an outcome of his evil choice, not God’s will. Definitely he didn’t listen to the voice of God but to the evil opposition God didn’t give out the command to kill and Hitler simply obeyed.
God is in control of all of , there is a difference to what you said. He knows ahead of all what will happen and knows of peoples choices ( bad and good) and He has solution to every situation , but it is us who are responsible for our choices to harm others or not. ( bringing Hitlers example or any evil doers) . It is up to us whom we will choose to obey; God or the opposition. You do not want to call it Satan, I do not care , we can call it opposition.
We do not call evil choices as fulfillment of God’s will ever. But we say God is in control , which mean she is aware of the situation and might have reason to let things happen for a certain purposes.
Lion, my interpretation is vindicated by the events of the Exodus. Why didn’t Pharoah let Israel go? Because G-d hardened his heart. Egypt was still regarded as Israel’s enemy in scripture, even when it was G-d himself who was hardening Pharaoh’s heart. This addresses your Ezekiel objection. Man has free Agency, but G-d sets up man’s stumbling blocks. Isaiah 45:7
Con, and then He acts against himself saying ‘ let my people go and at the same time He hardens faro’ s heart and tells him no, You do not really get what it meant ‘ God hardened his heart”
Eric, if free will and free agency is G-d’s will, then all the possibilities and choices that arise from that (Good and Evil) are a reflection of G-d’s will.
An Episode in G-d’s Justice:
Elijah granted his friend Rabbi Joshua ben Levi permission to accompany him on his journeys provided he not ask any explanation, no matter how odd it may be.
The two reached the house of a poor man whose only possession was a cow. The couple were thoroughly good-hearted people and received the two with cordiality. They invited Elijah and the Rabbi and gave them food and drink of the best they had, and afterwards made up a comfortable couch for them for the night. When Elijah and the Rabbi were ready to continue the journey the next day Elijah prayed the cow belonging to his host would die. Before they left the cow died.
The Rabbi was utterly shocked at what had befallen the good people. He thought, “Is that to be the poor man’s reward for all his kindness”
Later they reached the house of a wealthy man, who did not even give the courtesy of looking them in the face. Even though they spent the night he offered no food or drink. As it happens this wealthy man was having a wall replaced that was collapsing. When Elijah left the house he prayed the wall would erect itself and so it did.
The Rabbi was greatly amazed, but true to his promise he suppressed the question that his lips desired to speak.
The two travelled on until they reached an ornate Synagogue whose seats were made of silver and gold. The worshippers did not respond in character to the magnificence of the building. When it came to satisfying the needs of the two, one of those present said, “There is not dearth of water and bread, and the travellers can stay in the synagogue. Early the next morning when departing Elijah wished those present in the synagogue that G-d might raise them all to be “heads”.
Rabbi again had to restrain himself and not put into words that troubled him profoundly.
In the next town they were received with great affability and served abundantly with all their tired bodies had craved. Upon leaving these kind hosts Elijah bestowed the wish that G-d would but give them a single head.
The Rabbi could no longer withold himself and demanded an explanation for Elijah’s bizarre actions. Elijah consented to explain his actions before the two separated.
He said as follows: “The poor man”s cow was killed because I knew that on the same day the death of his wife had been ordained in heaven, and I prayed to G-d to accept the loss of the poor man’s property as a substitute for the man’s wife. As for the rich man, there was a treasure hidden under the dilapidated wall, and, if he had rebuilt it, he would have found the gold; hence I set up the wall miraculously in order to deprive the curmudgeon of the valuable find. I wished the inhospitable people assembled in the synagogue might have many ‘heads’, for a place of numerous leaders is bound to be ruined by reason of multiplicity of counsel and disputes. On the last, I wished a ‘single head’ for the one to guide a town, success will attend all its undertakings.
Know, then, that if you see an evil-doer prosper, it is not always unto his advantage, and if a righteous man suffers need and distress, think Not that G-d is unjust. After this the two separated.
Wow. That was cool Sharbano, well done.
Con, “Eric, if free will and free agency is G-d’s will, then all the possibilities and choices that arise from that (Good and Evil) are a reflection of G-d’s will.” That statement of yours says evil actions are God’s will. Or that God consists of evil and good. You are giving me a headache!
G-d says he creates evil so…its scripture you have a problem with.
Con, what do you mean by creating ‘evil’ Does God tell a person to kill others? Or it is his/her choice ; that they chose delight in evil actions themselves?. There is a difference of knowing about everything and having everything under control even ‘ all evil’ but you are making God an author of crime too. God is Holy and that means something!
How do you explain Exodus 3214
Eric, in reference to https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-20533
“See–I have placed before you today the life and the good, and the death and the evil etc. I have placed life and death before you, blessing and curse etc.” (Deuteronomy 30:15 and 19).
“[I am the One] Who forms light and creates darkness; Who makes peace and creates evil; I am the Lord, Maker of all of these” (Isaiah 45:7).
Even your apostle Paul says G-d makes vessels for destruction. G-d is sovereign.
C.R.,
From Romans you shouldn’t make the mistake of assuming that God does not judge us for our free will acts, whether for the good or the bad.
Paul also noted God’s election of Jacob over Esau (the older to serve the younger) before they were even born.
And he reminds us that God said to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and that God raised up Pharaoh for the very purpose of showing God’s power so that his name could be proclaimed throughout all the earth.
But you have misjudged God’s purpose. What is made should not say to the potter, “Why have you made me like this?” And therefore conclude that you are not responsible for your actions or that there are none who are rebellious or unrighteous.
But the point is thus:
Ultimately Paul is talking about the election of Jews for the good of Gentiles thus saving the entire planet as noted later in Romans 11.
“So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their stumbling salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their stumbling means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!”
And,
“A hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved.”
So C.R., We are judged based on what we are given, not on what we haven’t been given.
This May be what Paul says and his words aren’t the most trustworthy. I have never read in Tanach regarding this “fullness of the Gentiles”. The only fullness we’ve seen of the Gentiles, or Xtian Rome, as it were, is the trampling of millions, Jews and also pagans alike. They would spare no one in their zeal for blood atonement.
Testing to see if I can do italics.
Did that work?
Great! Now I don’t have to use caps anymore. No more shouting!
Did you use embedded HTML commands
Yup!
I see you did, too, to get the bold. I don’t know why I didn’t think of it before.
It may be preferable to use an HTML WYSIWYG editor and paste it here.
I’m technologically illiterate; I don’t even know what that is.
That goes back to the early days of HTML editing. It was a significant improvement in editing
HTML code. Most browsers you can use “View” and select source. THIS will give you the actual HTML code. In the beginning THIS is how you wrote web pages. Now there are a variety of editors, programs etc to accomplish Web design. I’ve used Microsoft’s Visual Studio for projects such as writing DLL files to pull data from applications and display it in web page. But all these methods are far more involved than needed here. If one has Microsoft Office, Word should do this but one, that is overkill, and many sites don’t allow Microsoft’s format. A person Should be able to find a free editor that is simple and small. I’ll check around.
WYSIWYG – What You See Is What You Get.
I assume you did as I, and inserted the HTML commands to create that text.
In this type of editor you “See” the result. I would highlight “result” and use the “B” button
for bold, or any other variety.
Thank you! I didn’t understand a word you said, but thank you anyway! And my husband is a computer engineer, you would think I’d have picked up a thing or two.
Given that, he might be interested in a tidbit of information.
The very first computer I had access to had to be loaded with a boot program
using binary switches, instead of any ROM boot sequence. You had to load
each address with binary data bytes and hit the Load button. Go to the next,
hit Load. When all that was entered you hit Run.
The very first computer I owned had as an Input / Output a Hexadecimal display
and Hexadecimal keypad. THAT is how you had to program it and run it. And it
had 4K of ram.
We come quite a long way since that time. It would seem strange Now, but
those were Exciting days. We thought we could do SO much then.
Lol, I will pass along this technical jargon. It will be more comprehensible to him than it is to me :).
Sharbano,
Then you should read again the Hebrew Scriptures.
Also ask yourself, for what purpose did God select a people for His own.
Sharbano you should read Isaiah:
25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together,
The lion shall eat straw like the ox,
And dust shall be the serpent’s food.
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain,”
Says the Lord. (Isaiah 65)
…
22
“For as the new heavens and the new earth
Which I will make shall remain before Me,” says the Lord,
“So shall your descendants and your name remain.
23
And it shall come to pass
That from one New Moon to another,
And from one Sabbath to another,
All flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the Lord. (Isaiah 66)
Beautiful and inspiring prophecy about the messianic era. May it come true speedily in our days! (But why do you think this will convince Sharbano to believe in Jesus?)
Dina it is prophetic and ready to be accomplished:
The wolf (Benyamim Tribe Genesis 49: 27
“Benjamin is a ravenous wolf;
in the morning he devours the prey,
in the evening he divides the plunder.”
The lambs are the Christians for Yahushuo was the Lamb.
The lion is Yehudah and the ox are the pagans
The serpent and his seed the liars and deceivers will eat dust…
Baruch YHWH ADONAY!!
Sharbano, that sounds like an Altair or oddesy Computer. Was it a kit?
What I had was the Heathkit H8. They did come out later with a monitor etc. It was about the size of the first IBM PC’s. I worked where we installed those original PC’s. This was in the mainframe days. We had one IBM 370. Not long after the PC IBM came out with the flat panel plasma display that would display data from four mainframes and used “Alt – Tab” to switch mainframes. Some think the modern LCD are a new idea but they existed over 30 years ago.
I also had another one from the early days that I discarded when I moved here, to my regret. I believe it was made by Xerox. It was in parts, a motherboard laid on the table with two 8 in, yes eight inch, floppy drives. I had the program WordPerfect and it would crash. It had 64K of memory in 16K chips X 8 bit, soldered in. I did a memory test and determined which one. I took out all the memory and added sockets. Since the mid 70’s I’ve had a new generation computer every couple, three years or so.
I remember word perfect. That white on blue typeface, oh man. My Dad had an odyssey, then an old IBM 386 as I recall. Plasma displays, near eye light field displays, all technology around in the 70s-80s just now in the consumer sector. Its remarkable the technological advances.
You’re dating yourself :). So is Sharbano :).
My last upgrade was in 2011. I’m waiting for new components to come out before I upgrade.
It shall come to pass in that day
That the Lord shall set His hand again the second time
To recover the remnant of His people who are left,
From Assyria and Egypt,
From Pathros and Cush,
From Elam and Shinar,
From Hamath and the islands of the sea. (Isaiah11 v.11)
These regions look like Muslim countries where YHWH will set his arm to recover the remnant of His people.
To Yehuda Yisrael do you see those as the remnant who will bring back Israel to the Torah??
Dina said: ”God said that the Sabbath is an eternal sign between Him and the Jewish people”
Dina did you check OLAM vs LÉOLAM?
That said : Shabat is a sign to a word or an universal sign were your sect again transformed the meaning of Torah instead of telling the truth…
Lion, check this out in Hebrew:
שמות לא יז
So, um, about that? What were you saying?
Eliyahu Did YOU check what you yourself wrote in the name of your ruah holy translating “olam” as “everlasting” and di YOU note the Torah uses both olam and l’olam in reference to the Sabbath?
You lied again Yisroel. The more a talk with you and your sect the more I see why you were called serpent by the Messiah. For you twist the dabarim elohim… Here is what I said contradicting you again:
Eliyah Lion says:
July 9, 2015 at 6:06 pm
Yisroel, Concerning the Shabat as a sign?
וְשָׁמְרוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּת לַעֲשׂוֹת אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּת לְדֹרֹתָם בְּרִית עוֹלָם
Strange translation make the shabat everlasting …
עוֹלָם means world throughout Scriptures most translator including strong says everlasting which is an error of translation major for it changes the meaning of Scriptures and put Israel above the other nations when we are supposed to be at the service and be witnesses to a world…
Therefore Exodus 31 v.16 is not a sign forever but a sign to a world or an universal sign…
Here is the translation:
”And they will keep sons of Israel the shabat to produce the shabat to their generation-dwelling an alliance universal”
This makes us bear a strong responsibility to this world and make us realize how far we missed our mission to teach the Commandments…
Eliyah Lion says:
July 9, 2015 at 8:42 pm
Dina I thought you would not contradict me on this one. Ask all Israeli and consult every Hebrew dictionary if you do not believe me.
The adverb forever would be the closest thing to Olam:
לְעוֹלָם = forever Léolam
עוֹלָם = world, universe Olam
The lamed here makes the difference.
Be honest Dina in front of all… Do you speak or understand Hebrew may be you confound with Yiddish which is a mix of german and european tongues with some hebrew…
Now do you see the implication of a good translation inspired by the Ruah to understand properly the Holy Revelation of Tanakh…
Shalom I love you!
P.S.: we are seeker of truth not promoter of egos…
תּוֹדָה רַבָּה
Eliyahu You translated the word “olam” as everlasting so it is you who is in contradiction with yourself – sort things out with yourself before you preach to others In case you forgot when you said this here are a few references June 18 9:17 comment on “Messiah – Letter and Spirit” June 24 9:15 comment on “representative idolatry”
Yisroel again you lie!! From a so-called rabbi you are loosing credibility each time you talk to me. I am not submitting to your poor spirit you need to take some vacation and have i real ‘examen de conscience’ People who lie like yourself are a disgrace… unless your an ignorant man but when someone dare to be called rabbi … fire of Eloah is the way to test him.
Now I will put what I have written and quoted June 24 9:15 (Note I was quoting the New King James Bible for I do not have the time to translate each text I quote but I went to
check it is not written OLAM but ALAM עָלַם
This Aramaic not Hebrew … you can not even see the difference…wow!!
Eliyah Lion says:
June 18, 2015 at 9:17 am
Yisroel I have read and heard that the rabbis before the council of Jamnia subscribed to a vision of a divine Messiah based on the book of Enoch and the book of Daniel. Subsequently the rabbis were divided on the subject.
In our time the Lubavitch movement think that the rebbe is a divine messiah coming back. If they fell… it was based on this notion and ancient doctrine.
The Scriptural source here is Daniel 7:
“I watched till thrones were put in place,
And the Ancient of Days was seated;
His garment was white as snow,
And the hair of His head was like pure wool.
His throne was a fiery flame,
Its wheels a burning fire;
10 A fiery stream issued
And came forth from before Him.
A thousand thousands ministered to Him;
Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him.
The court was seated,
And the books were opened.
11 “I watched then because of the sound of the pompous words which the horn was speaking; I watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame. 12 As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.
13“I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like the Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!
He came to the Ancient of Days,
And they brought Him near before Him.
14Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,
That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
Which shall not pass away,
And His kingdom the one
Which shall not be destroyed.
(NKJV) = New King James Version
Message June 24 was also from the NKJV checking this chapter is in Hebrew and the translation of the NKJV present an error in the verse 2 Daniel 12.
Conclusion you did not yet admit why your sect translation do the same error as the Goyim… If you knew Hebrew you would have noted and confirmed what I have said to Dina and Sharbano. But you are not a man of integrity and impartial… Show me If I am mistaken about you Yisroel… I hope…
Eliyahu In that comment you also translated Daniel 12:2 which has the word “olam” and not “alam” Doesn’t your “ruah holy” tell you not to jump to quick accusations?
No doubt you have read this from Xtian sources about “divine Messiah”. There are many “lies” perpetrated by the church in order to further their agenda. If THIS had any truth why didn’t Pablo Christiani not bring it up in the debate with the Ramban. It would have been a most propitious time.
You have YET to divulge where you have received “Your” knowledge of Hebrew. You have come here and stated Xtians taught the Rabbis this Hebrew. Then why is the Rabbi, or anyone here for that matter, wrong. If you cannot divulge your source then, most assuredly, you are Literally Making It Up as you go. Clearly there is a fear here of being “found out”. Otherwise, a person who is correct in all their belief’s would gladly give this information. On the other hand, if a person is just isn’t genuine then he doesn’t DARE reveal ANYTHING. He cannot afford to be “FOUND OUT”. It would destroy any credibility.
Yisroel your acting strangely or you are being illiterate for I did not translate Daniel 12 v.2
I took the NKJV (New King James Version). At that time we did not have the debate on OLAM vs LÉOLAM.
Still I am waiting: did you check with Israelis and real Hebrew if OLAM equals LÉOLAM? Still waiting, you can not answer and you are diverting from the debate here like always.
Eliyahu
You contradict yourself again and again. You said that modern Hebrew is not ancient Hebrew and now you want me to ask Israelis? You are the one avoiding the debate – throughout Scripture “olam” and “l’olam” both mean everlasting or for a long time. Besides – it has been pointed out to you that by the Sabbath – both words are used “olam” and “l’olam” so even according to your ridiculous translation you are still wrong – let us now see if you know how to admit a mistake
Yisroel you just admitted your mistake by stating that ancient Hebrew is different than modern Hebrew which you did not want to concede before. When I used this argument for good reason you did not accepted now we must believe you instead of all Israelis and true Hebrew and all the Hebrew dictionaries.
Modernly or anciently OLAM does not equal LÉOLOAM. That is an invention of your part to tamper with Scriptures and change the exact meaning.
Now Yisroel are you a man of integrity capable of admitting your mistake.
May YHWH have mercy on you that you may see his light that one day you may rejoice in his Name!!
Eliyahu I challenge you to show me where I said that modern Hebrew and ancient Hebrew are the same – I never said that Either way – what does this have to do with your contradiction?
Dear Sharbano, you want to know what exactly. Be more precise!
My knowledge of everything is NADA (Nothing) by myself I know nothing I can not even write properly. If I receive any knowledge I give glory to the Messiah Resurrected who is my teacher with His Ruah Hakodesh.
I hope I have answered you correctly.
P.S.: I am just a simple servant who wants to give glory to YHWH
Also my constant prayer to YHWH is that He gives me His ruah of wisdom and intelligence for my wisdom and intelligence is nothing…
Pray for me the little nothing! תּוֹדָה רַבָּה
It’s One thing to give credit and glory to someone but that doesn’t answer the question of Where. It’s one thing to extrapolate information and claim it’s from ruach but there is a Source for the information. THIS is what you have been evasive about throughout. You wouldn’t even be HERE if it weren’t for the Xtian text. THAT text is a “Source”. Each and every Xtian interprets it according to “their own ruach”. When it comes to Hebrew text this “word for word” is a distraction. Anyone who knows multiple languages realizes “word for word” will distort what is said. Therefore, everything you have written regarding Hebrew is a distortion. The only person who will use such a method are one’s who cannot “Construct” the sentence and merely uses a dictionary and place the definition of each word in the same place as the original. THAT is not what translations are about. If the UN used such a method there would be such chaos that it would be unimaginable.
Sharbano I understand your points
1)Word for word translation keeps the syntax of the language intact but surely make it weird for those who do not understand wherefore translator will twist to fit it in the syntax of the destination language.
The art of translation is to convey the exact meaning of the language of origin without breaking the natural flow of the language receiving the message. That is hard! But personally word for word is the first step where in the second step you try to make it sound beautiful in the destination tongue. I don’t have here the time to dress it nicely but my purpose here is to show that common translation let go some meaning in detriment of the meaning of origin. That is fatal in Holy Scriptures.
It is much better a word for word than a beautiful destination syntax loosing the salt of the origin…
2)Where is my source: Holy Tradition meaning exactly the same as Moseh and all the Prophets.
But you will not believe me. Why? Because your tradition took the Revelation not in humility but like the serpent by twisting the dabarim elohim to fit your view of your sect therefore letting down millions of Yehudim not able to follow your men made prescriptions:
a) which hand is to be use first when washing yourself
b) which system to use for not putting electricity on and off during Shabat
c) putting wigs for women
d) and multiplications of little things that are more obsessive in nature than the true way of observing the true mitzvot
3) My goal is to make Torah lovable for all Yehudi and Israeli and nations to show the world that true Torah obedience and major mizvot obedience are paths of life. The way of the Messiah gives us the truth about true obedience to obtain eternal life. We should all unite against those who are Lawless and want us to be divided for them to multiply and dominate the world. Let us wake up!!
1) Those who are skillful in translation don’t use a “word for word” method. It might be a person would take a certain word and expound a thoroughness to it. But generally the text would be done in chunks or rather phrases. Those skilled do it quite automatically, without hesitation, with a fluidity to it.
2) Are you suggesting yours is a Tradition from Moshe. Then you should be able to list the sources of that transmission. The Rabbis of today can trace that transmission TO Moshe. It is recorded, Moshe handed to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders, Elders to the Prophet, Prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly etc.etc. This is an Unbroken Chain.
The problem is as you say “you will not believe me”. Instead of giving details you continue from there to the next statement: “Because your tradition took the revelation not in humility”. You see, instead of coming clean you ADD to your problem.
You say “millions are unable to follow”. On the contrary there are millions who DO follow these Traditions. It’s rather interesting that ONLY Xtians see a difficulty in following Tradition. Most people find it to be second nature. Even those who are Ba’al T’shuva seem unencumbered in accomplishing observance.
3) I don’t see how you can assert this, especially the vindictive tone taken with the Rabbi. What IS your “way of messiah”. For one thing your J’sus said very very little. Xtians have to make it up as they go. Considering you follow your own Tradition, how do you accomplish keeping Torah. Without the Oral Torah, by the Rabbis, there is no way to know much of the details.
Apparently you are unaware that Hebrew is similar to other languages in that a “word for word” translation doesn’t accomplish the task. This has always been your method and the result is your reasoning is Not from ruach, but a lack of knowledge. Not once have you including grammatical nuances in your translations. OR, is it that you come here saying grammar is nonsense. THAT is the implication. Evey Hebrew speaking Israeli would laugh you out of the room if you were to pull this on them.
Instead of admitting you cannot grasp the grammar you have to call EVERYONE liars, and on and on. Maybe it’s just that your ruach doesn’t grasp grammar either. Without grammar confusion ensues. Communication isn’t even possible without grammar. The result is cave-man speak. And do you know what; THIS is how your translations come across, cave-man speak.
It occurred to me with your hinting of Elijah, and maybe claiming to be him, that you have misconstrued the meaning of his return. Possibly it is your intent to do the “returning” of the fathers and children with the never ending reference to “your sect”.
What is your exposition of Elijah, his purpose, and the outcome.
Another mistake! לָֽמוֹ LAMO means to them or for them. Tovia you don’t know Hebrew even your accent when you speak some words show that you are not Hebrew speaking.
Now Isaiah 53:8 : מֵעֹצֶר וּמִמִּשְׁפָּט לֻקָּח וְאֶת־דּוֹרוֹ מִי יְשׂוֹחֵחַ כִּי נִגְזַר מֵאֶרֶץ חַיִּים מִפֶּשַׁע עַמִּי נֶגַע לָמוֹ
Word by word it says: ”From detention and from Justice(Court-of-Law) he was seized and his generation who will converse with when he will be cut out of a land of the living for a transgression of My people a mark-plague-disease to them”
Tovia as a brother please be a man of integrity for who will bear false witness will be chastise by HaShem. Shalom!
Dina passage written to Tovia Singer show you how your sect again deformed Scriptures
+ Bible codes of Isaiah 53 show amazing discoveries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLMfDP2JaMCFn3xSx-36MxyBJhJ1_U-bUt&t=282&v=ywQ23T13Zjk
Lion, why are you changing the subject? Is it because you realized you messed up when I showed you Exodus 31:17 and you don’t want to admit it?
Dina are you kidding me or playing around?
In Exodus 31:17 is not OLAM but LÉOLAM
בֵּינִי וּבֵין בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אוֹת הִוא לְעֹלָם וַיִּנָּפַשׁ
”It is a sign between Me and you and the children of Israel forever…”
Confirming what I was saying:
Eliyah Lion says:
July 9, 2015 at 8:42 pm
Dina I thought you would not contradict me on this one. Ask all Israeli and consult every Hebrew dictionary if you do not believe me.
The adverb forever would be the closest thing to Olam:
לְעוֹלָם = forever Léolam
עוֹלָם = world, universe Olam
The lamed here makes the difference.
Capiche!!
Capiche?????
ויאמר יהוה אלהים הן האדם היה כאחד ממנו לדעת
טוב ורע ועתה פן-ישלח ידו ולקח גם מעץ החיים ואכל
וחי לעלם
ויאמר עוד אלהים אל-משה כה תאמר אל-בני ישראל
יהוה אלהי אבתיכם אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב
שלחני אליכם זה-שמי לעלם וזה זכרי לדר דר
יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד
מי-יתן והיה לבבם זה להם ליראה אתי ולשמר
את-כל-מצותי כל-הימים למען ייטב להם ולבניהם לעלם
כי-אשא אל-שמים ידי ואמרתי חי אנכי לעלם
ותקד בת-שבע אפים ארץ ותשתחו למלך ותאמר יחי
אדני המלך דוד לעלם
ושבו דמיהם בראש יואב ובראש זרעו לעלם ולדוד
ולזרעו ולביתו ולכסאו יהיה שלום עד-עולם מעם יהוה
והקמתי את-כסא ממלכתך על-ישראל לעלם כאשר דברתי על-דוד אביך לאמר לא-יכרת לך איש מעל כסא ישראל
יהי יהוה אלהיך ברוך אשר חפץ בך לתתך על-כסא
ישראל באהבת יהוה את-ישראל לעלם וישימך למלך לעשות
משפט וצדקה
אזכירה שמך בכל-דר ודר על-כן עמים יהודך לעלם ועד
ואני אגיד לעלם אזמרה לאלהי יעקב
ואתה מרום לעלם יהוה
הודו לאדני האדנים כי לעלם חסדו
Capiche?????
Are you really considering this as some “Proof”. I suggest you should Now convert to Islam.
From codes Uses and Abuses.
Yeshua Phrases
On page XXI of Yeshua and page 223 of The Signature of God, we are shown how the Hebrew phrase “Yeshua Shemi” (Yeshua is my name) was found in Chapter 53 of Isaiah. However, our use of Rambsel’s methodology yielded the phrase “Mohammed Shemi” (Mohammed is my name) in the Torah. In fact, “Mohammed Shemi”11 is encoded in the Torah exactly 21 times – a multiple of the Kabbalistically significant number 7. In addition, this phrase appears in each of the Five Books of Moses. The phrase “Koresh Shemi”12 (Koresh is my name) is encoded 43 times in the Torah and also appears in each of the Five Books of Moses. Furthermore, “Buddha Shemi” (Buddha is my name) and “Lenin Shemi” (Lenin is my name) are also encoded in the Torah 18 times.
On page 44, Rambsel writes how, in the Book of Leviticus, the phrase “Dam Yeshua” (the blood of Yeshua) appears at a skip distance of the significant number 7. But the phrase, “Dam Mohammed” (the blood of Mohammed) is also encoded in Leviticus13. In fact, “Dam Mohammed” is encoded exactly 14 times in the Torah – a multiple of 7. The phrase “Dam Koresh” (the blood of Koresh) is also encoded in the Book of Leviticus14. In fact, “Dam Koresh” is encoded 10 times in the Torah.
It is obvious that the phrases “Koresh Shemi,” “Yeshua Shemi,” “Blood of Koresh,” “Blood of Yeshua,” etc. are all appearing by coincidence and do not prove anything.
It’s Time, EL, to end your fascination with Dabar and follow “The Prophet”.
Sharbano In the beginning of my entry here I said that I am from the Order of Eliyah. Yet again you did not find it nowhere on the internet or elsewhere. Like I told you it is secret …
Concerning Mohammed the prophet of Ishmael and Islam, if he is in the Tanakh in bible code that must be interesting to look where his name emerges.
But the Name of Yahshuo is Name appears in Isaiah 53 precisely the place where people wonder who is that suffering servant… Does it strike you? For also in Isaiah 53 appears the name of the Apostles of the Messiah plus many more this in 12 verses… Here is the video:
Eliyahu By the way – if you read the whole code – starting from a few letters earlier – it reads ma’al yeshua shemi which means that yeshua has misappropriated my name
Yisroel this is a lie for I check before the first Yod of the Name of Yahshuo there is no MEM preceding the sequence of 20.
If you have something that serious you have to bring the evidence on this debate or any court system to back up your claim. If not you will be accused of bearing false witness…
That is a serious offence in our Torah!!
Eliyahu If you count backwards from the mem of “larabim” in 53:11 it reads m’a’al yeshua shemi which means Yeshua misappropriated my name. Why couldn’t you find this on your own? Will you admit your mistake now?
Eliyahu Also – since when do you believe in Yeshua? I thought it was yahoushuoahaoa
Rabbi B., you left out the “uo” at the end :).
Yisroel I checked personally ישוע Yashuo starting verse 11 backwards in minus 20 intervals and the word מעל appears
The whole crypted phrase will be : מעל ישוע שמי
Which could mean: 1) Upward Yahshuo my Name
2) He embezzled Yahshuo my Name
3)On top of Yahshuo my Name
Name Begins Word Ltr Interval
Nazarene 53:6 11 3 47
Messiah 53:11 1 1 -42
Shiloh 53:12 21 4 19
Passover 53:10 13 3 -62
Galilee 53:7 1 2 -32
Herod 53:6 4 1 -29
Caesar 53:11 7 4 -194
The Evil
Roman City 53:9 13 2 -7
Caiaphas
(high priest)52:15 7 3 41
Annas
(high priest) 53:3 6 5 -45
Mary 53:11 1 1 -23
Mary 53:10 7 3 6
Mary 53:9 13 3 44
Disciples 53:12 2 3 -55
Peter 53:10 11 5 -14
Matthew 53:8 12 1 -295
John 53:10 11 4 -28
Andrew 53:4 11 1 -48
Philip 53:5 10 3 -133
Thomas 53:2 8 1 35
James 52:2 9 3 -34
James 52:2 3 4 -20
Simon 52:14 2 1 47
Thaddeus 53:12 9 1 -50
Matthias 53:5 7 4 -11
Let Him Be
Crucified 53:8 6 2 15
His Cross 53:6 2 2 -8
Pierce 52:10 15 3 -92
Lamp of
the Lord 53:5 5 7 20
His Signature 52:7 8 4 49
Bread 53:12 2 3 26
Wine 53:5 11 2 210
From Zion 52:14 6 1 45
Moriah 52:7 4 5 153
Obed 53:7 3 2 -19
Jesse 52:9 3 1 -19
Seed 52:15 2 2 -19
Water 52:7 9 1 -19
Levites 53:3 3 6 19
From the
Atonement
Lamb 52:12 12 2 -19
Joseph 53:2 1 2 210
Conclusion the amount of evidence in the same passage here Isaiah 52-53 converge to mean that: מעל ישוע שמי
means: 1) Upward Yahshuo my Name
3)On top of Yahshuo my Name
Which means that מַ֫עַל is the word not מָ֫עַל
Eliyahu Putting a patach under the mem does not help your cause. Putting a tzereh under the mem would make the phrase read “My name is above Yeshua” which would tell us that the servant is NOT Yeshua but is above Yeshua. There is no way you can get it to read “upward yeshua my name” – “upward” in Hebrew is “lema’alah” not ma’al or mei’al. The fact that the simple reading of the text tells us that the Yeshua of Christianity is the one person in history who did the most to obstruct the mission of God’s servant – gives us to understand that if there is any legitimacy to these codes then the correct reading is that Yeshua misappropriated my name Furthermore – these codes can be manipulated to read anything so they are meaningless – except that they do serve to illustrate the extent of your ignorance of Hebrew. Eliyahu We are still waiting for you to admit your mistake about the Sabbath and for your answers for the other questions I asked you – such as since when do you believe that his name was yeshua and why did you not see the mem until I spelled it out for you?
Eliyahu Just for fun – if you go back 20 letters to the kuf of “achalek” – then it reads “kam al Yeshua shemi” which means “my name rises up against Yeshua”
Lol!
Yisroel
מַ֫עַל versus מָ֫עַל
First word is מעל : Above, on top of …
Second word is ישוע Yahshuo, Yeshua
Third word is שמי My Name
Above Yahshuo is my Name: means the YHWH name is on top of Yahshuo; meaning that Yahshuo is the Elect; as son of Adam the Name is above Him and as Son of Elohay the Name is in Him…
It corroborates Torah:
20 “Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him. 22 But if you indeed obey His voice and do all that I speak, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. (Exodus chapter 23, NKJV)
and
27 “So they shall put My name on the children of Israel, and I will bless them.”
(Numbers chapter 6, NKJV)
Conclusion מעל is mem + על which means massively above in a preeminent manner. For Yahshuo (son of Adam) the Holy Name is preeminently above Him. Which is corroborated by the numerous encrypted signs …
Once again Yisroel you have been defeated in the mockery of the Elect… For that you will pay dearly for none can insult this Angel without paying it back… Plus you learn to you poor disciples to do the same which will bring upon infamy… You have been warned!!
Eliyahu Again you display your ignorance of Hebrew ma’al with a patach under the mem is the same as mo’al with a komatz under the mem – see for example Numbers 5:6 You can twist these codes how you want – but the historical record has Christianity’s Jesus misappropriating the name of the servant in Isaiah 53 And you still did not answer the questions or admit your mistake
Do you Even KNOW what an angel IS??? Apparently NOT!!!!!
Yisroel
1)I have demonstrated that you are an ignorant in Hebrew.
2)That you don’t know the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew
3)That you twisted the signification of OLAM vs LÉOLAM
4)That still you twist the significance of מעל in spite of the mounting evidence
5)You talk about Shabat and you don’t even know what is Shabat and his significance
6)You obey carnally in with your human justice, as sons of the Elohim we obey with grace and true merit for we are establish in the justice
7)You are Askhenazi which make your seed not Semitic explaining why you have so much difficulty grasping the pure meaning of Revelation
Now the blind man Yisroel is there to teach me how to read and interpret Scriptures when his spirit is corrupted by his sect which says:
1)Woman must wear wigs
2)Electricity is forbidden during Shabat unless you have a special switch
3)How we must wash your hands
4)Dress only in black and white like if colors were forbidden
etc…
O that is human tradition for obsessive persons having lost the grace and beauty of true Judaism…
If you think that with this justice you will enter Shama’im you are in spiritual delusion or prelest…
In Russia, monks looking at you will certainly say this rabbi is in prelest, than for the love of Eloah let us teach him what it is:
http://www.roca.org/OA/66-68/66n.htm
Repent!!
You certainly don’t move out of your pattern. When confronted on your errors you do the same thing each and every time.
Speaking of L’olam I posted about 8 or 10 or so of that same word. You couldn’t reply as it destroys your argument.
I’ll wait for your response that will be the same as to Yisroel.
What about Stephen, what about “mouth- to – mouth”. Need I go on.
Eliyahu You demonstrate again and again that you have no answers How do you justify to yourself that you come here and violate every request of the comment policy?
It is SECRET????
How convenient for YOU. Of course it’s nowhere to be found. It’s all in your own mind. I say it’s more like you don’t want to be found out. You’ve proved you don’t know Hebrew and have concocted a theology that makes no sense. Because of such concoction you have unwittingly contradicted yourself on numerous occasions. Because of your high mindedness you cannot even see that.
Sharbano this word: mindedness… does it exist or you just invented it?
It bugs you that a said secret… He he! But if you were truly clever you would understand but lacking the true knowledge you are in the dark.
That is your choice not mine!!
You choose the path of a sect
I choose the path of life in the Messiah
You choose idol worshipping of yourself
I choose worshipping YHWH
You choose to walk in vain
I choose to walk toward the Land
Repent!!
Actually it doesn’t bother me in the least. Just as the Masons have no affect on me, neither do you. What it does though, is tell us about you.
One thing that IS for certain we do not have to keep finding and offering proofs of our beliefs. The Traditions handed down have remained virtually the same for generations. The Xtian, on the other hand, has to keep coming up with new ways to “sell” their religion. Since it didn’t work by the sword they have taken to love. In order not to be compared to those using the sword they have taken on Hebrew terms in order to “sound” Jewish, Yeshua for Jesus etc. The dilemma that still remains for these Xtians is Yeshu or J’sus is simply Not in Tanach, literally or symbolically. If G-d would give the name of the Mashiach, Cyrus, He certainly would have given clear indication that J’sus would be as he claimed. Israel is called G-d’s firstborn son. Would a father use such deceptive tactics to instruct a son. We can determine from Torah and throughout Tanach that when G-d speaks to Israel He does so with clarity. The Xtian references are filled with vagueness and ambiguity. THIS is Not the way G-d speaks to the nation. When he speaks in metaphor, even that is clear. Why would ANY nation “rely” on ambiguity when there is specifics that contradict that ambiguity.
Ooh, you belong to a secret order. You must feel so special.
Its kind like the X-MEN, they have their own private schools and everything. Not even the CIA knows where they are.
Dina, sharbano
I do not remember who said that , anyways;
“but to necessitate that people acknowledge Christian theology and Jesus as the only way to the father/messiah contradicts the plain meaning of the Torah.”
You guys do not understand what it means ‘ the only way to Father’. It means that only through his name that God gave – people can have life and salvation.
Somebody said; “God is a Savior , so we do not need anybody. ”
God is a Savior but He uses people in different situations. God saved Israel from Egypt but He used Moses for that and every OT book can give their example. I have no time to go over and keep listing them.
I think Dina said the first part.
Sure G-d uses many different people, but none of those people were deified. If we look at Moshe we find he is merely a conduit for G-d actions.
Sharbano,”Sure G-d uses many different people, but none of those people were deified. If we look at Moshe we find he is merely a conduit for G-d actions.”
That doesn’t disqualify Jesus. God has always used people, you can;t even accept He used somebody for our redemption. “Deifying” is not an argument it is people’s choice.
So you are admitting that Jsus deification was a choice by the followers.
Scripture is explicit, G-d is the ONE who saves and no one else beside him.
Maybe the secret sect is. http://www.roca.org
Lion, may I ask why you are so threatened by another group’s interpretation that you always have to result to slander? You have called Rabbi Blumenthal a liar multiple times, just because he offers you another viewpoint. Your constant shift from offering platitudes to offering an accusatory tone and barbs is distasteful. You have called the Pharisees a “sect,” but, it’s known from history that this group existed long before Jesus, long before the Christians.
Con after all my analysis of your arguments and those of this blog, my conclusion is pretty simple: Distortion
1)Yisroel when confronted to the obvious always distorts my post to introduce doubt and therefore divert from the issue debated. That is a technique of diversion commonly use by person spotted in a corner.
2)Concerning you, you have been cleverly webbed by this sect in believing their so-called knowledge versus faith when we know that all path with the Elohim must be made in faith: the father in the Faith Abraham is the primary example. He walked in faith in the Elohim and that was his justice.
3)All passage pointing to the Messiah and his Name as been truncated and mistranslated to deny the miraculous evidence of the Prophets where Isaiah 53 is the primary example. This video will show an example how striking his Isaiah 53 for the sect of the deniers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZetVOMhopM
4) To call a liar a liar is sometimes beneficial for this person if he has a little humility to examine himself in front of the Ruah Emet.
Eliyahu
Where did I “distort” your post? You are the one diverting attention from the issue at hand. Again – you contradicted yourself, you contradicted Scripture and you cannot admit your mistake – this tells us more then a bit about the “ruah” that you claim is your guide.
Yisroel like a parakeet you play the same disk: you contradict yourself…you contradict yourself… That is not enough in a debate you must bring substance but you bring nothing for you have nothing to bring… just to say the same thing over and over.
Now I have established:
1) You do not know Hebrew (for a rabbi that is a question mark what do they teach you in your sect: how to wash your hand properly…)
2)You do not know the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew
3) You do not have the Semitic mindset which may be should tell you that you might be Askhenazi therefore may be a Khazar of origin therefore not Yehudi by blood
4)You are in a sect dressed from another world, having an obsessive propensity to details and man made justice
5)You are full of yourself instead of being full of the Shakhinah
6)You do not know the Shakhinah for your insult Her and her children constantly
7)You do not know how to pronounce the Name and can not mentally for you have been bared by divine decree
8)You are emulators of the serpent which you befriend for you like to accuse and you like to distort Scriptures
9)You are Moseh worshippers putting him higher than the Dabar Elohim
10) You are carnal beings having hijacked the Pure Revelation
11) You are without any charismata for you are so-called rational man trying to box Revelation and the Elohim in your mind…therefore you are the worst of Idol worshipper for you worship your own perverted mind…like Heylel…
O how Yahushuo the true Messiah of Israel the Risen was right about you!!
Eliyahu You came onto this blog violating every one of the requests I made in the comment policy. You claim to be inspired by a “ruah.” It seems that you do not take the charge of false prophecy seriously – you have proved yourself to be a false prophet because your “ruah” contradicts itself. I pointed out how you contradicted yourself and you keep on ignoring it – forcing me to repeat myself. Eliyahu You cannot expect us to take us more seriously than you take yourself. Even according to your ridiculous understanding of Hebrew the word “l’olam” means “everlasting” – so your point about Sabbath not being everlasting is flatly contradicted by Scripture. If you are someone who has no problem being in conflict with Scripture then I will take all of your accusations as compliments.
Lion, I’ve told you before and I’ll say it again: everyone knows that when you can’t win on logic and good argumentation, you attack your opponent’s character. You lose.
Lion, the servant songs in Isaiah state very clearly “you are Israel my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen.” Even the NT has Mary call Israel the servant in Luke 1:54. Jews are just reading Isaiah 53 plainly as they have traditionally, so they don’t believe Jesus is referred to, it’s simple really.
Jesus never stood before kings to make them shut their mouths, only a roman proconsul, and even then, he conversed with Pilate. He also wasn’t silent before his accusers according to the gospel accounts.
Even if Jesus was a servant of G-d, that doesn’t mean we should worship him as divine. To worship a son or servant of G-d as divine is a blatant violation of Deuteronomy 4:19.
Again, you don’t answer with clearly stated verses, but with your own “authentic” translations. You say I have been caught in a web, well respectfully, you have been taken captive by overactive imagination.
Not one verse that you have brought in support of your pisition has just been quoted, but has been thoroughly retranslated and reinterpreted. You as a Christian are not content to let scripture speak contextually (historically, grammatically, etc.) you always retranslate the words. Just like your forefathers in the Church, you rely almost exclusively on allegegrical renditions for all readings of scripture. Is it any wonder why people don’t believe you when you always have to berate commonly available translations?
If we examine your readings, it is clear they are unique to you, they are not established in a tradition. They can’t have legitimacy if they are new and unknown.
Con at least you debate with your point of view. but plain Scriptures contradicts your views. You have been deluded and to stay silent from my part would not be an act of charity but cowardice which I will not.
Now having presented mounting evidence each time your refer to sophism of the sect to refute the obvious. Let us take a simple example. Psalm 110:
The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
2 The Lord shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion.
Rule in the midst of Your enemies!
3 Your people shall be volunteers
In the day of Your power;
In the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning,
You have the dew of Your youth.
4 The Lord has sworn
And will not relent,
“You are a priest forever
According to the order of Melchizedek.”
5 The Lord is at Your right hand;
He shall execute kings in the day of His wrath.
6 He shall judge among the nations,
He shall fill the places with dead bodies,
He shall execute the heads of many countries.
7 He shall drink of the brook by the wayside;
Therefore He shall lift up the head.
New King James Version (NKJV)
YHWH said to Adoni sit at my right hand
The right hand of YHWH is his Son Eternal to which the Lord of David will sit to reign untill all his enemies will be humiliated. I am working for that and your interpretation can not explain how can a man sit at the right hand of YHWH. This elevation happen to Yahushuo the Mesiah when his Resurrection and Ascension confirmed that YHWH heard his plea. He would had still be dead if he was a false prophet. For His Resurrection is not a temporary one like the one Eliyahu performed toward the son of the widow nor the one of Lazarus although he was dead for 4 days. HIs Resurrection is the glorious Resurrection from whom all the righteous in Him will resurrect to reign …
The sect believed in Resurrection but now being deluded by the satan they believe in reincarnation like the pagan Hindus. And you dare to tell me that we are the idolaters here because we pray the Father in the Heavens daily and recognized his Messiah… Wow!! How blind you have become because you have listen to the venomous false teaching of the sect… Repent and become Orthodox!!
How can he be at the right side of Hashem. He says there is No One BESIDE me. Look up the word beside. You’ll find it would mean either to my right or to my left. Is it any wonder your “one-person” sect is so out of touch with reality.
Mr. Lion, concerning Psalms 110, I am confused why you come to the conclusion that the Melchizedek priesthood relates exclusively to jesus/yeshua/yahushuo/yahawishiwashy/whatever…I am not convinced that it refers to jesus/yeshua at all…But I have no problem with it having a Messianic connotation to it as well.
As you acknowledge, you will find in the Talmud that Abraham, King David, and even the Messiah are called as being fulfillments of this Psalm. One of the most striking commonalities between King David and Abraham is that they both “crushed kings” with the help of Hashem. This directly correlates with Psalms 110:5, which explicitly states this:
Psalms 110:5. The Lord, on your right hand, *has crushed kings* on the day of His wrath.
Now Mr. Shapira, during jesus’s/yeshua’s lifetime, did jesus “crush kings”? Was he successful in defeating his enemies? Were his enemies “made a footstool at his feet”? (Psalms 110:1) Clearly not! Your jesus/yeshua was killed and failed to fulfill the Messianic prophesies outlined in the Tanach. As it stands, jesus has fulfilled none of Psalms 110 in any tangible sense. You can argue that he will fulfill it in his supposed “second coming,” but to claim that jesus has fulfilled any of this Psalm would be completely baseless as it stands…
Another oddity about your understanding about this “Melchizedek priesthood” is that you believe that jesus’s/yeshua’s bloodshed “atoned for the sins of the world.” Where in the Tanach does it state that the Melchizedek priesthood achieves atonement via the blood sacrifice? The only priesthood that was given this divine instruction that I know of was the Levitical priesthood…If you could find a passage in the Tanach which states that the “Melchizedek priesthood” achieves atonement via “blood sacrifice,” then maybe your position would make a little more sense. But as it stands, you appear to be baselessly asserting that this Melchizedek priesthood has “superior atoning power” in comparison to the Levitical priesthood, when there is nothing in the Tanach that indicates that the Melchizedek priesthood deals with blood atonement at all! I hope you will consider these concerns.
Shalom
Yehida the insulting one of the name of the Messiah. You will pay for that offence in front of the divine Court.
Now who conquered the Roman Empire? The Messiah, the Christ for the power of the true Messiah transcend time to conquer by the blood of his martyrs.
But a person like you can not understand the ruah of sacrifice of oneself for the benefit of the others… For like your sect you idol worship yourselves… Where is you Tikun Olam???
Isn’t it interesting that NO Xtian, as this man does, will EVER start at the beginning of 52, which lays the ground work for what is written afterwards. Instead they see a “couple of words” and thus Conclude it’s about J’sus. This is the technique in ALL uses of Tanach. They have to change the text to Force a meaning. You are in good company.
Sharbano again you are diverting. Isaiah 52 is about Israel personified in the Messiah for the Messiah is the Messiah of Israel first and after for the nations. Don’t you understand?
1)My first born is Israel… the Messiah is the first born
2)Israel has 12 sons…the Messiah has 12 apostles
3)Israel came out of Misrayim…the Messiah came out of Misrayim
4)Israel had 70 who left the Land…
The Messiah had 70 disciples who went on a mission out of the Land
5)Israel had 4 wives…the Messiah has 4 main Churches
6)Israel had a preferred One…the Messiah has a preferred One
7)Israel returned to the Land…the Messiah will return to the Land
On and On…
But with your sect everything is closed to your sight for being afraid to loose control on you like all sect they control their people… That is not freedom but bondage!!
Not only can you not read Hebrew, you cannot even understand a translation, the NKJV ,that you always cite. I see no need to write it here and explain it to you as you have shown the inability to understand the simplest of things.
Lion, respectfully, Jews are in the minority, they have no control to lose. You keep heaping accusations that are baseless. The Church has always been threatened by this tiny tiny “sect” but why?
That’s all allegorical, not the plain meaning. Allegory and typology doesn’t override the plain meaning.
Isaiah 42:8 “I am the LORD, that is MY name;” The first time I can find reference to the title/name Lord is in Genesis 2. Why do Christians call Jesus Lord? In the NT the title Lord is the most common reference to Jesus. Who is lord in Isaiah 53? The Christian reads it like this. Below I substitute the title (2)Lord for the words He and Him.
4. Surely (2)Lord took up our pain, and bore our suffering, yet we considered (2)Lord punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But (2) Lord was pierced for our transgressions, (2)Lord was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on the (2)Lord, and by (2)Lords wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the (1) Lord has laid on (2) Lord the iniquity of us all.
The New Testament clearly gives Jesus, (2) Lord, the same name as God. A name he (1) Lord clearly claims for his own in Isaiah 42:8. Also it is a title/name Jesus (2)Lord claims for his own,
Matt7:21Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.
Its all so confusing, “not”. There is only one Lord God in the torah, you do not get to the second lord god until you read the NT.
Larry, I appreciate your common sense approach. When you substitute “Lord” for “servant” throughout the chapter it becomes even more clear how absurd it is.
Actually Lion, not all Orthodox Jews believe in reincarnation, because it may definitely go against clear teachings on reward and punishment, so there is that objection out of the way, because there are different opinions.
For another thing, I see how you said “the lord said to adoni.” You do know then that Adoni means “master” and does not necisarily refer to G-d? The Hittites called Abraham Adoni in Genesis 23:5, and Esau is called adoni Genesis 32:4. As you know, Humans are often called adoni, just like Moses was called Elohim. It doesn’t have to yield a christological meaning as you would have it, or a son of G-d figure as you would have it. The lord said to my master, is clearly David speaking. This could be David saying, the lord said to my master, (to Abraham) Sit at my right hand, (a place of chosen proximity) while I make your enemies your footstool. Abraham went against the cannanite nations, “and ruled in the midst of his enemies” quite literally. Melkizadek, King of Salem, King of righteousness is thought to be Shem, son of Noah (head and surviving son ) of the last righteous family that survived the flood, who was still alive when Abraham was.)
You are offering a Christian interpretation that is not the only possible one of psalm 110. Moreover, Christianity’s interpretation of a pre-existing son/logos who must be served as divine alongside the father violates Deuteronomy 4:19 in its plainest sense. Besides, if you look at Philo of Alexandria (the first Jewish author to actually talk about the Logos just as the early Christians would have,) he regarded the Logos as “first born of creation,” “the first created thing,” “an angel of many names, etc.” So, even speaking historically, halachically minded Jews never would have believed that the logos was G-d itself, or that it should be worshipped. Worshiping it violates the plain meaning Deuteronomy 4:19 as has been explained.
I wonder what people think being reincarnated means.
Con thank you for response with substance and arguments.
Philo position led to the famous debate of Arius versus Athanase both of Alexandria. The pure Trinitarian won the battle of Orthodoxy. We could discuss the theology via the Tanakh.
Like a said before Genesis starts with a Oneness in a Plurality
The word Elohim is a plural accompanied by singular verbs showing Unity of Action
The Let Us make Adam in our Image confirms the Plurality of the One Elohim
The theological analogy would be:
Humanity is one Human Essence(Nature) with a plurality of persons where Adam is the Head
Elohim is one Divine Essence with a Plurality of Divine Persons where YHWH Father is the Head
That is taught in the Holy Oral Torah and the doctrine of the Sephirot give us an image…
Deuteronomy 4 addresses a people immersed in Egyptian influences and surrounded by pagan nations which made Moseh concentrate the written Torah on simple theology for a people just born of bondage and still in carnally mindset… Therefore Holy Tradition and Kabbalah were not taught to the babies in the faith but only to minds having been purified by the fire of the Shakhinah.
Conclusion True Christianity enters in a New Creation predicted by the Prophets where the Humanity of the Messiah becomes the Way to the deification of our beings in order to become elohim and sons of the Elohim. That was the Promise given to our forefathers where the Age of the Torah will give birth to the Age of the Election where the Elect will bring forth the Age of Glory where all the chosen will reign will the Messiah.
For now I think I have said enough. Those who have ears to hear blessed are they!!
Lion, the problem with your exposition is that you speak of the Torah of Moses as if it is being written for carnal minds. That is to presuppose an idea that the Torah text does not know of. David says the mitzvot are a light to our path, that they are not too hard to be observed, and that they are for Jews to observe in all their generations.
You say that the Arian controversy was “solved,” but that question was not asked or approached on halachc grounds by Jews. Halacha tells Jews the will of the father expresses that he alone is to be worshiped, and how Israel is supposed to worship him. Therefore, whatever Hashem’s nature may or may not be in reality (plural or unitary) is irrelevant to the issue at hand and the facts on the ground. You mentioned kabbalah. Kabbalah (as I hope you know) is aggadic in nature, therefore it has no impact or bearing on halachic rulings.
Con thank you for your response.
I have many points to communicate you:
1) I did not touched here the mitzvot but only the Theology of the Elohim. The mitzvot are explicit and are paths of light although we could go further in their amplitude in the other worlds, but that is another fascinating subject.
2) Actually there is Halakha and halakha. The will of the Father is not expressed in small men made tradition like wearing wigs for women, dressing in black and white, switching electricity on Shabat… that is not Justice but sectarian view of men made compulsion to control everything proper to any sect. The will of the Father in our realm is the living Torah.
3) The Arian controversy superseded rabbinic thought for once the temple destroyed they lost the capacity to bring substance to the debate. They were to occupy to breached the gaps in their system. For Christianity was and will be their main challenge in keeping their men made tradition. They did not understand that the age of animal sacrifice and corrupt Judaism was being abrogated for the age of grace and mercy… They failed to see the genius of Paul who brought the Elohei Abraham to the nations…
4)Instead of Kabbalah I prefer concentrate on Holy Tradition. Holy Tradition is the mystical ground that gave us Torah, oral or written. Also each dabarim elohim as the power to give life to those who listen in humility and receive in simplicity. Kabbalah is receiving. Holy Tradition gives birth to Torah and all holy scriptures through men of Eloah who were born of her…
Therefore all dabarim elohim written is a sort of incarnation of the Dabar in our realm meaning that a person having integrated all dabarim elohim in his heart after a life of study and prayer will be transformed in a sort of dabar in the flesh. The Master teacher is the incarnation of the whole Torah in the flesh to become the path to the deification of Adam in a state higher than what was in Paradise…
Conclusion dear Con, Torah and holy scriptures make us enter the realm of Holy tradition where our being is made complete in the power of the Eloah. YHWH promise is then accomplished in the one receiving. Here I think at Maryam who received the Dabar because all her life prior she received the dabarim elohim in humility and simplicity like a child receiving the milk of his loving mother…
You are teaching simple replacement theology without a single shred of scriptural support
I take with suspicion when a “Jew” claims Ashkenazi Jews aren’t part of the Tribe. About the only people who bring this up are anti-Semites and Arabs. The best they can come up with is “prove it’s not true”. Serious study by serious historians show this idea cannot have any truth to it.
Therefore how can one take a person serious when that person will accept the distortions of anti-Semites. The Rabbi is correct in it shows how a Xtian can be influenced by the anti-Semitic writings of the Xtian text. It’s this same distortions that brought about replacement theology.
Putting again your old argument does not make it right. It is Yehudi Historians themselves that have brought the question up:
”A 2003 study of the Y chromosome by Behar et al. points to multiple origins for Ashkenazi Levites, a priestly class who comprise approximately 4% of Ashkenazi Jews. It found that haplogroup R1a1a (R-M17), which is uncommon in the Middle East or among Sephardi Jews, but dominant in Eastern Europe, is present in over 50% of Ashkenazi Levites, while the rest of Ashkenazi Levites’ paternal lineage is of apparent Middle Eastern origin. In comparison, the haplotype is very rare among Ashkenazi Cohanim (1.7%). Behar suggested a founding event, probably involving one or very few European men, occurring at a time close to the initial formation and settlement of the Ashkenazi community as a possible explanation.[76] Nebel, Behar and Goldstein speculate that this may indicate a Khazar origin,[77] with Goldstein saying the Khazar theory “now seems to me plausible, if not likely”.[78]
76: Behar DM, Thomas MG, Skorecki K et al. (October 2003). “Multiple origins of Ashkenazi Levites: Y chromosome evidence for both Near Eastern and European ancestries”. American Journal of Human Genetics 73 (4): 768–779. doi:10.1086/378506. PMC 1180600. PMID 13680527.
77: Goldstein, David B. (2008). “3”. Jacob’s legacy: A genetic view of Jewish history. Yale University Press. pp. location 873 (Kindle for PC). ISBN 978-0-300-12583-2.
78: Goldstein, David B. (2008). “3”. Jacob’s legacy: A genetic view of Jewish history. Yale University Press. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-300-12583-2.
Sharbano contrary to you who brings perverted products of your imagination I bring proof in this debate. Like the others of your sect you know nothing except your men-made tradition. Plus if your Ashkhenazi I would not count on you to teach Torah for may be 50% of your branch is mixed therefore not Semitic how can teach and be light to the nations when you are not ISRAEL. Your are the anti-Semite. By the way Arabs are more Semite than you. In case you did not know Semite comes from Shem the first son of Noah. But you Ashkhenazi do not understand that. I your name the Lord put the name of the german enemy to identify you… Hmm!!
”Abraham Eliyahu Harkavi then suggested as early as 1869 that there might be a link between the Khazars and European Jews,[241] 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.[242][243] 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)[244] Maksymilian Ernest Gumplowicz,[245] and by the Russian-Jewish anthropologist Samuel Weissenberg.[246] In 1909 Hugo von Kutschera developed the notion into a book-length study,[247] arguing Khazars formed the foundational core of the modern Ashkenazi.[248] Maurice Fishberg introduced the notion to American audiences in 1911.[249] The idea was also taken up by the Polish-Jewish economic historian and General Zionist Yitzhak Schipper in 1918.[250][251] 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”,[252][253] a thesis that was to have a political echo in later opinion.[254][255] 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.[256] 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.[257][258] 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.[259] 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.[260] Poliak’s work found some support in Salo Wittmayer Baron and Ben-Zion Dinur,[261][262] but was dismissed by Bernard Weinryb as a fiction (1962).[263]
The Khazar-Ashkenazi hypothesis came to the attention of a much wider public with the publication of Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe in 1976.[264] which was both positively reviewed and dismissed as a fantasy, and a somewhat dangerous one. Israel’s ambassador to Britain branded it “an anti-Semitic action financed by the Palestinians”, while Bernard Lewis claimed that the idea was not supported by any evidence whatsoever, and had been abandoned by all serious scholars.[264][265] Raphael Patai, however, registered some support for the idea that Khazar remnants had played a role in the growth of Eastern European Jewish communities,[266] and several amateur researchers, such as Boris Altschüler (1994)[235] and Kevin Alan Brook,[267] kept the thesis in the public eye. The theory has been occasionally manipulated to deny Jewish nationhood.[264][268] Recently, a variety of approaches, from linguistics (Paul Wexler)[269] to historiography (Shlomo Sand)[270] and population genetics (Eran Elhaik, a geneticist from the University of Sheffield)[271] have emerged to keep the theory alive.[272] In broad academic perspective, both the idea that the Khazars converted en masse to Judaism, and the suggestion they emigrated to form the core population of Ashkenazi Jewry, remain highly polemical issues.[273]
One thesis, held that the Khazar Jewish population went into a northern diaspora and had a significant impact on the rise of Ashkenazi Jews. Connected to this thesis is the theory, expounded by Paul Wexler, that the grammar of Yiddish contains a Khazar substrate.[274]
Wikipedia
Lion, I suggest you read Harry Potter. It might teach you a thing or two about the evils of racist ideology and the obsession with “mixed ancestry.”
By the way, since English is not your native tongue, you might not have realized that the Wikipedia entry you quoted from destroys your argument.
And here is a whole book claiming to prove that Sephardic Jews aren’t descended from Jews at all!
http://www.sunypress.edu/p-2279-the-non-jewish-origins-of-the-s.aspx
This whole discussion is stupid and pointless and interesting only to racist anti-Semites.
I’ll say I have never actually “met” a Jewish Xtian, that I know of, but I Have heard plenty of them speak. In each and every case there comes across a Jewish Neshama. It has even been found that Xtians who were unaware of their Jewish heritage had shown signs of this Neshama. I don’t see this trait in you, EL.
There are methods to determine the validity of claims, such as the Khazars. I admit when I first heard of this I was intrigued, to say the least. But it didn’t take much to find out how disingenuous this theory was. Anytime there is a new claim brought forth the first thing that needs to be considered is the person bringing it. It’s not different than how the term “Palestinian” has been co-opted. There are all kinds of writings suggesting the Jews, Israelites, whoever, were never home to the land of Israel. Apparently these “historians” are accurate in Their portrayal of history. What constitutes Actual PROOF is PHYSICAL proof. Archaeology has Actually proven the Jewish connection to Israel. There is NO physical evidence these Khazars had even Converted to Judaism, let alone the Ashkenazi being their descendants. What IS true is YOUR Hatred of these Jews, BECAUSE these are the descendants of those Pharisees of 2000 years ago. As you have repeatedly wrapped any mention of Jews with “Your Sect” you have shown you have a disgust for Jews. If your hatred is so pronounced how and why should any of us believe You are, in fact, Jewish. I have my doubts. Is it any wonder no one would even consider the “Order of Eliyah” to have any merit.
Dina and Sharbano, being Ashkhenazi of course you will react to the Khazar mixing. That actually would break your claim to be Israel. For only the children of Israel can be on the land. YHWH knows his children. He will deploy his hand to cleanse the Holy Land from the usurpers. Sephardi and Mizhrahi are true Semite not the Ashekhnazi! This claim comes from Yehudi historian not me. For my part I know who his mixed or not. Surely the Elohim knows his People!!
Note my words: the fire is coming very soon to purify the Land from evil and pull out the heylel followers from my Country!!
{For only the children of Israel can be on the land}
I hate to burst your bubble but you speak contrary to Torah. Even the Prophets speak about people of the Nations coming to Israel, like for Succot, during the messianic era. Of course, when a person is a “sect of one” that person WILL be exclusionary.
Just because some Jew comes with some theory doesn’t make it so. Karl Marx was a Jew but that doesn’t make communism Jewish. You sound like those from Mondoweiss.
In light of the terrible Iran deal, you may have a point. But one doesn’t need to be a prophet to see that.
Sharbano again like all fools you understand like a fool. In light to what his happening now for Israel and how blind you are… If you love Israel you will start to pray and repent and try to reunite the tribes… for Yehudah alone can not withstand the enemy.
Christians from the Middle East and many in Russia are the lost tribes of Israel. We should had been welcoming them in Israel to easily double the population of service men to defend the raging wolves that are coming. We must increase our forces to defend the Land.
Also I told you from the beginning of my appearance here listen to Malachi the prophet:
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
6 And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”
We the father in the Faith must turn toward the children in the Faith with our hearts meaning with good sentiment and warm welcoming not with our brains and with resentments…
Do you hear??
So, are YOU claiming to be Eliyahu HaNavi.
You seem to be misunderstanding Malachi. It is saying Eliyahu will come and do this, because if he didn’t come; THEN the option would be striking the earth. It isn’t saying that if Eliyahu fails; this will come to pass.
Do you REALLY think “numbers” will be the determining factor. Look for the answer in Torah. G-d diminished the numbers to Show it isn’t in the numbers that victory is attained. This is the problem in Israel today. They want to claim it’s ALL the IDF’s doing that Israel has prevailed against the enemies. If one examines each major conflict we see that each succeeding time it was more difficult. It is not the fault of the IDF but too many NOT giving credit to whom it belongs, Hashem.
It is quite interesting that during the Gulf war there were exactly 39 Scuds that hit Israel, in which Israel was spared losses. That is in direct contrast with the 39 Melachot of Shabbat. It can easily be an indication of warning. The problem in Israel today, And, since its inception is we have the Erev Rav in control. They want to be part of a modern Western, Greek, culture instead of Torah guidance. This does not bode well for the country. What they have been doing to the religious Jews is a disgrace. What kind of nation promulgates “Administrative Orders” against Jews living in the Land of Jews. It is the worse disgrace imaginable. G-d has made it clear throughout Tanach that if Israel, the Jews, would obey the commandments then they would live in blissful abundance. The Greek culture cannot be burdened by such ideas. There are literally countless examples where G-d has his hand in place but too many simply cannot or do not want to acknowledge this. They prefer a secular lifestyle. There are circumstances that warrant acknowledging the miraculous but too many choose to ignore these occurrences. THIS is where the problem lies and no amount of numbers will help.
As much as I agree with you, Sharbano, I think a Jewish theocracy in Israel is not a good alternative, to understate the case. We need Mashiach for that.
INDEED!!
Under the circumstances it would never come to pass as it should. First, there would have to be a sitting Sanhedrin where ALL the Rabbis agreed on the members.
Once again it’s all speculation based upon “assumptions”. What IS for certain are those who have a lineage that is traceable.
Sharbano your supposed traceable lineage can be forged. DNA testing can prove if you lie or not. Also the Elohim knows if you are a real Yehudi or not or a real Israeli or not. You can say what you want just bring the proof. I don’t believe you and your Ashkhenazi must be DNA tested… they can be infiltrators and corrupt Israel purity especially with your false doctrine of reincarnation in bodies with non Jewish DNA and your doctrine of Neshama…
Are You trying to corrupt our line like in Genesis 6??
As usual you come here with Just enough information to be dangerous. They are a long way from concluding much in this DNA analysis. They have had to modify aspects a number of times already. The limited use of DNA is only worthwhile in direct relationships. Recently they have found there is more to the DNA than originally thought. If they can understand this new development it will Entirely change Everything they now know about DNA.
And what does the Nephilim have to do with Anything. Oh, I know, that was your J’sus before he was ready, no doubt.
Theology of G-d can’t abrogate the Torah.
Con that is not what I said. What is veiled or not clearly explicit in the written Torah does not mean that it is not in the Torah. How do you explain the LET US MAKE ADAM IN OUR IMAGE AND ACCORDING TO OUR LIKENESS.
From the on start of Genesis the Theology is their but not clearly explicit to those who do not have eyes to see…
Lion, you repeatedly bring up the “let us make man” and “Moshe saw a form” arguments, as if several of us haven’t responded to you on this several times each. You have completely ignored our answers while endlessly repeating yourself.
Why do you bother to ask questions if you don’t listen to the answer?
EL. You Would be able to understand that reference in Genesis by knowing Hebrew and looking in other places those Hebrew words are used. Those who are unskilled in Hebrew assume the meaning of the translated words and fall short. Notice the usage of the words used; and what is not used. When asking THAT question it will shed light on the subject.
Dina and Sharbano, if your so-called arguments where convincing the debate will be closed by now. Obviously your imagination can not explain Genesis 1… Therefore try to peddle all you want but the LET US MAKE is not resolved. May be you should ask some twisted mind of yours to try but as a serpent twist I will recognize that what he will say is words of a serpent…
Now if you have humility you will submit to the word of Elohay and repent of all your sins. May be then YHWH will have mercy on you. From my part I can assure you that you will not be part of the messianic reign. You thought that you can lash at me all you want but I am not a lamb like the Christians to stay quiet and be impressed by your sophisms. I will bring holy fire upon you that you feel the wrath of Eloah for no one can insult the Ruah Holy without any consequence: unlike Con and Jim who dare not do what you did you and all who insulted the Ruah Holy will feel the fire. Your cry will not be heard for you did not listen when the Dabar said:
28 “ Amen I say to you that all will be forgiven to the sons of men the sins and the blasphemies as great as if they would have blasphemed; 29 who however if he would have blasphemed in regard to the Ruah the holy, he has not the release into the eternity, on the other hand guilty he is of an eternal sin; 30 because they said, a Spirit unclean he has. ” (Mark, chap.3)
You are soooo scary.
E.L.F scary? Na. But I do wish he would quit rewording the KJV to make it sound like he has some secret Jewish knowledge going on. This whole ruah holy, jesus/yeshua/yahushuo/yahawishiwashy/whatever.. is laughable. 🙂
Larry, I forgot the and tags.
My Favorite title that Yehuda Yisrael uses for J is “The Jeezer” I laughed for hours. It just makes me think of some really weird guys in tin foil hats 🙂
Oops, I put in pretend html sarc tags, and the computer thought it was real. Next time I’ll just write #sarcasm so people will know when I’m being sarcastic.
casper the friendly ghost pic would be appropriate.
My fave is the yahawishiwashy.
I wish I was that clever, but credit must go to Yehuda Yisrael says:
July 14, 2015 at 6:01 pm
Actually we did speak to that regarding Genesis. I put up a complete explanation from the Rambam, who discusses the Hebrew usage and comparisons. The problem you have is looking at each verse in total isolation. That’s why so many have come to so many different conclusions. ALL one has to do is let Torah speak for itself. As we are taught in hermeneutics they way to find answers is to question this, here, and look for for other occurrences and see the usage there. The words themselves will complement each other and a clear understanding will result. Of course it helps when one has memorized the entire Torah, as the Rambam had and told his wife to have his children do the same.
In this post once again you have exhibited true colors. If this was the way your J’sus behaved around the people he came in contact with no wonder they reacted as they did. It certainly seems your actions Do parallel the same reaction he had to those around him, when they too disagreed.
Legitimate reaction when you from Elohim condition but like Paul said He humbled himself for the benefit of Humanity:
5 This let it be minded in you which also in Messiah Yahushuo, 6 who in a condition of Elohim belonging surely not a prize to be grasped he led the way himself the one to be dual-equal to Elohai, 7 otherwise himself he emptied having taken a condition of slave, in a likeness of men having become, 8 and of appearance having been found as a man, he humbled himself having become obedient as far as death, death furthermore of a cross. 9 Because of which also the Elohim exalted him exceedingly and given him a name the one above every name, 10 in order that in the name of Yahushuo every knee should bow upon heavens and on earths and down from earths, 11 and every tongue should confess that Lord Yahushuo Messiah you are a glory of Elohim father. (Philippians, chap. 2)
I’ll explain it to you This way. I’m not at all bothered by anything you say. You are not the first to hurl so many barbs. When I was growing up as a child I had to put up with Xtian “fire”, with remarks as xhrist-killers and even worse taunts, including physical. All it did was make me that much more determined, that much more steadfast with Emunah. And I think that frustrates and angers you because no matter what you say it bounces off. I simply don’t take it personally no matter what. Because nothing you can do can affect me personally. You cannot affect my parnassah, or any other aspect of my life. I walk away from this computer, or the other one, and I forget about you. There is too much in life to be troubled by someone’s words. “And that’s the way it is”, (dating myself)
According to this word of the Messiah, all we be saved except those would have blasphemed the Ruah Holy the Shakhinah. They are guilty of spiritual pride as they can not recognize Mercy and Grace and therefore repent of their sins. They have consummated pride like their father Heylel who is banished forever from Shama’im and Paradise for it is written in Ezekiel the prophet:
18 “From the multitude of your iniquities, in unrighteous trade of yours you have defiled your sanctuaries
…
19 All they who knew you in the people are desolated upon you;
Terrors you will become
And nothingness of yours eternity of a world .”’”
Where does Yechezkel say “Heylel”. It DOES say to Yechezkel to speak in lamentation to the “King of Tyre”. He was one who was the epitome of haughty arrogance.
What IS noteworthy is in one particular verse.
“Therefore, behold I am bringing foreigners, the strong of the nations, upon you, and they will draw their swords on the beauty of your wisdom and profane your brightness.
Into the Pit they will lower you, and you will die the deaths of those who are slain, in the heart of the seas.
Will you say, “I am a god” before your slayer? Indeed, you are a man and not a god in the hand of your slayer.”
So, are you suggesting that mere mortal man can actually slay this fallen angel. You see Why you simply cannot look at One verse and create a theology on that.
Actually Sharbano you are looking at some verses I look at the whole… go further down Ezekiel 28… The prince of Tyr is a mortal yes but the king of Tyr the power behind the prince of Tyr is a fallen Cheroub:
11 Moreover the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 12 “Son of man, take up a lamentation for the king of Tyre, and say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord God:
“You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.
14 “You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.
Continue the rest of this passage Sharbano for yourself… But with this quote here that I have provided you… Are you going to tell me that the prince of Tyr was in Eden with Adam???
Do you understand now or have I again to explain everything…
You simply CANNOT ignore the “Who”, “King of Tyre”. Just as it was regarding the King of Babylon. G-d is saying these stories are about These people. Then, it is put in poetic, metaphorical language.
You should also try for a better translation. It doesn’t take much to change what is being conveyed, especially when it is metaphorical.
Lion, you have bigger issues on your hands concerning your eisegetical interpretation of Genesis 1:26…
It’s time to put your argument to rest.
Deuteronomy 4:9-19 explicitly forbids the worship of ANY FORM including man.
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 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 worship 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.
From this passage, we see two explicit themes:
1. G-d is explicitly commanding Israel not to worship 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)
So this isn’t just a “one time deal” command, Lion…This prohibition against form worship extends to this very day!
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.
Also keep in mind that the “sun, the moon, and the whole host of heaven,” were not “man made” either, so please do not make the pitiful argument that your jeezer is immune to this prohibition because he is supposedly “uncreated.” (Which you have no means of proving.) A form is a form is a form!
At the end of the day, Deut 4:9-19 what we are to go by. If you wish to eisegetically abuse scripture and assume that “let us make man in our image” refers to your jeezer, then that’s your idolatrous prerogative.
G-d gave Israel explicit instructions not to worship Him in ANY FORM. Deut 4:9-19 isn’t going away…Sorry!
Shalom
Lion, if we granted your premise that by the “prince of tyre” the Torah text really allegorically means Satan, a fallen Cherub, then please follow your own interpretation through to its logical conclusion. The conclusion is, NO messenger of G-d can claim to be G-d himself (as this Cherub apparently claims for himself.)
As you know, Christians look throughout Tanakh to verses like Genesis 1:26 and Joshua 5, and other places in Torah to claim that the “captain of G-d’s host,” the “angel of great council” (as Jesus is often called in many orthodox Christian sources,) is divine and worthy of worship. These verses you have brought here about this “cherub” completely refute that position that you hold. G-d emphatically says of this “cherub,” this messenger, you ARE NOT G-D, SO DONT CLAIM TO BE. When read with Deuteronomy 4:19 in mind, the message is explicit, the father alone is to be worshipped, no angels/logos, etc.
Plus Con Yehoshua chapter 5 v.13-15 shows us a man as the commander of YHWH army
This is the Eternal Messiah the Image of the Elohim in which Adam was made!!
13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, a Man stood opposite him with His sword drawn in His hand. And Joshua went to Him and said to Him, “Are You for us or for our adversaries?”
14 So He said, “No, but as Commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.”
And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and said to Him, “What does my Lord say to His servant?”
15 Then the Commander of the Lord’s army said to Joshua, “Take your sandal off your foot, for the place where you stand is holy.” And Joshua did so. (NKJV)
Note that Yehoshua worshiped Him…
Lion, interesting that you should bring up Joshua 5 and the supposed “worship” of this “captain of the Lord’s HOST” who you claim to be the jeezer.
Did you ever think to check Deuteronomy 4:19 and how the WHOLE HOST OF HEAVEN is prohibited from being worshiped by G-d Himself?!
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 (צְבָא) 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.
This utterly destroys any attempt by you or anyone else who wants to insist that the angel described in Joshua 5:14 is actually a “pre-incarnate jesus angel.” The angel is described as “the captain of the Lord’s **HOST.*” Literally, the same Hebrew word for “host” (צְבָא) is used in Deuteronomy 4:19 concerning the prohibition of the worship of ALL THE **HOST (צְבָא)** OF HEAVEN. This prohibition obviously includes the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14. This means that the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14 cannot be G-d! So anyone like you who tries to say that this refers to their “pre-incarnate jesus” will have to answer to G-d when He makes it abundantly clear that it is idolatry to worship any of His heavenly host in Deuteronomy 4:19!
And no, Joshua did not “worship” this angel as a god. You clearly do not know Biblical Hebrew as well as you boast…
I’ll give credit where credit is due, Concerned Reader. 🙂
Thanks Yehuda
Lion, lets look at Genesis 27:29 and see what you think is going on there. I’ll give you the context. Jacob is being blessed by his father Isaac after he tricked his father into thinking he was Esau…
Genesis 27:29 Nations shall serve you and kingdoms shall **BOW DOWN TO YOU;** (וישתחו) you shall be a master over your brothers, and your mother’s sons shall **BOW DOWN TO YOU.** (וישתחו) Those who curse you shall be cursed, and those who bless you shall be blessed.”
See that Hebrew word *וישתחו*? It appears that it means to “BOW DOWN TO.” Clearly Isaac was not telling Jacob that he was to be worshipped as a god by anyone!
Interestingly, the SAME HEBREW WORD can be found in Joshua 5:14!
Joshua 5:14 And he said, No, but I am the captain of the host of the Lord; I have now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and **PROSTRATED HIMSELF,** (וישתחו) and said to him, What does my lord say to his servant?
See, Lion? The work *וישתחו* does not necessarily mean “worship” in the sense of worshipping Hashem. No! Rather, it can refer to PROSTRATION/BOWING DOWN, as clearly intended in the context of Genesis 27:29, where Isaac tells Jacob that nations will BOW DOWN TO HIM, using the Hebrew word *וישתחו*, which is the EXACT SAME HEBREW WORD used to describe Joshua’s PROSTRATION to the “Captain of the Lord’s HOST” (צְבָא) Which, as mentioned earlier, is used in Deuteronomy 4:19 concerning the prohibition of the worship of ALL THE **HOST (צְבָא)** OF HEAVEN.
So brush up on your Biblical Hebrew, Mr Lion. Joshua wasn’t worshipping the “Captain of the Lord’s Host.” He was simply bowing down and showing his respect, as was common during the time.
Shalom
Con and Yehuda that is your interpretation. Yehoshua chapter 5 v.13-15 says He worshiped:
Your own rabbis teach that if you drop a penny on the floor and you bow down to get it and that a pagan temple is just there… they say do not bow down for not you to be accused of having bow down to idols.
Now why Yehoshua is bowing down and disobeying Deuteronomy 4? Is there a contradiction? No for bowing to authorized persons is allowed but not to idols… Do you see the difference?
Also why to he calls him Lord and put his face of the floor… That is plain worship!
“And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and said to Him, “What does my Lord say to His servant?” ”
You see your interpretation is full of contradiction, mine flows with Tanakh!!
So according to Lion, the Hebrew word *וישתחו* can only refer to worship of Hashem.
I guess Isaac was telling his son Jacob that he was also “G-d in the flesh,” just like jesus, according to Lion!
Genesis 27:29 Nations shall serve you and kingdoms shall **BOW DOWN TO YOU;** (וישתחו) you shall be a master over your brothers, and your mother’s sons shall **BOW DOWN TO YOU.** (וישתחו) Those who curse you shall be cursed, and those who bless you shall be blessed.”
According to Lion’s understanding of the word וישתחו, the only possible explanation is that Isaac was calling his son Jacob “G-d in the flesh!”
I guess the jeezer has some competition, Lion!
(Chas V’Shalom!)
I was the one who told you of the coin and bowing. I may or may not have said why. If a person would do this and an am ha’aretz would see this they may believe it is not forbidden to worship other idols, or in some way violate Torah.
I’ve mentioned before that to decide on a word’s meaning it is necessary to search throughout Torah and do a comparative analysis. What may be an ambiguous use in one place will be clarified in another by this method. In this way the Entire Torah is clarified.
Also Lion believes that Moses worshipped his father-in-law, Yitro, as the Hebrew word *וישתחו* can ONLY MEAN “worship of G-d” according to Lion!
Exodus 18:7 So Moses went out toward Jethro, **PROSTRATED HIMSELF** (וישתחו) and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent.
So according to Lion, Joshua worshipped the “Captain of the Lord’s Host” where it says he PROSTRATED HIMSELF (וישתחו) in Joshua 5:14. Likewise, Moses also worshipped his father in law, Jethro, where it says that Moses PROSTRATED HIMSELF (וישתחו) in Exodus 18:7.
Thank you for showing us that Jethro was actually “G-d in the flesh,” Lion!
So now we have Jacob and Jethro being “G-d in the flesh” in addition to the jeezer!
(End sarcasm…)
Yehuda That is your interpretation. Abraham, Mosheh saw the Eternal Messiah (Angel). Numbers chapter 12 is very explicit that Mosheh saw Elohim in a form. Daniel saw the Ancient of Days in a vision.
The ark itself was cover on top by two cherub. Your interpretation is not the Torah but the interpretation of some rabbis countering Christianity by the Talmud. This was not the Faith of Abraham nor Isaac nor Israel…
Deuteronomy 4 does not contradict Genesis 1 v.26, therefore your interpretation is not satisfactory to explain it.
LET US MAKE ADAM IN OUR IMAGE
Imagine that did you ever ask the question of who is the IN OUR IMAGE : Does Elohim have an Image??? Does the Elohim go against its own commandments in Deuteronomy 4. Of course not therefore your interpretation MUST be reviewed for it is contradictory of the Tanakh.
A passage here Deuteronomy 4 can not supersede all other passages of the Tanakh and certainly not Genesis 1 v.26 !!
So you are telling me that G-d’s explicit commands to Israel not to worship Him in any form are superseded by your eisegetical interpretation of Genesis 1:26, which, by the way, makes no explicit mention of your jeezer…
Ok then…
Lion, thank you for admitting that you don’t take G-d’s word seriously. You have admitted that you don’t care what G-d has to say and that your interpretation of an ambiguous verse takes precedence over G-d’s explicit commands to Israel concerning the fact that we are not to worship Him in any form…
Wow…
I guess G-d is a pillar of a cloud.
You ignored this the last time it was posted. Here it is again for your reading pleasure.
We have “free-will” and we have an “intellect”. Both of these are qualities G-d has, whereas angels have no free will. This is an excerpt from the Rambam’s Guide to the Perplexed.
Some have been of opinion that by the Hebrew tselem, the shape and figure of a thing is to be understood, and this explanation led men to believe in the corporeality [of the Divine Being]: for they thought that the words “Let us make man in our tselem” (Gen. i. 26), implied that God had the form of a human being, i.e., that He had figure and shape, and that, consequently, He was corporeal. They adhered faithfully to this view, and thought that if they were to relinquish it they would eo ipso reject the truth of the Bible: and further, if they did not conceive God as having a body possessed of face and limbs, similar to their own in appearance, they would have to deny even the existence of God. The sole difference which they admitted, was that He excelled in greatness and splendour, and that His substance was not flesh and blood. Thus far went their conception of the greatness and glory of God. The incorporeality of the Divine Being, and His unity, in the true sense of the word–for there is no real unity without incorporeality–will be fully proved in the course of the present treatise. (Part II., ch. i.) In this chapter it is our sole intention to explain the meaning of the words tselem and demut. I hold that the Hebrew equivalent of “form” in the ordinary acceptation of the word, viz., the figure and shape of a thing, is toär. Thus we find “[And Joseph was] beautiful in toär (‘form’), and beautiful in appearance” (Gen. xxxix. 6): “What form (toär) is he of?” (1 Sam. xxviii. 14): “As the form (toär) of the children of a king” (Judges viii. 18). It is also applied to form produced by human labour, as “He marketh its form (toär) with a line,” “and he marketh its form (toär) with the compass” (Isa. xliv. 13). This term is not at all applicable to God. The term tselem , on the other hand, signifies the specific form, viz., that which constitutes the essence of a thing, whereby the thing is what it is; the reality of a thing in so far as it is that particular being. In man the “form” is that constituent which gives him human perception: and on account of this intellectual perception the term tselem is employed in the sentences “In the tselem of God he created him” (Gen. i. 27). It is therefore rightly said, “Thou despisest their tselem ” (Ps. lxiii. 20); the “contempt” can only concern the soul–the specific form of man, not the properties and shape of his body. I am also of opinion that the reason why this term is used for “idols” may be found in the circumstance that they are worshipped on account of some idea represented by them, not on account of their figure and shape. For the same reason the term is used in the expression, “the forms (tsalme) of your emerods” (1 Sam. vi. 5), for the chief object was the removal of the injury caused by the emerods, not a change of their shape. As, however, it must be admitted that the term tselem is employed in these two cases, viz. “the images of the emerods” and “the idols” on account of the external shape, the term tselem is either a homonym or a hybrid term, and would denote both the specific form and the outward shape, and similar properties relating to the dimensions and the shape of material bodies; and in the phrase “Let us make man in our tselem ” (Gen. i. 26), the term signifies “the specific form” of man, viz., his intellectual perception, and does not refer to his “figure” or “shape.” Thus we have shown the difference between tselem and toär, and explained the meaning of tselem .
Demut is derived from the verb damah, “he is like.” This term likewise denotes agreement with regard to some abstract relation: comp. “I am like a pelican of the wilderness” (Ps. cii. 7); the author does not compare himself to the pelican in point of wings and feathers, but in point of sadness.” Nor any tree in the garden of God was like unto him in beauty” (Ezek. 8); the comparison refers to the idea of beauty. “Their poison is like the poison of a serpent” (Ps. lviii. 5); “He is like unto a lion” (Ps. xvii. 12); the resemblance indicated in these passages does not refer to the figure and shape, but to some abstract idea. In the same manner is used “the likeness of the throne” (Ezek. i. 26); the comparison is made with regard to greatness and glory, not, as many believe, with regard to its square form, its breadth, or the length of its legs: this explanation applies also to the phrase “the likeness of the chayyot (“living creatures,” Ezek. i. 13).
As man’s distinction consists in a property which no other creature on earth possesses, viz., intellectual perception, in the exercise of which he does not employ his senses, nor move his hand or his foot, this perception has been compared–though only apparently, not in truth–to the Divine perception, which requires no corporeal organ. On this account, i.e., on account of the Divine intellect with which man has been endowed, he is said to have been made in the form and likeness of the Almighty, but far from it be the notion that the Supreme Being is corporeal, having a material form.
Some years ago a learned man asked me a question of great importance; the problem and the solution which we gave in our reply deserve the closest attention. Before, however, entering upon this problem and its solution I must premise that every Hebrew knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges, and the rulers of countries, and that Onkelos the proselyte explained it in the true and correct manner by taking Elohim in the sentence, “and ye shall be like Elohim” (Gen. iii. 5) in the last-mentioned meaning, and rendering the sentence “and ye shall be like princes.” Having pointed out the homonymity of the term “Elohim” we return to the question under consideration. “It would at first sight,” said the objector, “appear from Scripture that man was originally intended to be perfectly equal to the rest of the animal creation, which is not endowed with intellect, reason, or power of distinguishing between good and evil: but that Adam’s disobedience to the command of God procured him that great perfection which is the peculiarity of man, viz., the power of distinguishing between good and evil-the noblest of all the faculties of our nature, the essential characteristic of the human race. It thus appears strange that the punishment for rebelliousness should be the means of elevating man to a pinnacle of perfection to which he had not attained previously. This is equivalent to saying that a certain man was rebellious and extremely wicked, wherefore his nature was changed for the better, and he was made to shine as a star in the heavens.” Such was the purport and subject of the question, though not in the exact words of the inquirer. Now mark our reply, which was as follows:–“You appear to have studied the matter superficially, and nevertheless you imagine that you can understand a book which has been the guide of past and present generations, when you for a moment withdraw from your lusts and appetites, and glance over its contents as if you were reading a historical work or some poetical composition. Collect your thoughts and examine the matter carefully, for it is not to be understood as you at first sight think, but as you will find after due deliberation; namely, the intellect which was granted to man as the highest endowment, was bestowed on him before his disobedience. With reference to this gift the Bible states that “man was created in the form and likeness of God.” On account of this gift of intellect man was addressed by God, and received His commandments, as it is said: “And the Lord God commanded Adam” (Gen. ii. 16)–for no commandments are given to the brute creation or to those who are devoid of understanding. Through the intellect man distinguishes between the true and the false. This faculty Adam possessed perfectly and completely. The right and the wrong are terms employed in the science of apparent truths (morals), not in that of necessary truths, as, e.g., it is not correct to say, in reference to the proposition “the heavens are spherical,” it is “good” or to declare the assertion that “the earth is flat” to be “bad”: but we say of the one it is true, of the other it is false. Similarly our language expresses the idea of true and false by the terms emet and sheker, of the morally right and the morally wrong, by tov and ra’. Thus it is the function of the intellect to discriminate between the true and the false–a distinction which is applicable to all objects of intellectual perception. When Adam was yet in a state of innocence, and was guided solely by reflection and reason–on account of which it is said: “Thou hast made him (man) little lower than the angels” (Ps. viii. 6)–he was not at all able to follow or to understand the principles of apparent truths; the most manifest impropriety, viz., to appear in a state of nudity, was nothing unbecoming according to his idea: he could not comprehend why it should be so. After man’s disobedience, however, when he began to give way to desires which had their source in his imagination and to the gratification of his bodily appetites, as it is said, “And the wife saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to the eyes” (Gen. iii. 6), he was punished by the loss of part of that intellectual faculty which he had previously possessed. He therefore transgressed a command with which he had been charged on the score of his reason; and having obtained a knowledge of the apparent truths, he was wholly absorbed in the study of what is proper and what improper. Then he fully understood the magnitude of the loss he had sustained, what he had forfeited, and in what situation he was thereby placed. Hence we read, “And ye shall be like elohim, knowing good and evil,” and not “knowing” or “discerning the true and the false”: while in necessary truths we can only apply the words “true and false,” not “good and evil.” Further observe the passage, “And the eyes of both were opened, and they knew they were naked” (Gen. iii. 7): it is not said, “And the eyes of both were opened, and they saw”; for what the man had seen previously and what he saw after this circumstance was precisely the same: there had been no blindness which was now removed, but he received a new faculty whereby he found things wrong which previously he had not regarded as wrong. Besides, you must know that the Hebrew word paka? used in this passage is exclusively employed in the figurative sense of receiving new sources of knowledge, not in that of regaining the sense of sight. Comp., “God opened her eyes” (Gen. xxi. 19). “Then shall the eyes of the blind be opened” (Isaiah xxxviii. 8). “Open ears, he heareth not” (ibid. Xlii. 20), similar in sense to the verse, “Which have eyes to see, and see not” (Ezek. xii. 2). When, however, Scripture says of Adam, “He changed his face (panav) and thou sentest him forth” Job xiv. 20), it must be understood in the following way: On account of the change of his original aim he was sent away. For panim, the Hebrew equivalent of face, is derived from the verb panah, “he turned,” and signifies also “aim,” because man generally turns his face towards the thing he desires. In accordance with this interpretation, our text suggests that Adam, as he altered his intention and directed his thoughts to the acquisition of what he was forbidden, he was banished from Paradise: this was his punishment; it was measure for measure. At first he had the privilege of tasting pleasure and happiness, and of enjoying repose and security; but as his appetites grew stronger, and he followed his desires and impulses, (as we have already stated above), and partook of the food he was forbidden to taste, he was deprived of everything, was doomed to subsist on the meanest kind of food, such as he never tasted before, and this even only after exertion and labour, as it is said, “Thorns and thistles shall grow up for thee” (Gen. iii. 18), “By the sweat of thy brow,” etc., and in explanation of this the text continues, “And the Lord God drove him from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground whence he was taken.” He was now with respect to food and many other requirements brought to the level of the lower animals: comp., “Thou shalt eat the grass of the field” (Gen. iii. 18). Reflecting on his condition, the Psalmist says, “Adam unable to dwell in dignity, was brought to the level of the dumb beast” (Ps. xlix. 13).” May the Almighty be praised, whose design and wisdom cannot be fathomed.”
Lion, concerning your idolatrous misunderstanding of 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, Lion. 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?
It is also interesting that you say that Daniel “saw the ancient days in a VISION.” I agree whole heartedly. It is also interesting what Numbers 12 says concerning Moses in comparison to other prophets, such as Daniel.
But unfortunately for your argument, you are flippantly using Moses’s revelation as the standard for all of Israel. Deut 4:9-19 was a commandment for ALL ISRAEL. It explicitly states that we are not to acknowledge G-d IN ANY FORM! G-d speaks to Aaron and Miriam in Numbers 12:6-8 concerning what makes Moses different from all other prophets, **INCLUDING AARON** (This is the key) The context of Numbers 12 involves G-d speaking to Aaron and Miriam. Lets start at verse 5:
Numbers 12:5 The Lord descended in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the Tent. He called to Aaron and Miriam, and they both went out.
Numbers 12:6. He said, “Please listen to My words. If there be prophets among you, [I] the Lord will make Myself known to him in a vision; I will speak to him in a dream.
Numbers 12:7. Not so is My servant Moses; he is faithful throughout My house.
Numbers 12:8. With him I speak mouth to mouth; in a vision and not in riddles, and he beholds the image of the Lord. So why were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses ?
Moses is a UNIQUE prophet in that he is the ONLY PROPHET who “beholds the image of the Lord.” We can debate on what that means, but one thing is clear: MOSES IS THE ONLY PROPHET CAPABLE OF THIS ABILITY!
At the end of the day, Deut 4:9-19 what we are to go by. If you wish to eisegetically abuse scripture and assume that Moses prayed to jesus, then that’s your idolatrous prerogative. If you want to assume every time an unnamed angel appears to someone in the Tanach, this angel must be a “pre incarnate jesus angel,” then that is your idolatrous prerogative. Just know that the Tanach, nor the NT supports your claims. For jesus didn’t even claim to be these angels in your false NT!
Ultimately, Deuteronomy 4:9-19 thwarts any eisegetical attempt made by a christian to try and deify angels in the Tanach. Your “great jesus angel hunt” is a wild goose chase. If you want to disobey G-d’s explicit commands not to worship Him in any form, then that’s your prerogative…
And that’s a real shame, Lion…
Yehuda todah rabah (thank you very much). I like the way you argue. I understand your preoccupation. As a man of the Alliance you defend your interpretation of what Moseh transmitted you.which is ok. But you must respect the Orthodox Christians who have another interpretation. Which one is right?
Let us try to respond:
1)Abraham encounter with the tree Anasim אֲנָשִׁ֔ים , which means persons not men where it could be a man or an angel…
2)Two of the anasim are angels not men
3)The other is the Eternal Messiah in the flesh the Word (Dabar) why? Because he stays with Abraham and Abraham starts negotiating with Him as the Lord pleading to Him for Sodom…
Now concerning Mosheh having seen the form of Elohim, his Image
He is not the only one for in the true Messianic Body the smallest of children is higher in sanctity than the highest of prophets in the old because of the Messiah Blood circulating in our veins. We are a nation of priest, prophets and kings… we are the saints the dabarim elohim of the order of Eliyah angels in the flesh to come to judge!!
Actually angels will bow down to us and we will judge angels and men for we have believed and bear witness to the Resurrected Messiah transcending space and time and we are his children One with Him for the Glory of Elohay
By the way that is why one third of the angels followed Heylel and rebelled because they did not want to bow to Adam and his children…in the future…meaning to the Messiah and his children…
“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.”
and
“Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels?”
Lion, your understanding of Genesis 18 is saying that one of these men is actually a divine person worth of worship. You eisegetically assume this. The text does not say explicitly that the angel who told Abraham about his future son was still standing there with Abraham. This is where your eisegesis comes into play.
If we were to assume your position, then other passages in the Tanach would deify prophets!
Here is an example. Let’s read Isaiah 7:3-11
Isaiah 7:3. **AND THE LORD SAID TO ISAIAH,** “Now go out toward Ahaz, you and Shear-Yashuv your son, to the edge of the conduit of the upper pool, to the road of the washer’s field.
(Here we have it established that Hashem is having Isaiah speak to king Ahaz on His behalf. Moving on.)
Isaiah 7:4. **AND YOU SHALL SAY TO HIM,** “Feel secure and calm yourself, do not fear, and let your heart not be faint because of these two smoking stubs of firebrands, because of the raging anger of Rezin and Aram and the son of Remaliah.
(Hashem is making it clear that Isaiah is the one who is speaking to king Ahaz on behalf of Hashem…Moving on.)
Isaiah 7:5. Since Aram planned harm to you, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, saying:
(Isaiah is still speaking here…)
Isaiah 7:6. ‘Let us go up against Judah and provoke it, and annex it to us; and let us crown a king in its midst, one who is good for us,’
(Isaiah is still speaking…)
Isaiah 7:7. So said the Lord God, ‘Neither shall it succeed, nor shall it come to pass.
(Isaiah is making it clear that he is still speaking on behalf of Hashem as he says “so said the Lord G-d.)
Isaiah 7:8. For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and in another sixty-five years, Ephraim shall be broken, no longer to be a people.
(Isaiah is still speaking)
Isaiah 7:9. And the head of Ehpraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah; if you do not believe, it is because you cannot be believed.”
(Isaiah is still speaking)
Isaiah 7:10. **AND THE LORD CONTINUED TO SPEAK TO Ahaz,** saying,
What a second here, Lion! This verse says that THE LORD CONTINUED TO SPEAK TO AHAZ! I thought Isaiah was speaking on behalf of G-d up until this point! That’s what the text says anyway…
I guess the only way to reconcile this passage is to say that Isaiah is “G-d in the flesh!” After all, this is how you understand Genesis 18! How could the man who told Abraham about the birth if Isaac have been anyone else but “god in the flesh”?! The text says that Abraham was left standing before G-d, and the text said that he was just speaking to an man…So the only explanation possible is that this man is god in the flesh! So too, how could Isaiah be the speaker when the text clearly says that G-d CONTINUED to speak to Ahaz? The only possible explanation is that Isaiah must be god!
Right Lion? (Sarcasm)
Isaiah 7:11. “Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord, your God: ask it either in the depths, or in the heights above.”
(Remember, the LORD is speaking here so this isn’t actually Isaiah speaking. It is G-d! So Isaiah must be god, too according to Lion’s interpretation of Genesis 18…)
Isaiah 7:12. And Ahaz said, “I will not ask, and I will not test the Lord.”
Isaiah 7:13. And he said, “Listen now, O House of David, is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?
(These verses also might seem like Isaiah is speaking, but Isaiah 7:10 clearly says that G-d was speaking throughout this passage as it states G-d CONTINUED TO SPEAK, thus Isaiah must be god, according to Lion’s logic.)
It’s a shame I have to go through such a tedious process to show you how you abusing the context of scripture, Lion. If you want to argue that G-d “explicitly said he came in the form of a man to Abraham,” then you must also say that G-d “explicitly said he came in the form of Isaiah.” You would be wise in conceding that your logic is faulty and goes against G-d’s explicit commands to Israel.
In Deut 4:9-19 G-d does not make an exception for the form of a man. It explicitly says that we are forbidden to worship Hashem in ANY FORM!
Shalom
ויצו עליו פרעה אנשים וישלחו אתו ואת-אשתו
ואת-כל-אשר-לו
ויאמר אברם אל-לוט אל-נא תהי מריבה ביני ובינך
ובין רעי ובין רעיך כי-אנשים אחים אנחנו
ויאמר לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך כי אם-ישראל כי-שרית
עם-אלהים ועם-אנשים ותוכל
ויעברו אנשים מדינים סחרים וימשכו ויעלו את-יוסף
מן-הבור וימכרו את-יוסף לישמעאלים בעשרים כסף
ויביאו את-יוסף מצרימה
ומקצה אחיו לקח חמשה אנשים ויצגם לפני פרעה
ויצא ביום השני והנה שני-אנשים עברים נצים ויאמר
לרשע למה תכה רעך
ולא-שמעו אל-משה ויותרו אנשים ממנו עד-בקר וירם
תולעים ויבאש ויקצף עלהם משה
ויאמר משה אל-יהושע בחר-לנו אנשים וצא הלחם בעמלק מחר אנכי נצב על-ראש הגבעה ומטה האלהים בידי
וכי-יריבן אנשים והכה-איש את-רעהו באבן או באגרף
ולא ימות ונפל למשכב
There are many many more.
The ark itself was cover on top by two cherub. Your interpretation is not the Torah but the interpretation of some rabbis countering Christianity by the Talmud.
NOBODY WORSHIPS THE ARK OR THE CHERUBS ON IT!
NOBODY WORSHIPS THE BURNING BUSH!
NOBODY WORSHIPS THE PILLAR OF CLOUD!
WHEN PEOPLE WORSHIPED THE BRASS SERPENT (which had G-D’s spirit on it, THEY WERE PUNISHED AND THE SERPENT DESTROYED!)
Lion, you are going against the plain sense of the verses. If an incarnation was acceptable, why didn’t anyone ever pray to the burning bush? G-d’s word spoke through it, and his spirit rested on it, why isn’t that an incarnation?
Right-o, Con!
There’s quite an interesting parallel here. There were two K’ruvim guarding the entrance to forbid access to the “Tree of Life”. The Ark, with its cover also has two K’ruvim, which guards the Tablets of Torah. The Torah also is referred to as a “Tree of Life”. We see this throughout Tanach where there are direct parallels rather than the Xtian symbolism of e.g., seed and snake.
Con but Yehoshua worshiped the Commander who he calls Lord and to whom He bows down face on the earth… You can not escape the truth of Torah here.
All the authorize order of YHWH in all the realms represents him and can be bow down too depending of the order you are. Example a seraphim will not bow down to a simple angel but an angel will bow down to a seraphim. A king normally will not bow down to a servant but a servant will bow down to him.
Deuteronomy forbids to bow down to idols not to authorized orders of YHWH. For when you bow down to a king you bow down to YHWH to whom he represents.
For us Messihim it is even forbidden to bow down to anyone. We apply strictly Torah for we are of the higher orders… Blessed those who have ears to hear!!
If you were Really strict in following Torah you would be strict in accordance with Devarim 4.
Our order are in the strict obedience of Torah. You are mixing the elect and the goyim.
We bow only to YHWH Adonay and his Messiah like all true elect Yehudim. But obviously you judge what you don’t know accomplishing the word of the proverb:
A fool always judge before hearing a matter!!
Another fascinating diversion. You avoided the actual subject by attempting to reinforce the proposition.
Lion believes that Moses worshipped his father-in-law, Yitro, as the Hebrew word *וישתחו* can ONLY MEAN “worship of G-d” according to Lion!
Exodus 18:7 So Moses went out toward Jethro, **PROSTRATED HIMSELF** (וישתחו) and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent.
So according to Lion, Joshua worshipped the “Captain of the Lord’s Host” where it says he PROSTRATED HIMSELF (וישתחו) in Joshua 5:14. Likewise, Moses also worshipped his father in law, Jethro, where it says that Moses PROSTRATED HIMSELF (וישתחו) in Exodus 18:7.
So let me quote Lion above:
“For us Messihim it is even forbidden to bow down to anyone. We apply strictly Torah for we are of the higher orders… Blessed those who have ears to hear!!”
I guess Moses was an idolator then, according to you, Lion? After wall, he PROSTRATED HIMSELF to his father in law, Jethro…The exact same Hebrew word, וישתחו, is used for Joshua’s PROSTRATION OF HIMSELF to the Captain of the Lord’s Host in Joshua 5:14.
So you understand Moses to be an idolator, then?
Interesting…And a shame…
Yehuda I know your breed! You twist and deform my words and the dabarim elohim. You do so to introduce confusion. But like all serpent their head is always crushed by the sons of the Messiah. Therefore continue your monkey mimics and your foolishness for a true proverbs says:
“the dogs bark but the messengers continue their way…and one day their masters will come to make them shut up…” …
P.S.: I just had a thought may be you need your glasses to read carefully for I think that your imagination is running wild…seeing and understanding what is not written…
It’s quite fascinating how you invariably resort to such the same tactic of diversion and pugnaciousness when presented with a convincing counter argument. You wouldn’t last long in a Yeshiva.
Mr. Lion, I’m not the one arguing that Joshua worshipped the Captain of the Lord’s Host as his god. You are the one who is in error here, as you have been insisting that the Hebrew word וישתחו can “only mean worship.”
Now that I have have shown you examples of the word וישתחו where it is not used for worship of Hashem, you have called me a “serpent” and a “dog.”
Now that you’ve been caught with your pants down, all you can do is call me a “serpent and a “dog.”
Now that I have proven to you that Joshua did not worship the “Captain of the Lord of Hosts” as “G-d in the flesh,” what do you have to say for yourself?
Shalom
Yehuda you have proven only what your imagination want you to believe. You insult the Messiah of Israel and you expect me to have any consideration for you.
To hear baboon who think they know something and have the nerve to discuss with me while insulting the Messiah that is sarcastic. The time of Mercy is finishing o great baboon and the time of fire his starting. You must be of the frum kind who think they are Yehudi but are probably not.
You are a disgrace to the Yehudi Nation and to Israel. May the Lord purify us from your kind that the Land be bless again and protected against her enemies.
Now for the benefit of others to de-twist your words I will state that bowing down in the Tanakh is done to worship YHWH and show respect for the order(authorities) he instituted. When Moseh bow down to Yethro he showed respect for his father in law and worshipped YHWH through him.
Now to bow down to idols or animals or powers that are demonic that is not permitted by Torah in any circumstance.
Examples: 1)a) none should bow down to a tyrant or to Antiochus Epiphane
b) but someone could bow down to a legitimate king like the Messiah
2)a)none should bow down to a cow or a golden calf
b) but someone could bow down to Anasim like Abraham did
3)a) none should bow down to idols of the Hindus or other false gods
b)but someone could bow down to the people of the Land like Abraham did
4)a)none one should bow down to demonic forces or Heylel
b)but everyone should bow down to YHWH and his Messiah
For all bowing down his done to the proper authorities out of respect and as a worship through them to YHWH who establishes all of them for his Glory…
Yehuda Yisrael, you must surely be swept off your feet by the logic and power of Lion’s reasoning. You are a baboon. It’s really that simple. I wonder why I didn’t think of that rebuttal.
Maybe because I didn’t know baboons could type on computers and read Scripture and all. It’s amazing what these monkeys can do! I’ve got some catching up to do on the science!
ELF
What a coincidence? Jeeeez called disbelievers murders, liars etc. John 8:44. and you call disbelievers, dogs, monkeys, baboons etc. See what your messiah started?
Larry, what does the “F” stand for?
Dina
Nothing, funny thing, every time I write ELF, I’ll try it again, every time I write el that F just shows up. Weird. 🙂
Eliyah Lion, I’m glad that we can come to an agreement on this! You claim that when Moses bowed down to his father in law, Yitro, this was a sign of RESPECT.
Like I said before, when Joshua encountered the “Captain of the Lord’s Host,” the exact same Hebrew word used for “bowed down/prostrate” (וישתחו) is used in both Joshua 5:14 and when Moses “bows down/prostrates” himself to his father in law, Yitro.
So Joshua did not worship the “Captain of the Lord’s Host.” We also know this because Deuteronomy 4:19 forbids us from worshipping any of the heavenly HOST. That includes the Captain of the Lord’s Host.
So your argument has been refuted, Lion. Joshua did not worship this individual in Joshua 5:14. Just like Moses, Joshua was simply bowing as a sign of respect. This “Captain of the Lord’s Host” was not “G-d in the flesh” and it certainly wasn’t your jeezer!
Shalom
Haha again with JEEZER. Where did you get that one man?
I’m not sure where I got “jeezer” lol. I’m sure I might have heard it somewhere, but I feel like it was in passing, if at all. And yeah, like you said on Gene’s blog, I also think of “Ebeneezer jeezer” when I type it out lol.
Yehuda Yisrael, I don’t know why, but your yahawishiwashy tickled my funny bone. I laughed myself silly when I saw it. Also Rabbi B.’s version where he added a zillion vowels at the end.
By the way, you must have noticed that when you present Lion with an argument he can’t refute, he responds with an insult (such as you are a baboon) and a curse (you will be wiped away in the coming fire which is of course coming soon). Then when he calms down, he fires off another post simply repeating his original position that had already been handily refuted.
That is his pattern, and it gets really tiresome after a while.
Dina you are full of lies and deceits and are not a seeker of truth. You have been exposed!! Being Ashekanazi it only confirms that you are like the other usurpers of the glorious title of Yehudi. You insult the Messiah and you think I will stay without word like a little lamb. You are mistaken here. Your kind has been chastised by the wrath of Eloah throughout history. You are liars and wolves in disguised to rob like your father the Faith and Salvation to mankind.
Secular Yehudi are sinners but do not walk your path to perdition for all sinners will be saved by the Mercy of the Lord but you kind will go in a world damnation like all the fallen angels.
The combat is coming where the fire is about to be lighten up and where the Beast will devour the Prostitute you and your kind having fornicated with Heylel and all his lies and deceits…
Continue in your mockery to be mocked… And the righteous will continue in their righteousness the Son-David…
Yeah, whatever.
Definitely a Child in the mid-teen years.
Yehuda the geezer, if you can read Hebrew, read carefully Yehoshua chap.5 v14
וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא כִּי אֲנִי שַׂר־צְבָא־יְהוָה עַתָּה בָאתִי וַיִּפֹּל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶל־פָּנָיו אַרְצָה וַיִּשְׁתָּחוּ וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ מָה אֲדֹנִי מְדַבֵּר אֶל־עַבְדּוֹ
Note this expression שַׂר־צְבָא־יְהוָה Commander-Host-YHWH it is a title bearing meaning which make Yehoshua worshiped whom he called: My Lord … He worshiped face on the ground which is a complete bow down which convey more than a simple sign of respect but a sense of awe before his Lord…
The Messiah is this שַׂר־צְבָא־יְהוָה Commander-Host-YHWH because in verse 13 Yehoshua saw a Man (ISH). How is it possible that the Messiah traverse Time and Space? He is the Resurrection and LIfe he is the Eternal Messiah the Image of Elohim, Master of Time and Space because for Elohim everything is Present…
Note in verse 15 confirms that this Being is holy for the place is now holy ground:
“Take your sandal off your foot, for the place where you stand is holy.”
Conclusion your interpretation is flawed and the truth is there to those who are humble and pure enough to see it. Therefore if you can not see that lies in the fact that YHWH don’t want you to see like pharaoh for you are not part of the chosen People. You are just a geezer wandering around like the satan accusing the saints of the Lord. But your time is approaching where your kind will be wipe out of the Messianic era unless you have been chosen to be the footstool of our feet… (Psalm 110)
Cursed are those who mock now for they laugh will be changed in fear!!
Blessed those who cry now for they will laugh of joy in the world to come!!
We see once again in a glaring example how you are unable to actually ‘Construct’ a sentence from the original Hebrew. All you have Ever been able to do is ‘List’ each word in the Hebrew sentence. You are incapable of Constructing a grammatical sentence and therefore your explanations have absolutely No value.
Sharbano once again you have shown how a fool judge. I did not translate any phrase here:
“Take your sandal off your foot, for the place where you stand is holy.” was from NEW KING JAMES VERSION
Your old argument is a sham to contra-balance the valid arguments brought forth. You accuse by insinuating bad translation or lack of knowledge of Hebrew when you can not counter it with valid argument.
Now that we have established that Yehoshua has bow down in worship to his Lord here the Commander-Host-YHWH, the Messiah Eternal transcending time and space. You better start to review your false sect view about the Elohim and His Messiah for you time is coming where you will be forced to bow down to Him as predicted in Psalm 110:
“The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
My Lord is the same Lord that Yehoshua (chapter 5 v.14) bow down in worship
You see Tanakh and Torah flows to those who have the right Emounah. For you it is a stumbling block for you are disgraced!!
It’s quite telling how you have ignored several posts now which included numerous Hebrew verses showing your analysis is wholly flawed. If you are going to contend that a particular word Has to mean such and such, then all the other references with that word would also have to mean such and such. THIS has been your method of analysis and you have been found out, Again. So, go look at all the Hebrew references, UNLESS that is, you are incapable. Relying on a dictionary makes it quite difficult.
You have made mention the age factor. Out of curiosity I wonder what Your age is. Your reaction to the very many here resembles that of a person in his mid teens.
interesting that you should bring up Joshua 5 and the supposed “worship” of this “captain of the Lord’s HOST” who you claim to be the jeezer.
Did you ever think to check Deuteronomy 4:19 and how the WHOLE HOST OF HEAVEN is prohibited from being worshiped by G-d Himself?!
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 (צְבָא) 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.
This utterly destroys any attempt by you or anyone else who wants to insist that the angel described in Joshua 5:14 is actually a “pre-incarnate jesus angel.” The angel is described as “the captain of the Lord’s **HOST.*” Literally, the same Hebrew word for “host” (צְבָא) is used in Deuteronomy 4:19 concerning the prohibition of the worship of ALL THE **HOST (צְבָא)** OF HEAVEN. This prohibition obviously includes the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14. This means that the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14 cannot be G-d! So anyone like you who tries to say that this refers to their “pre-incarnate jesus” will have to answer to G-d when He makes it abundantly clear that it is idolatry to worship any of His heavenly host in Deuteronomy 4:19!
And no, Joshua did not “worship” this angel as a god. You clearly do not know Biblical Hebrew as well as you boast…
I’ll give credit where credit is due, Concerned Reader. 🙂
And, concerning Psalms 110, I am confused why you come to the conclusion that the Melchizedek priesthood relates exclusively to jesus/yeshua/yahushuo/yahawishiwashy/whatever…I am not convinced that it refers to jesus/yeshua at all…But I have no problem with it having a Messianic connotation to it as well.
As you acknowledge, you will find in the Talmud that Abraham, King David, and even the Messiah are called as being fulfillments of this Psalm. One of the most striking commonalities between King David and Abraham is that they both “crushed kings” with the help of Hashem. This directly correlates with Psalms 110:5, which explicitly states this:
Psalms 110:5. The Lord, on your right hand, *has crushed kings* on the day of His wrath.
Now Mr. Shapira, during jesus’s/yeshua’s lifetime, did jesus “crush kings”? Was he successful in defeating his enemies? Were his enemies “made a footstool at his feet”? (Psalms 110:1) Clearly not! Your jesus/yeshua was killed and failed to fulfill the Messianic prophesies outlined in the Tanach. As it stands, jesus has fulfilled none of Psalms 110 in any tangible sense. You can argue that he will fulfill it in his supposed “second coming,” but to claim that jesus has fulfilled any of this Psalm would be completely baseless as it stands…
Another oddity about your understanding about this “Melchizedek priesthood” is that you believe that jesus’s/yeshua’s bloodshed “atoned for the sins of the world.” Where in the Tanach does it state that the Melchizedek priesthood achieves atonement via the blood sacrifice? The only priesthood that was given this divine instruction that I know of was the Levitical priesthood…If you could find a passage in the Tanach which states that the “Melchizedek priesthood” achieves atonement via “blood sacrifice,” then maybe your position would make a little more sense. But as it stands, you appear to be baselessly asserting that this Melchizedek priesthood has “superior atoning power” in comparison to the Levitical priesthood, when there is nothing in the Tanach that indicates that the Melchizedek priesthood deals with blood atonement at all! I hope you will consider these concerns.
Shalom
Yehuda you are here the jeezer not the Messiah your lying man. You spit lies when you talk and can not even write properly a new post for you keep cutting and spacing showing how you can not keep up with the flow. Pathetic!!
Now this not for you but for other to understand your contradictions:
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 (צְבָא) 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.
Why then Yehoshua prostrate himself in front precisely of this Host in clear contravention of Torah knowing Deut.4 better than you?
Because He recognized the Lord in Him for his name is Commander-Host-YHWH
You see fools like you and the rest of your false sect spread lies about Torah from the beginning for you are children of Babylon your mother and your father is Heylel. Therefore I can assure that your kind will be pull out of this Land very soon.
Now that you may see the power of prophecy in action here is what Yohan in chapter 3 wrote from the Resurrected Messiah:
‘These things says He who is holy, He who is true, “He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens”:8 “I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9 Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. 10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11 Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown. 12 He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.
(NKJV)
See what I mean, Yehuda Yisrael?
Lion, lets go through this again:
Exodus 18:7 So Moses went out toward Jethro, **PROSTRATED HIMSELF** (וישתחו) and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent.
Exodus 18:7 uses the Hebrew word, וישתחו, when it says that Moses PROSTRATED HIMSELF to his father in law, Jethro…The exact same Hebrew word, וישתחו, is used for Joshua’s PROSTRATION OF HIMSELF to the Captain of the Lord’s Host in Joshua 5:14.
As you admitted earlier, Moses wasn’t worshipping his father in law, rather, he was bowing out of respect for his father in law.
Likewise, Joshua was bowing down to this “Captain of the Lord’s Host” as a sign of respect. Joshua was not worshipping this “Captain of the Lord’s Host” as a “god in the flesh.”
Did you ever think to check Deuteronomy 4:19 and how the WHOLE HOST OF HEAVEN is prohibited from being worshiped by G-d Himself?!
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 (צְבָא) 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.
This utterly destroys any attempt by you or anyone else who wants to insist that the angel described in Joshua 5:14 is actually a “pre-incarnate jesus angel.” The angel is described as “the captain of the Lord’s **HOST.*” Literally, the same Hebrew word for “host” (צְבָא) is used in Deuteronomy 4:19 concerning the prohibition of the worship of ALL THE **HOST (צְבָא)** OF HEAVEN. This prohibition obviously includes the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14. This means that the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14 cannot be G-d! So anyone like you who tries to say that this refers to their “pre-incarnate jesus” will have to answer to G-d when He makes it abundantly clear that it is idolatry to worship any of His heavenly host in Deuteronomy 4:19!
And no, Joshua did not “worship” this angel as a god. You clearly do not know Biblical Hebrew as well as you boast…
So brush up on your Biblical Hebrew, Mr Lion. Joshua wasn’t worshipping the “Captain of the Lord’s Host.” He was simply bowing down and showing his respect, as was common during the time.
Shalom
Yehuda and Eliyah,
The problem and solution are in the manner and proclivity of translating the Hebrew to “worship” instead of “bow down.” We can and do “bow down” to angels and to man. Worship is a poor translation. We should use “bow down” instead even when referring to God.
Because the prohibition is in the heart and not unique to the outward physical manifestation of bowing down, giving one’s heart to another as is solely and uniquely reserved for God alone is what is prohibited and not the physical act of bowing down.
That is why when we bow down to God it is with our hearts uniquely reserved for God.
And that is why there is no prohibition to bowing down to man or angels as an outward sign of respect as long of course as the heart is not assigning to them the uniqueness of God.
And that is also why there is never a time where it is permitted to bow down to idols or the sun, moon, etc., even to show respect since an idol deserves no respect as would a living thinking being such as man or angel created in the image of God.
However there is one case where Naaman (who was cured of a skin disease and thereby came to believe and trust in the Hebrew God of the universe) requested special permission of Alisha to bow down to the god of his King. He was told to go in peace, meaning don’t worry about it. God would obviously understand that his job required it but that his heart wasn’t in it. Thus the physical action of bowing down was proven to be insignificant and secondary to the heart.
David in the Christian Economia the Tradition from Peter and Yohan(John) forbids us to even bow down to angels:
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.
9 Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.” (Revelation 22 ; NKJV)
For they are no more considered higher than us for because of the Messiah we become partakers of the divine nature:
2 Grace to you and peace may be multiplied in recognition of the Elohim and of Yahshuo our Lord, 3 like as all these things to us of his divine power these pertaining to life and godliness having been donated through the recognition of the one having called us through glory and excellence, 4 through which these precious to us and greatest promises he has himself been donated, in order that through these you might become partners of divine nature having escaped of the corruption within a world-order in lust.
(2 Peter, chap. 1; own translation from the Greek))
Conclusion because of the Messiah we are elevated to a higher realm in Shama’im higher than the past Alliance for we are now already in the Faith in the New Creation where the last of the old order are now the first.
Bless indeed those who believe in the Holy One for they will reign with Him forever!!
P.S.: False Yehudim having lost the grace which was theirs to grasp foregone it to worship the satan without even knowing it for they were struck with a curse and still the veil on their eyes is not remove yet. But the time is approaching fast for I work of Eli!!
Maybe you should read what you yourself wrote, if you can that is.
I made this point to you previously and you were unable to absorb it.
{For I am your fellow servant}
See what it says here; “FELLOW SERVANT”. The angel is stating that HIS stature is no higher
than that of John. One does not bow down before his equal, only to someone who is of greater stature. As a KING. Capiche???
Hey Sharbano I thought you did not pay attention to Holy Scriptures from the Apostles. Obviously you lie again. It intrigues you. But Yes Yohan will after his Resurrection be higher than the angels for Paul the great Apostle ex-Pharisee full of grace and wisdom said:
2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? (1 Corinthians 6; NKJV)
Clearly you were unable to rebut my statement. Therefore the stature of a person is paramount in understanding this.
By the way, there is NO way that Paul was a Pharisee. He would lie and even admit to it, in order to further his cause.
I have noticed a particular theme in many of your comments. Apparently you have a desire to have power and authority of those who are detractors to your position. I have heard many a Xtian that also have this desire over their detractors. They literally relish in the idea that one day they will be able to rule over others. It is a desire that exceeds all rational thinking. Similarly those other Xtians who think this way, they too, are quick to resort to similar tactics of attacks.
Amazing! Such blindness! What curse did you received to be so dumb and so blind?? O yes I forgot you despised the Messiah of Israel accomplishing what the proverb said:
The ignorant having drank the cup of confusion,
Spit it out of his mouth to show his foolishness…
And the wise men were stunned to see a man of disgrace
Walking around with no conscience of his lost…
Now for those who still have not lost it completely:
The commandment is clear and Yehoshua (Joshua) knew it much more than the fools. Therefore he would have never bow down to a host of heaven knowing:
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 (צְבָא) 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.
In the eyes of his brothers how would someone differentiate between bowing down face on the floor has not being worship when the commandment said:
“And lest you lift up your eyes to heaven…all the host (צְבָא) of heaven…and be drawn away to prostrate yourselves before them and worship them” (NKJV)
Clearly Yehoshua bow down + face on the floor which is a sign of clear worship and call this Man (ISH) my Lord for his name was Commander-Host-YHWH … for he recognized his Lord!!
Lion, If a person bowed down in the presence of Nebuchadnezzar, Nero, or Antiochus (who were also kings) would that mean that this person was properly worshiping G-d through bowing to them? Off course not. Bowing is a sign of respect to a position of authority, not an indication of divine service or honors by a person. This is simple enough for a child to understand. You must know that our interpretation of the event in Joshua 5 is the proper one, because of your more than extreme, very hurtful, venomous reaction to it. Venom is used in defense of a weak position. If you had a good scriptural argument, you wouldn’t need to berate people. Also, there is no indication in any Torah verse that a Malach, like the captain of G-d’s host, is the moshiach. That is a thoroughly eisogetical interpretation. What you are really doing is seeking to find behavior in scripture (examples of actions) that might somehow justify your devotion to Jesus, and your current method of worship. you aren’t even asking the question of the Torah’s clear teaching on a matter of who it is Israel is supposed to worship.
Con in appearance you seem to have some sense but when you laugh when someone insulted the Messiah I saw how corrupt and deluded you are. The venom of the Pharisees that the Messiah warns us about YOU have in your soul to your lost.
In the other world I will rejoice and you will cry for the condemnation is without recall to those who forgo the Promise to defiled themselves with idols here your Heylel and his demonic cortege..
“33 But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 10; NKJV)
Therefore go with your baboon wherever you go but when you die you will be surrounded by demons bringing to your place in their world…
11 And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 8; NKJV)
I guess you still haven’t grasped it yet. We do NOT care what your NKJV has to say. Since it is such a flawed text there is no reason to give it credence.
You know, Like Stephen, Or even J’sus when he was Unable to debate the Pharisees but used the same inventiveness as you do, or Paul the “twisting serpent”.
By the way, how old are you again? Mid-Teen years. Maybe THAT is your difficulty in absorbing the content of the posts here.
You have proven my point. All you do is insult others. You didn’t even bother to respond to the arguments presented. For the record, I don’t return your sentiment, I hope you will be well. You once accused people here of calling Gentiles dogs, but here you have used all manner of evil speaking against someone you don’t even know. FYI JESUS CALLED GENTILES DOGS, NOT RABBIS!
Your “fruit” shows you to be an unstable person, I hope you get some help. I do not believe Jesus is the messiah because even Christians admit he has to come back a second time to complete the messiah’s job description. If Jesus comes and finishes the clear messianic message of universal peace, knowledge of G-d, and Israel dwelling in safety, he would be accepted right away. It is because the job is not done that he is not accepted.
As for my laughing, Yehuda said something that made me laugh, it’s not a demonic shot at Jesus’ person, any more than Jesus’ character was defined by him being among lepers and prostitutes.
Con you are really in such prelest that you believed those who have been cursed for almost 2000 years. If they were righteoous and true followers of Mosheh never the Elohim would had left them wandering the earth like the satan.
They were banished for they sin against the Messiah. But they fall was mercy for the Goyim and you have the nerve to deny the one who saved the nations from perdition.
31 For if they do these things in respect of the green wood, what will be done in respect of the dry one?”
Do you think that their so-called anti-messiah will solve all the problems with a magical stick…
Concerning the Talmud read the original for it is encrypted for people like you for it filled with lies and contempt for the Goyim. They spit on the goyim naming them animals. Ask your rabbi if he is honest enough to tell the truth…
Since you didn’t read the post about Elijah and G-d’s Justice Vindicated you cannot understand the last 2000 years. They were dispersed in order that they would survive as a nation from the onslaught of your fellow co-religionists.
You have proved my other point regarding the Talmud. Since you don’t have the wherewithal to understand it you “assume” what is in fact vicious rumors perpetrated by Xtians who literally FEAR the Talmud and its teachings. If you were to “know” it intimately, your eyes would be opened. This is why you and the church, from the beginning, has forbidden anyone to go near it. OUT of that fear.
Lion, lets go through this again:
Exodus 18:7 So Moses went out toward Jethro, **PROSTRATED HIMSELF** (וישתחו) and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent.
Exodus 18:7 uses the Hebrew word, וישתחו, when it says that Moses PROSTRATED HIMSELF to his father in law, Jethro…The exact same Hebrew word, וישתחו, is used for Joshua’s PROSTRATION OF HIMSELF to the Captain of the Lord’s Host in Joshua 5:14.
As you admitted earlier, Moses wasn’t worshipping his father in law, rather, he was bowing out of respect for his father in law.
Likewise, Joshua was bowing down to this “Captain of the Lord’s Host” as a sign of respect. Joshua was not worshipping this “Captain of the Lord’s Host” as a “god in the flesh.”
Did you ever think to check Deuteronomy 4:19 and how the WHOLE HOST OF HEAVEN is prohibited from being worshiped by G-d Himself?!
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 (צְבָא) 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.
This utterly destroys any attempt by you or anyone else who wants to insist that the angel described in Joshua 5:14 is actually a “pre-incarnate jesus angel.” The angel is described as “the captain of the Lord’s **HOST.*” Literally, the same Hebrew word for “host” (צְבָא) is used in Deuteronomy 4:19 concerning the prohibition of the worship of ALL THE **HOST (צְבָא)** OF HEAVEN. This prohibition obviously includes the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14. This means that the “captain of the Lord’s HOST (צְבָא)” mentioned in Joshua 5:14 cannot be G-d! So anyone like you who tries to say that this refers to their “pre-incarnate jesus” will have to answer to G-d when He makes it abundantly clear that it is idolatry to worship any of His heavenly host in Deuteronomy 4:19!
And no, Joshua did not “worship” this angel as a god. You clearly do not know Biblical Hebrew as well as you boast…
So brush up on your Biblical Hebrew, Mr Lion. Joshua wasn’t worshipping the “Captain of the Lord’s Host.” He was simply bowing down and showing his respect, as was common during the time.
Shalom
Hey, Mr. Hebrew genius. What is the word for “Worship”
Lion, You (just like your progenitors in the Church) hurl insults, barbs, venom, etc. at people who disagree with your opinion, and then expect them to heed you. You inheret that mentality (as did the Church fathers) from Greek rhetoricians, and the Hellenistic academies, not from the Hebrew Bible. I have already demonstrated to you with the CLEAR example of Philo (and even with groups like the Ebionites) that the position that holds that the Logos was created is antecedent to Christianity as a religion. It is the older belief, and it is a belief that corresponds more clearly to a straightforward reading of verses like Deuteronomy 4:19. Your orthodox Christian theologians (like athanasius) introduced innovations that go against the plain stated meaning of the biblical verses. This proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that you do not care what scripture actually says, but seek to justify your belief.
I even gave you examples of clear theophanies (like the burning bush and pillar of cloud) that had G-d’s word emanate from them, and had his spirit rest on them. Yet, you have not responded to the fact that
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE ARK OR THE CHERUBIM!
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE TEMPLE!
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE BURNING BUSH!
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE PILLAR OF CLOUD!
ISRAEL ONLY EVER WORSHIPS AND SERVES THE MANIFESTOR, (the father) NOT A MANIFESTATION.
Christians attempt to say that by serving a manifestation of G-d’s power, it is a way of serving and honoring G-d. Scripture soundly refutes this notion of yours in the cases of the brass serpent (which was destroyed because it was worshipped,) and in the case of Gideon’s idol, a priestly garment. Moses’ body was likely hidden so that Israel would not worship him as somehow divine at his gravesite. Your interpretation is in error respectfully.
Yes carnally and stiff neck people can not work in nuances like the great Mosheh they are taught like little children. You can not expect of them to understand adult stuff…
Now concerning the Ark you should now your history or at least try to know to your capacity…
1)NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE ARK OR THE CHERUBIM! True or false?
False: For it is written: “He set in front of an ark of YHWH some of the Levite servants and to do remembrance and to do thanksgiving-hymns and to praise toward YHWH Elohei Israel” (1Chronicle XVI)
Note the word toward meaning that the worship was made in the direction of YHWH represented by the Ark. Therefore once again your doctrine of your sect does not stand in front of the plain sense of Holy Scriptures.
Talmud is not Tanakh!! Stop drinking the cup of confusion!!
Hi C.R.,
You wrote:
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE TEMPLE!
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE BURNING BUSH
NOBODY WORSHIPS OR PRAYS TO THE PILLAR OF CLOUD!
My response:
I agree that it is God who is being worshiped or revered and not the manifestation itself, but as the following verses testify, it is the manifestation or representation of God in various forms and various places that speaks to the human heart which results in the inspiration for the worship or reverence. Even God Himself demands it in certain circumstances such as removing sandals at the sign of the burning bush which was holy ground (Exodus 3:5). King Solomon himself also provided pathways of worship to that which was not itself God but rather a go between to God, knowing that God would watch from heaven his children on earth.
Regarding the Promised Land, the chosen city and the Temple of God:
JPS; 2 Chronicles:
6:38 If they return to thee with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their captivity, whither they have carried them captives, and pray toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, and toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house which I have built for thy name: 6:39 Then hear thou from the heavens, even from thy dwelling place, their prayer and their supplications, and maintain their cause, and forgive thy people which have sinned against thee.
Regarding manifestations of God’s glory in the Temple:
JPS; 2 Chronicles:
7:3 And when all the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the glory of the LORD upon the house, they bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and worshipped, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever.
(and 1 Kings 8:30)
Regarding the pillar of cloud representing God’s presence and guidance through Moses:
JPS; Exodus 33:
10 And when all the people saw the pillar of cloud stand at the door of the Tent, all the people rose up and worshipped, every man at his tent door.
Regarding manifestations of miracles/signs which spoke to the human heart inspiring belief/trust in God’s redemptive plan after 400 years of bondage resulting in the natural human response to worship:
JPS; Exodus 4:
30 And Aaron spoke all the words which HaShem had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people.
31 And the people believed; and when they heard that HaShem had remembered the children of Israel, and that He had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshiped.
Bowing heads, removing sandals, prostration, etc. is not in any way similar to the level of Christian veneration of and supplications offered in and to the name of Jesus.
In fact, in most near eastern culture’s these actions you mention are just simple signs of courtesy. It is only in polytheistic emperor worship, Shinto, ancestor worship, animism, (such as in ancient Japan, north Korea, etc. that these actions are truly of sacral significance.) There are no requests made for effectual intercession, or a fundamental trust in some aspect of the literal physical characteristics of a manifestation. Forgive the crude analogy, but for example, there is nothing in the Torah that says a person can only receive Atonment or forgiveness if you touch the leaves of the burning bush. In Christianity, it is the literal blood and death on the cross of a literal human 2000 years ago who cleanses you from sin. Israel did not have its temple or sacrifices in the time of Daniel, yet G-d redeemed the Jewish exiles from Babylon without them. Even the Samaritans who had their sacrifices still did not see a blessing from the blood. You can find examples of humans asking Angels/righteous men for a blessing, or asking them to pray for you to HASHEM, but in no way is this a submission in divine service of the entity or medium of revelation in question.
This is where Christianity’s comparisons and Torah allusions ring truly hollow. If Christians merely taught Yeshua’s ethics, we’d be cool. However, You can never get to orthodox Christian theological and doctrinal definitions from a straightforward reading of Torah that truly respects halachic observance as defined by Tanach. The only people who focussed on theology or G-d’s nature at length (in terms of mystical ideas) were the proto orthodox and the gnostic Christians. Some Jewish Christians in fact were extremely looked down upon simply because they focused on Torah observance, and taught that Jesus was only a normal human like every ruler from Moses to Solomon.
Think about this. Even the NT narrative itself assumes at the start that when the disciples first met Jesus when he actually lived, they had no idea about a christological significance to his life or his death. He only introduces himself to them initially as a man wishing to be their rabbi and teach them Torah. All “Christian” theological ideas and doctrinal ideas come later on (in parables and vague allusions,) through later reflection over the course of Jesus’ ministry.
Isn’t it sad that today it is regarded as a heresy to say “Jesus was just an ethical rabbi?” Consider carefully, that as far as anyone in 2nd temple era Israel knew, that’s all the Jews could know of Jesus until he was 30 years old.
To use the same kind of reasoning you employ here Lion, would imply that when the early Christians faced Jerusalem to pray, Jerusalem was being worshipped alongside the father by them as something possessing divine nature, being that it was the representative of his presence. (2 Chrinicles 6:6) Are you prepared to make Jerusalem a fourth person?
Jews today all have an Ark in front of the congregation, it doesn’t mean it is being worshipped as divine, or as representative of G-d.
“You heard only a voice.”
No Jews, no return. If there are no Jews then scripture cannot be fulfilled.
Dear brother Paul, if you believe this statement truly, then do you not see the role that rabbinic Judaism (by rejecting Jesus) has played in the preservation of the Jews as a set apart nation for G-d distinct from all others?
In other words, when you call the Jews to the acceptance of Jesus of Nazareth, (if Jesus were to have been accepted in the Middle Ages for instance,) the people of Israel would have ceased as a unique set apart culture, because the Church always taught by law, “abandon the old law, ignore the Pharisees, replace observance with gospel.” All practices which mark Jews as separate from the nations (kosher, sabbath on Saturday, Circumcision, sukkot, teffilin, etc.) were to be abandoned according to the Church teaching. That actually means no more Jews would exist as Jews.
To put it another way. If you did not have rabbinic Jews who rejected Jesus as messiah, we wouldn’t even be able to relate to Jesus as he actually lived while he was here. It says in John’s gospel that Jesus celebrated “the feast of the deeication.” What is this feast? How is it observed? Why is it observed? When was it first observed? You see, if you were only reading the pages of a book, you wouldn’t know any of these answers, you would only be able to hypothesize. It is because rabbinic Jews exist and ACTUALLY OBSERVE THIS FEAST that we even know about it. Accepting Jesus means losing that knowledge, that culture, that way of life.
Hello cr
You only presume that the rejection of Jesus and the folliwing of Judaism has preserved the Jewish people. On what scripture would you align that theory?
The Lord God of Israel through His covenants, promises have preserved you. Of course God made it very clear that the Jewish people will always ultimately be preserved, no matter what comes against her, and specifically what Israel does in her ways.
Culture and traditions of the Jewish people should never be done away per se. Traditions are only negative when they war against Gods statutes and principles etc. I understand completely that people in times past have tried to de judaise Jews through “christening into christ”, but that was and is not the intention of God through His Son.
Technically and theologically it is impossible to force a conversion. Faith comes from the heart and soul, not at the end of a noose or a torture chamber.
Paul still lived, and under went traditions etc. His issue was that redemption was not through works and traditions, but through faith, now in the fulness of the Law through Christ Jesus. He never said or indicated Jews to stop being Jews.
Jews are Jews where ever the live and what they practice. The teaching was never stop being Jews, but acknowledge the Law through the Messiashship of Jesus.
Paul
I’m no expert but just what Torah scripture can I find “The teaching was to acknowledge the Law through the Messiashship of Jesus.”
Hello
No where does it state in scripture directly, word for word as you ask. But the answer is not a direct one, The answer is shown through the entirety of the Law, prophets and writings. The teaching of Law, the giving of the Law, its functions and its purpose etc are argued here constantly. Take your pick, The list is a long one.
Gen 3.15 22.18 49.10
Num 23 and 24
Deut 18.15-19
Summary;
The seed, Messiah would be human, not a angel, not God purley as God. Messiah would be Jew not a gentile. Messiah would come from a specific tribe from the twelve, Judah. To that end, Messiah, to be recognised as a decendant of Judah, would mean that His genealogy would have to be verified before the records were destroyed in the temple in AD70. Something that cannot happen today.
Messiah was understood by eve to be God and man. The scepter is used more than once to indicate Messiah would be King. Messiah will be prophet like Moses. Lamech understood that the Messiah would remove the curse. A hint that Messiah’s birth will be born from a virgins womb, not reckoned after a man.
The NT is not a rewriting of the Tanach, its just shows everything that God is, and says everthing that would happen, did happen through His Son.
Paul Where did you pick up this myth of the family records being destroyed with the Temple in the year 70 c.e.? People still have family records today
Paul
I was simply using your statement in the form of a question. Mainly to show you do not have an answer and to see if you would admit that it is not in scripture. Of course the stiff neck Christian will take many quotes out of context to make the Torah say anything they want it to say as you have repeatedly have done on this blog. One thing I will agree with you on though, is that the NT is not a rewriting of the Tanach. The NT is replacement theology.
All the scripture you cite for claiming Jsus are imaginary They aren’t even a good metaphor. There aren’t even hints to the matter. It contradicts the written word, G-d doesn’t change, there is no Savior Besides Him, He speaks plainly to His prophets.
Xtians want to view a mention of “seed” as being some kind of evidence when even that word is not a singular, but when an application is direct they fail to acknowledge it. A metaphor that IS used is Mashiach will be a “branch” from Jesse. A branch “Grows” out from the tree, comes “From” that tree. According to the Xtian text Jsus did Not come from the loins of Joseph, therefore he would NOT be a “branch from Jesse”, the Literal text of the prophets. Even if the seed were true, the branch denies it. This is abundantly clear from Isaiah 11. Considering what your bible says and what it says there it is conclusive proof Jsus is not the one.
And Where do you get the idea that Eve “knew” messiah was a man-god. The problem with Xtian polemics is that the Literal Text denies you claims. But Xtianity is so desperate to have these beliefs they have to deny the literal.
Apparently Xtianity is not content with distorting Torah and must also enforce their theology with made-up claims. No one has been able to find the origin of the idea that genealogy records were stored in the Temple but clearly it IS just made up. It is another lie the church has made up in order to cement an idea that no one else can be messiah. There is evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately in so many cases “believers” will automatically assume what the church tells them without question and therein lies so many wrong ideas, which even go back to that original church.
Here is mohammed in the bible. Isn’t he the final prophet?
http://www.thewaytotruth.org/prophetmuhammad/proofs.html
And proof that Mickey Mouse is the messiah can be proven as well.
http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/5888/codes-tell-past-present-future-book-claiming-scientific-proof-of-god-draws-/
Paul, your Genesis 3:15 argument is laughable. There is nothing unique about this verse implying a “virgin birth” as you falsely claim. Evidence to support this comes from Genesis 16:10, where an angel says this to Hagar:
Genesis 16:10 And the angel of the Lord said to her, **”I will greatly multiply your seed,** and it will not be counted for abundance.”
So if women “do not have seed” as you claim, then what do you make of Hagar?
Did she have a “virgin birth” too?
Obviously not…You’re using eisegisis to force your explanation of Genesis 3:15. It has nothing to do with your supposed “virgin birth” that your false NT claims of jesus in your false book of matthew…
Also, concerning Deut 18:18-19, Deut 18:15-19 refers to Joshua in the immediate context and all subsequent prophets after him. Lets look at Deut 18:15 and 18:18 more closely:
Deut 18:15 [Moses speaking] “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet **LIKE ME** from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him…
Ok, so now we need to establish the context of what it means to be “LIKE” Moses. Verse 18 establishes this context concerning this particular chapter:
Deut 18:18 [God speaking] ‘I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen **LIKE YOU,** [Like Moses] **and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.**
So what does it mean to be LIKE Moses in this context? Simple! All at it means is that the prophet will SPEAK THE WORDS THAT GOD COMMANDS HIM. That’s all! Now, what prophet do we know in the Bible who fits this description?
Every prophet in the Bible speaks the word of God…That’s the definition of a prophet!
So who does this apply to? ALL PROPHETS! But in the immediate context, it applies to Joshua, since he was Joshua’s successor. The Book of Joshua gives us explicit proof of this:
Joshua 1:5. No man shall stand up before you all the days of your life; as I was with Moses, so shall I be with you. I will not weaken My grasp on you nor will I abandon you.
Joshua 1:16. And they answered Joshua saying: All that you have commanded us we shall do and wherever you send us we shall go.
Joshua 1:17. Just as we obeyed Moses in everything, so shall we obey you. Only that the
Lord your God be with you as He was with Moses.
Joshua 3:7. And the Lord said to Joshua: This day I will begin to make you great in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that as I was with Moses, so will I be with you.
Joshua 4:14. On that day the Lord made Joshua great in the sight of all Israel, and they feared him, as they had feared Moses, all the days of his life.
Joshua 11:15. As the Lord commanded Moses His servant, so did Moses command Joshua, and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the Lord commanded Moses.
I would argue that there is no prophet in the entire Bible who is compared to Moses as much as Joshua. I challenge you to show me otherwise…
We can also use grammatical consistency to demonstrate that Deut 18:18 does not refer to only one prophet, but rather, the general concept of “prophets” who succeeded Moses. Lets look at the verses again:
Deut 18:17. And the Lord said to me, “They have done well in what they have spoken.
Deut 18:18. I will set up a prophet for them from among their brothers like you, and I will put My words into his mouth, and he will speak to them all that I command him.
Deut 18:19. And it will be, that whoever does not hearken to My words that he speaks in My name, I will exact [it] of him.
These verses describe “the prophet like Moses” who you deem to be one singular individual, namely, the Messiah. (Or in your case, Jesus.) Knowing this, lets keep reading on:
Deut 18:20. But the prophet who intentionally speaks a word in My name, which I did not command him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.
Deut 18:21. Now if you say to yourself, “How will we know the word that the Lord did not speak?”
Deut 18:22. If the prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, and the thing does not occur and does not come about, that is the thing the Lord did not speak. The prophet has spoken it wantonly; you shall not be afraid of him.
I want you to look at words. Look at the grammar concerning the fact that both “the prophet like Moses” and “the false prophet” are referred to in the third person SINGULAR.
If we are to be grammatically consistent with your interpretation of Deut 18:18, namely that “the prophet like Moses” only refers to one singular person, shouldn’t we also interpret
Deut 18:20-22 in the same way concerning “the false prophet”? Shouldn’t we also say that there will only be “one false prophet”? If you want to be grammatically consistent with the passage, this is really your only option. Do you really want to interpret Deut 18:20-22 as referring to only one false prophet? Surely you don’t believe that…
I get that you really want to force this passage to exclusively refer to the Messiah. However, this is clearly not the case.
Shalom
Yehuda,
Regarding prophets and Deut. 18:
I doubt that the passage of Deut. 18 is referring to Joshua since Joshua was already alive and working as Moses’ assistant at the time it was spoken. If Joshua was the intention God could have simply said Joshua will succeed you, which He later indicated separate and apart from Deut. 18. More likely Deut. 18 is referring to other prophets (plural) or another prophet (singular) other than Joshua.
Regarding the virgin birth.
It is indicated in the Septuagint which predates the MT and Christianity.
David, the Great Isaiah Scroll found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which predates Christianity and the Masoretic Text, uses the Hebrew word “almah” (which means young woman, rather than “betulah” which means virgin). You can view it online. The first letter is faded, the the last three clearly point to almah, being lamed, mem, heh.
Food for thought.
David, I didn’t say the passage referred exclusively to Joshua. However, it does include Joshua, as Joshua was indeed a “prophet like Moses” who spoke the word of G-d. Since that is the context of what Deuteronomy 18:15-19 speaks of, Joshua fits the bill, as does every other true prophet of G-d.
Concerning your “Septuagint” argument, your contention that “parthenos does mean virgin” is incorrect. The Greek word Παρθένου (parthenos) can mean either a young woman or a virgin. Therrefore, Παρθένου can be found in the Septuagint to describe a woman who is clearly not a virgin. For example, in Genesis 34:2-4, Shechem raped Dinah, the daughter of the patriarch Jacob, yet the Septuagint refers to her as a parthenos after she had been defiled. The Bible reports that after Shechem had violated her, “his heart desired Dinah, and he loved the damsel (Septuagint parthenos) and he spoke tenderly to the damsel (Septuagint parthenos).” Clearly, Dinah was not a virgin after having been raped, and yet she was referred to as a parthenos, the very same word the Septuagint used to translate the Hebrew word alma in Isaiah 7:14, which makes it all the more ironic that you would make such an argument concerning Dinah and the word “alma”…
Moreover, the Septuagint in our hands is not a Jewish document, but rather a Christian recension. The original Septuagint, translated some 2,200 years ago by 72 Jewish scholars, was a Greek translation of the Five Books of Moses alone, and is no longer in our hands. It therefore did not contain the Books of the Prophets or Writings of the Hebrew Bible such as Isaiah, from which you asserted Matthew quoted. The Septuagint as we have it today, which includes the Prophets and Writings as well, is a product of the Church, not the Jewish people. In fact, the Septuagint remains the official Old Testament of the Greek Orthodox Church, and the manuscripts that consist of our Septuagint today date to the third century C.E. The fact that additional books known as the Apocrypha, which are uniquely sacred to the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Church, are found in the Septuagint should raise a red flag to those inquiring into the Jewishness of the Septuagint.
I will now demonstrate to you how the “virgin birth” that matthew speaks of is a lie. Isaiah never made such a prophesy!
The birth of Isaiah’s child was clearly the fulfillment of the sign prophesied in Isaiah 7:14-16. How do I know this? Isaiah tells us himself! Lets look at these verses
Isaiah 7:14. Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:15. Cream and honey he shall eat when he knows to reject bad and choose good.
Isaiah 7:16. For, when the lad does not yet know to reject bad and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread, shall be abandoned.”
Keep verse 16 in mind. It is crucial to the context of Isaiah. Now, lets look at the next chapter of Isaiah and see what he has to say:
Isaiah 8:3. And I was intimate with the prophetess, and she conceived, and she bore a son, and the Lord said to me, “Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
Isaiah 8:4. For, when the lad does not yet know to call, “Father” and “mother,” the wealth of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria shall be carried off before the king of Assyria.”
Well what do you know! Isaiah said a young woman would give birth to a child and in the very next chapter his wife has a son! Prophesy fulfilled! The interesting thing about it is that Isaiah explicitly says he was intimate with her. This means that this “alma” described in Isaiah 7:14 is Isaiah”s wife. Morever, she is not a virgin! Thus, the word “alma” does not exclusively refer to women who are virgins! Isaiah says it himself!
And if you are still not convinced, here”s a direct statement from Isaiah saying his sons are signs:
Isaiah 8:18. Behold, I and the children whom the Lord gave me for SIGNS and for tokens in Israel, from the Lord of Hosts, Who dwells on Mount Zion.
The natural birth of Isaiah”s son was the fulfillment of the sign of Isaiah 7:14, namely that his wife would give birth to a son, and that before he knew the difference between good and evil/father and mother, “the wealth of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria shall be carried off before the king of Assyria.”And if you are going to whine that Isaiah”s son was not called “Immanuel directly,” I will kindly point out to you that your yeshua was never called “Immanuel” by his mother either, so you would be setting a double standard, as Isaiah states that the mother of this child will call him “Immanuel.”
And just to delve into the idea behind “Immanuel” a bit more, II Chronicles 32:7-8 describes the events which occurred concerning the king of Assyria, during the reign of King Hezekiah, the son of King Ahaz:
II Chronicles 32:7. “Be strong and of good courage; do not fear and do not be dismayed because of the KING OF ASSYRIA and because of all the multitude that is with him, because HE WHO IS WITH US is greater than those with him.
II Chronicles 32:8. With him is an arm of flesh, and WITH US IS THE LORD OUR G-D to help us and to wage our wars,” and the people relied on the words of Hezekiah, king of Judah.
So lets put it all together: The birth of Isaiah’s son was a sign for King Ahaz that the two kings who he dreaded would be destroyed by the king of Assyria. By after the king of Assyria defeated these kings, King Hezekiah (Ahaz’s son) assured his kingdom that G-d WAS WITH THEM. Since King Hezekiah and Isaiah’s son both lived during the same time as well, it is safe to conclude that the birth of Isaiah’s son can be linked to King Hezekiah’s understanding that G-D WAS WITH THEM, even though Assyria appeared to be a threat. Remember, this prophesy was TIME SENSITIVE and involved the two kingdoms being destroyed by the king of Assyria. This is how Isaiah’s son is considered Immanuel. It’s all linked together within the time frame.
If you are going to argue that this is a “dual fulfillment” regarding Matthew”s application of this to the supposed virgin birth of yeshua, you will have to concede that the word “alma” does not exclusively refer to a virgin, as I have demonstrated above. This shows lack of exclusivity to the nature of the word “alma” and demystifies the “yeshua believer’s” obsession with the birth needing to be “miraculous” in order to see fulfillment.
In other words, Isaiah 7:14 has just as much to do with the birth of yeshua as it does the birth of Karl Marx, or Jerry Seinfeld, assuming a “multiplicity of fulfillments” theory”
Or perhaps my birth! I was born of a woman! Maybe Isaiah 7:14 is about me!
See how ridiculous it is to attribute this prophesy to yeshua?
Shalom
Yehuda,
Where did you get the idea that one prophecy was limited to one event? Isaiah 7:14 refers directly to the situation King Ahaz was facing, yes, but should also be interpreted as a double prophesy which has been fulfilled.
Regarding Alma which has an inherent meaning of young woman. It occurs 7 times in the Hebrew Scriptures. none of the instances demand a meaning of virgin but neither does it deny that it could also refer to a virgin.
Regarding the Septuagint and the Greek translators rendition of Alma to Parthenos, you are partially correct. But the text in the NT independently explains a virgin birth even without the reference to Isaiah and doesn’t depend on Isaiah to demand a virgin understanding.
But if you read the following you’ll see that Matthew was correct in citing Isaiah in the Septuagint it since the usage at the time had the connotation of virgin (note the third paragraph below: “in the first century parthenos indeed meant virgin”). So in summary, Luke and Matthew explain a virgin birth. Luke does not cite Isaiah. Matthew is not dependent on Isaiah for the virgin birth explanation. Matthew correctly cites the Septuagint which at the time has a virgin connotation.
http://www.timothymichaellaw.com/was-the-virgin-birth-a-mistranslation-stavrakopoulou-fails-to-conv
“…it is not a mistranslation. Elsewhere in the Septuagint we find the use of parthenos for ‘young woman’, having no connotation of virginity. To give just one example, in Gen. 24 parthenos is used five times to translate three different Hebrew nouns for Rebekah, one of which is עלמה. James Barr noted long ago in his Typology of Literalism (1979) that the Greek translator of Genesis simply used parthenos to translate the rare word עלמה, but that parthenos is a suitable word for ‘young woman’ and does not necessarily imply virginity. It may be unusual both in Genesis and Isaiah, but it has a broader semantic range than it is often given credit for. The Greek term has also meant a young woman who has just come of age, and only later, perhaps due to Christian use, did the term become almost exclusively connected to virginity.
The use of parthenos by Matthew is unquestionably a claim that Jesus was born of a virgin. But the claim is not based on a mistranslation, as Stavrakopoulou suggests. The Greek translator of Isaiah used a perfectly acceptable rendering for עלמה. It is more likely that there was already a virgin birth oral tradition, related to other Greek myths in the Greco-Roman world like that of the birth of Aeo (see e.g., Rösel, ‘Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel’, JBTh 6 [1991], 135–51).
The Gospel writer was able to refer to the citation of Isa. 7:14 when he gave his narration of the birth of Jesus, because his readers, whether or not they were aware of the semantic shift that had occurred in the short history of this little Greek word, knew that in the first century parthenos indeed meant ‘virgin’.
This problem with the Greek translation in Isaiah has been discussed by several Septuagint scholars like Arie van der Kooij and Johann Lust, but a recent summary of past research can now be found in R. de Sousa, ‘Is the Choice of parthenos in LXX Isa. 7:14 Theologically Motivated?’, JSS 53.2 (2008): 211-232. De Sousa’s aim is not to take up this question of Matthew’s use, but to ask whether the Greek translator was theologically motivated to use parthenos. De Sousa concludes, convincingly, that he was not.”
Regarding the text of Deut. 18 you wrote:
“However, it does include Joshua”
My response:
That’s your conclusion that it must refer to Joshua but is unsupported in the text. The text does not include anyone by name. As noted in my previous post, it is very unlikely it would refer to Joshua since Joshua was already working as Moses’ assistant throughout all of the desert years and God Himself designated Joshua by name separately and apart from Deut. 18. That tells us we should wait for someone like Moses and Joshua wasn’t it. Furthermore Joshua wasn’t like Moses in many ways.
David, apparently you didn’t read my response…I already addressed your “double prophesy” copout. Let me post it again for you:
If you are going to argue that this is a “dual fulfillment” regarding Matthew”s application of this to the supposed virgin birth of yeshua, you will have to concede that the word “alma” does not exclusively refer to a virgin, as I have demonstrated above. This shows lack of exclusivity to the nature of the word “alma” and demystifies the “yeshua believer’s” obsession with the birth needing to be “miraculous” in order to see fulfillment.
In other words, Isaiah 7:14 has just as much to do with the birth of yeshua as it does the birth of Karl Marx, or Jerry Seinfeld, assuming a “multiplicity of fulfillments” theory”
Or perhaps my birth! I was born of a woman! Maybe Isaiah 7:14 is about me!
See how ridiculous it is to attribute this prophesy to yeshua?
Also David, Proverbs 30:18-20 describes an ADULTEROUS ALMA. It does not refer to a virgin!
Proverbs 30:18 There are three things which are too wonderful for me, for which I do not understand:
Proverbs 30:19the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship in the middle of the sea, and the way of a man with a young woman [b’almah][/b’almah].
Proverbs 30:20 This is the way of an adulterous woman: she eats and wipes her mouth, and says, “I have done no wrong.”
In the above three verses, King Solomon compares a man with an alma to three other things: an eagle in the sky, a serpent on a rock, and a ship in the sea.
What do these four things all have in common?
They leave no trace.
After the eagle has flown across the sky, it is impossible to determine whether an eagle had ever flown through that airspace. Once a snake has slithered over a rock, there is no way to discern that the snake had ever crossed there (as opposed to a snake slithering over sand or grass, where it leaves a trail). After a ship passes through the sea, the wake behind it comes together and settles behind it, leaving no way to discern that a ship had ever moved through this body of water.
Similarly, King Solomon declares that once a man has been sexually intimate with an almah, i.e. a young woman, no trace of sexual intercourse is visible, unlike a virgin who will leave behind a discharge of blood after her hymen is broken.
Therefore, in the following verse (Proverbs 30:20) King Solomon explains that once this adulterous woman “eats” (a metaphor for her fornication), she removes the trace of her sexual infidelity, “wipes her mouth, and says, ‘I have done no wrong.’” The word alma clearly does not mean a virgin.
Deuteronomy 22 explains how we determine whether or not an adulterous woman is lying…
Deut. 22:13. If a man takes a wife, is intimate with her and despises her,
Deut. 22:14. and he makes libelous charges against her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I took this woman, and when I came to her, I did not find any evidence of virginity for her.”
(By the way, the Hebrew word for “virginity” in this verse is “Betulim.” The word “alma” is no where to be found here.)
Deut. 22:15. Then the girl’s father and her mother shall obtain evidence of the girl’s virginity, and take it out to the elders of the city, to the gate.
(Once again, the Hebrew word for “virginity” in this verse is “betulay.” The word alma is no where to be found, again!)
Deut. 22:16. And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, “I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, and he despised her;
Deut. 22:17. And behold, he made libelous charges, saying, ‘I did not find evidence of your daughter’s virginity.’ But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity!’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city.
(Once again, betulim/betulay are the words used here for “virginity.” The word alma is no where to be found…)
Deut. 22:18. Then, the elders of that city shall take the man and chasten him.
Deut 22:19. And they shall fine him one hundred [shekels of] silver because he defamed a virgin of Israel, and he give it to the girl’s father. And she shall be his wife; he shall not send her away all the days of his life.
(Once again, the Hebrew word for “virgin” in this verse is not alma…It is “betulat”…)
I think you get the idea…
The fact is, this passage speaks EXPLICITLY about virginity and EVERY TIME THE WORD “VIRGIN” IS MENTIONED IN THE PASSAGE, IT IS TRANSLATED AS “BETULAH.”
The word “alma” is NOWHERE TO BE FOUND IN THIS PASSAGE THAT DEALS EXPLICITLY ABOUT VIRGINITY!
But more importantly to our discussion, we see that the manner in which the virginity was determined in the case of a libel made against her by her husband was through whether or not her hymen was intact. If she broke her hymen before her first sexual encounter, then the elders of the city are to display the “tokens of her virginity” which refers to the broken hymen on a garment, as Deut 22:17 states.
Deut 22:17. And behold, he made libelous charges, saying, ‘I did not find evidence of your daughter’s virginity.’ But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity!’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city.
So we understand in the Biblical context of King Solomon’s time, the way we determined whether or not a woman was lying or not about her virginity was through whether or not her hymen was intact, and if it wasn’t, her family was to show evidence of her virginity by displaying her broken hymen on a garment.
So now that you see the context of all of this, we know that King Solomon’s lack of “understanding” concerning “the way of a man with a woman,” we can determine that he is clearly using Proverbs 30:20 to describe the alma described in Proverbs 30:19. Clearly, this is an adulterous alma, and King Solomon would have no way of determining whether or not she committed adultery if she were to lie about it. If a married woman had relations with another man outside of her marriage and then kept it a secret from her husband, he would never come to understand that his wife was an adulterous, as her hymen had already been broken before the adultery took place!
Clearly, this is an example of an adulterous alma, and no Septuagint is going to save you from this fact…
Your jesus is a false messiah/deity.
And concerning Deuteronomy 18:15-19, I gave you textual evidence to show you how it applies to Joshua. If you disagree, then your argument is out of silence. You are also missing the point as the point is to show that this prophesy is not specific to the Messiah, but rather to ALL prophets succeeding Moses, including Joshua and the Messiah.
Notice that Deuteronomy 18:15-19 doesn’t give any kingly title to this “prophet like Moses” or any sort of “G-dly status” to it…This is contrary to your idolatrous and erroneous understanding of the jeezer…
Shalom
I knew you would say that Paul, but it’s just not historically accurate, For almost 2,000 years, Chrisendom has berated Torah observance, berated the Pharisees, berated Talmud, berated Jews as murderers of G-d, liars, misanthropes, etc. Jews were put on a very low rung of Christian society. It has been a matter of legal principle and Christian culture to do this, ever hear of the merchant of Venice? This is just historical facts. http://sacred-texts.com/jud/rio/index.htm
You are allowing yourself to use an arbitrary definition of Jews, not the Torah’s definition of Jews. If a Jew does not identify with observing the commandments, he is secular, culturally Jewish, but will his children identify with the biblical holidays that G-d set up? Will he be able to trace his ancestry all the way back to observant people? Will he be married to a Jewish person? (Ezra 10:19.) It is scriptural to state that G-d promised preservation of his unique nation on condition of their obedience to the commandments. Further, as I said, if you had no rabbinic Jews, there are things you wouldn’t even know about Jesus!
Hello
Yes I agree Jews have been berated through the ages. Only a fool would disagree with that. Its just as sad that the world and the so called church ignore such.
Im not disputing how you have been treated. But you are arguing that the treatment that you have recieved proves the non Messiaship of Jesus, and antisemitic teaching of the NT.
Having said that I wouldn’t change my view of Jesus views of the scribes etc. Its written and quoted by Jesus so I stand by that. Bear in mind though Jesus is not against Jews in general, He is against Jews who reject Gods written Law, there is a massive difference.
And when I say He is agsinst them, I mean angry in the righteous way, not put them against a wall and have them speared to death.
Jesus lamented over Israel, He wished how He could have gathered them under His wings. However there heart was not willing.
Yes, Jesus celebrates the feast. He gives a sermon that fits the day on how he and his father are one, and that those to whom the word of G-d came (the elders together with Moses who received Torah) came were also called “gods.” He says it in refutation of a blasphemy charge too btw. All Jews are called G-d’s son.
Paul,
You wrote:
“Im not disputing how you have been treated. But you are arguing that the treatment that you have recieved proves the non Messiaship of Jesus, and antisemitic teaching of the NT.”
By “you” are you referring to Jews in general historically or to C.R. personally or to both?
For the record, I was raised Christian, and don’t have an issue with Christians in and of themselves. What I have issue with is Christianity’s relentless and obsessive need to PROSELETYZE To Jews and to dictate to Jews the meaning and significance OF THEIR OWN BIBLE AND THEIR OWN HISTORY. HOW WOULD A EUROPEAN FEEL ABOUT BEING LECTURED ON EUROPEAN HOSTORY AND FULTURE BY AN AMERICAN? Jesus lived in accordance with a Torah observant lifestyle and JEWISH cultural norms just as Orthodox Jews do today. This is historically verifiable information. CHRISTIANS WOULD KNOW THIS IF THEY ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO LEARN FROM JEWS AND READ CHRISTIAN HISTORY RATHER THAN SIMPLY PONTIFICATE AND DICTATE TO JEWS HOW WRONG THEY ARE ABOUT THEIR OWN HISTORY AND HERITAGE.
Jesus is rejected because most Christians teach he should be worshipped BY EVERYBODY as a manifestation of G-d. Deuteronomy 4:19 refutes this, as does the fact that no biblical theophanies (like the burning bush) were ever worshipped by Israel alongside the father. ITS WRONG TO WORSHIP ANYONE BUT THE FATHER.
If Jesus actually meant what he said in Mathew 23:1-3 then you should be blessing your observant brothers for rejecting the Church which changed set times and laws. Only the Torah observant people (rabbinic Jews) have done what the Pharisees said, as respecting Moses’ seat.
Hello cr
The passage that you quote is a message of outward appearance of righteousness contradicting the inward heart of hypocritical double standards.
Jesus said, do as they say, ie according to the written word of torah. Do this because you are Jews under the Law of Moses.
What He also was saying, was do not do as they actually practice. Because what they say you should do, that they do not do themselves.
So again, its not the Law that is an issue with Jesus its the heart of the ones proclaiming it but not observing it.
If Jesus meant only the written Torah was to be observed by the Jews, he wouldn’t have celebrated hannukah “the feast of the dedication.” If he meant only the written Torah was binding, then this statement makes no sense, John 7:23 “Now if a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing a man’s whole body on the Sabbath?” This is a Pharisaic argument, about a Pharisaic principle of Torah observance. The premises of this argument have no place or root in the written text of scripture by itself, but must be interpreted.
Why would Paul circumcise Timothy (because his father was a Greek, and his mother was Jewish?) Torah lineage (according to the written Torah by itself) goes by your father’s tribe, not your mother’s. Why does Paul mention a rock following Israel In the desert? The text tells us about the rock Moses struck, it says nothing about it moving with them!
Jesus commands in Mathew 8:4 that a man healed of leperousy “show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses commanded as a testimony to them.” How does one carry this out? Which gift? What if he cannot afford the animals? Consider also that the early Church fathers perspectives on the Jewish Christians were that they, “were just Jews, who lived as The Jews live, and held meager opinions of Christ.”
Mark 6:56; Mat 9:20; Luke 8:44).
What kind of garment is Jesus wearing? How is it made? How do you know this garment is to be worn?
Luke 22:19-20 How did Jesus know what blessings to say when he broke bread?
Hello cr
Im not sure why you ask this question?
Jesus was a Torah observed Jew. He also lived customarily to His kin. As long as it was not contary to Law and sinful, whatever He did, He did within the bounds of decency.
Jesus knew the Law, from its first until its last dot. He makes that point when He is writing in the sand. Its not what He wrote, its what He used to write with, which is the point, literally!!!
Hello
where do you get the idea that Jesus celebrated the feast? The feast as you rightly point out is not one of Gods appointed feasts. It says it was the time of the feast and Jesus was around the temple area. The feast of tabernacles had happened a few months earlier, and Jesus was in the temple compound because of that and winter had set in. Thats why it makes the point of winter.
Jesus had things to say to the pharisee’s, about God and the Law. The lights are not torah Law.
The point of the discussion on circumcision is Torah observatory. The law states that male Jewish children must be circumcised on the 8th day, even if that fell on the sabbath. The Law would appear to contradict itself, as the Law states no work on the sabbath, period. However the priests still under the Law, worked within there roles in the temple on the sabbath, including circumcision, Jesus healed someone on the sabbath day. Jesus is pointing out righteousness of Gods work, out does the written word, because the healing of God’s creation, man, is more important.
Paul You were blocked from the blog a while back because of your refusal to interact – so your being here is simply unethical. I will let you stay on this blog if you show me where in Scripture it says that circumcision is to be done even if the 8th day falls on the Sabbath and I also challenge you to show me where in Scripture it defines the act of circumcision as “work” that would be prohibited on the Sabbath – you also have the option of admitting your mistake
Hello PF
Interaction is excatlty what i am doing. There is a difference of agreement of course. If you want to deny access because you feel the answers are uncomfortable for you, that is your right and free will.
I feel like the answers given make your arguements weak. Why feel the need to ban or threaten a ban on someone on the grounds of fair and logical arguement? Offensive language and bigoted views are one thing, however I have not been thus.
Every Christian arguement here is against your view, why do you feel the need to isolate me from the rest?
Im not asking not to be banned, I wondering why you feel I diserve to be banned?
Im sure you would agree the Law states “circumcise the male on the 8th day”. Children are born when the baby is ready to be born, natually. When the child arrives the clock is ticking. The parents being Totally Torah observed will have there child circumside on the day which is commanded, the 8th day. The Law doesnt say do it either on the 7th or the 9th, or any other day that you choose. The day will be the 8th day. This 8th day for many parents will be a sabbath day. Its just common sense.
Show me where it states not to circumcise on the 8th day.
I never said circumcision was work, which was prohibited.Thats the point of the arguement.
I never said the Law was a contradiction, I was saying there seems to be a contradiction. There cannot be a contradiction, because there are no contradictions in scripture. One then has to use sense to determine the outcome.
Healing and circumcision, if the need falls on a sabbath, do as required. God requires mercy not sacrifice.
Jesus healed some one of the sabbath and was rebuked, Jesus argued that healing was righteousness on Gods behalf. Righteousness and faith are Gods statutes on any given day, even the sabbath day.
Paul You can look at the comment section on this blog and you will see that I allow all types of divergent opinions. When I threaten to ban you it is not because your “answers” are so “brilliant” – even for a Christian you rate pretty low. The reason I am telling you that you will be banned is because you don’t INTERACT – you just preach. When evidence is brought against you you ignore it as you have done with Psalm 41 and Genesis 18. Now let us get to the point at hand – The Torah says to circumcise on the 8th day – would we do this even if the child is sick on the 8th day and will be endangered by the circumcision? Another related question – When the Torah tells the leper to shave his head on the seventh day – would that be done even on the Sabbath? Another question (which is simply a previous question that you failed to understand) – if the act of circumcision is not considered “work” that is prohibited on the Sabbath – then Jesus is making no point – you can eat on the Sabbath – would that be a proof that you can heal on the Sabbath? The proof only makes sense if the act of circumcision should be prohibited but that for the sake of the commandment of circumcision the Sabbath is moved aside.
Hello cr
I think you misunderstand my intentions.
I dont come here to show and tell Jews there history, and to reveal how one should live, according to Jewish Law and tradition etc. Im not here for Jewish readjustment to the christian life style.
Jesus did not come to Israel to establish Christianity!!
He came because the Jewish Law required it. Jewish Law, not Christian replacement theology.
He came to die, be buried, resurrected and to be glorified. The reason for such, was to pay the penalty for sin, according to the Law. The penalty for sin is death. Jesus died on the behalf of sin. Jesus conquered the grave and conquered the consequence of death. And anyone who believes in Him will have eternal life.
Hello David
Im referring to all. Admitted I personally dont know if one here has been persecuted individually, but the YOU, is generally. The reseon is generally because the view from bloggers and history of course, is Jews have always been wrongly judged.
Hi Paul,
This may be a minor point, but I think a valid one.
In reading your response then, what I think you really mean, when you say “you”, would better be phrased as “your ancestors.”
You wouldn’t say “you” committed genocide, enslavement, servitude, and bastardization against the Canaanites would you? You would probably say that’s what your ancestors did over the course of time in the conquest of Canaan. You wouldn’t say that “you” worshiped the golden calve in the desert years would you? Or that “you” hosted and visited male Hebrew prostitutes and worshiped Baal and Ashera in the Temple of God (which took place during the reign of the kings) would you?
All these things do pertain to the ancestors of present day Jews. But we wouldn’t say that “you” did them when it was not the descendants but rather the ancestors who were perpetrating the act.
Likewise, when it is not the descendant who is the victim of an act perpetrated upon them, but instead was the ancestor, we should (I think) be consistent and not say the ubiquitous general “you.”
I think it’s better to say “the Jews”, “the Hebrews” or “the Israelites” rather than the general “you” where appropriate, depending on the context so as not to inappropriately convey a connotation of victimization on the one hand or perpetration of victimization on the other hand where one is not intended or due.
Of course that’s not to say there are not times where the general “you” would be appropriate such as if you are referring to your discussion/debating partner as part of a larger group of victims of anti-Semitism or some other type of discrimination for example.
Just my argument and opinion for consistency, that’s all.
Hello David
Yes I see your point.
Thanks
Hello cr
Its not just about appealing to His person as such, its about appealing to God. Because My belief that Jesus is God incarnate, then both are one, acceptance that is. Jesus is making the point that His character is an express image of the Father. Accepting Jesus character, work, miracles etc, should have been enough to make Israel see who God the father is. It wasnt just a case of Jesus turning up from human heritage and claiming deity, or claiming that a man had become God. Its God saying here is my son from Heaven. Jesus isnt saying, there are 3 Gods. There is only one God.
I dont understand how the Tanch which of course, clearly teaches Gods presence manifesting Himself in many ways, the shechinah glory, The Angel of God etc, Then in time, God fully reveals His Glory through the most biblical logical way, through the form of a man. What better way to show His people what the character of God is, than through the communication of a man, Of course no mere human can be a fully holy 100% example of God, unless that person is God Himself.
If the Tanach didnt reveal this truth to come, The God man concept, then Jesus, this false self professed Messiah would have been chancing His luck, trying to convince the world of His claims.
Many arguements about Jesus rest on His failure to establish the Kingdom, as of course the Messiah will establish the kingdom. But when you see the believing camp point to a rejection first, which entails His death, and then a return to establish the kingdom, many arguements pursue defying such teachings.
When you take a step back and try and look at the arguements on a neutral footing, when you compare all the reasoning etc, then look at the One person who is involved in the devision, the one person who is claiming deity and Messiaship, aligning the scripture arguements, who else could He be?
Point for point Jesus life is scrutinised, comparing His claims to the Tanach. Messianic Christology can be seen throughout the Hebrew scriptures.
Personally I find it totally mind blowing that the Messiah of Israel can be seen from Genesis to Malachi. 400 yrs later the promise arrives. 33 and and bit yrs later He has gone, according to His Fathers pre destined plan, according to His rejection by His kin, according to scripture. He is despised according to scripture. To some He is a rock of offense, to some a stumbling stone, according to scripture. To some He is the Rock of Salvation, according to scripture. Jesus said Do not think that I bring peace, but a sword of division. Contextually, that is where we are today.
Devided. Some believe, some dont. Its all about faith through Gods grace.
According to your definition then we are all G-d incarnate. Isn’t it true that G-d is Everywhere. If He is not, how can He be G-d. Would He not also be in the S’tan.
G-d certainly didn’t how Himself as a “Man” at Sinai, or to Moshe, as a “Man” in the many times He spoke to him.
The problem IS you are Not looking at it in a neutral way. You are seeing Everything in Tanach as “pointing to Jsus” first and foremost. What you have done, as with any Xtian, is to take words that have no bearing on anything messiah related and “applied” it to him. Apparently the Psalms aren’t included in this since you only count Genesis to Malachi. Why is it when Tanach Does speak of the Real Mashiach Xtians want to Ignore these references but only consider those which has No mention of a messiah.
All records were destroyed. The temple and its contents. What survives today that excisted then?
Or what survived the destruction, but later was destroyed or lost? If the records were kept, but later lost, surley you would know of this, to that end, you will be abke to trace today’s Jews tribal heritage of Judah?
What tribe are you?
If messiah is to come for the first time, how will you know His tribal claim?
Mashiach will NOT have to prove that lineage. It’s only a Xtian obsession. The proof is the accomplishments. Since Jsus didn’t accomplish ANYTHING Xtianity has had to make That the primary focus, and hence the lie made up about the records.
Hello Sharbano
Yes I agree, having to prove ones hetirage to rightfully claim Messiahship isnt the balanced in which authenticity is claimed. It is only one of many. But historically at the time, and pre AD70 Jesus claims on His family line would be studied and shown to be from the tribe of Judah, from the House of David.
Its just one of many arguements I agree, but it does show that when the Hebrew texts are studied and it reveals the Messiah will be from the tribe of Judah, Jesus can claim such.
In other words, heritage lineage isnt THE proof, but it adds to the claim. what is intresting though is actually what you said,… the accomplishments.
Jesus did such. Thats my point. His rejection is paramount to the fullest context of Scripture.
Jesus did not come to reign as King at His first advent. He came to offer the Kingdom to His people, He came to authenticate His credentials, He came to be rejected by most but not all, He came to be rejected, to be crucified on the behalf of sin, He came to die, be buried and to be ressurected the third day. All according to Gods will.
When you Jesus never accomplished anything, I would say, Yes He did. He accomplished everything that His Father sent Him to Do, all of the above.
You stated that the records being destroyed is a christian lie. Im not sure its a lie?
The Jewish lineage was very sacred in biblical days, inter marriage and the possibility of Jew and gentile marriage was a very closely monitored system. Levitical heritage was very important due to the possibility of a Danite, say, becoming a priest, or a simionite becoming a King. After Israels exile and the returning to the land, Israel were very scrupulous in record keeping, one main reason was to steer clear of the inter marriage which they fell into previously. All records were kept, and kept safe in the most plausible and practical place, the temple.
The temple was destroyed and everything in it. If they survived, then I am wrong.
Paul There are many families that could trace their lineage today – the entire idea of the records being destroyed with the destruction of the Temple is a myth – you are not “wrong” – someone sold you a fable – and you have to ask yourself – why did this person make it up and what other fables has he been selling you. By the way – The Messiah is supposed to come from the tribe of Judah and from the line of David – this means that he will have a human father – if no human from the line of David steps forth and claims to be his father then he cannot be the Messiah
Hi Yisroel,
Have the Jews put forth a counter lineage to show that Jesus was not in the line of David, either by blood or legal authority? To my knowledge no, there has never been a counter argument lineage. I’ve heard many arguments such as that he cannot have a step father (which is disputed) but never a Jewish counter lineage argument of their own to show that what is put forth in the NT is wrong. I’ve seen some limited arguments that it cannot include this person or that person, but never a full line lineage counter argument of their own which leads me to believe the only existing record is in the NT.
David From the standpoint of the Jewish Bible, the story presented by the Christian Scriptures would have us reject Jesus. Joseph, who was of Davidic lineage (and I have no reason to dispute this) acknowledged that he was not Jesus’ father. No man from Davidic lineage did step forth to say that he was Jesus’ father – and even if someone would have done so – it wouldn’t help because that would make Jesus an illegitimate child (Deuteronomy 23:3) – who could not be considered “from amongst your brethren” (Deuteronomy 17:15) thus disqualifying him from being a king – but again this is theoretical – even according to the record of the Christian Scripture – no man from Davidic lineage acknowledged fatherhood for Jesus – we don’t have to prove that he is not from Davidic lineage – his claim simply doesn’t add up.
Hi Yisroel,
So then your only argument is the disqualification of a stepfather argument.
Thanks.
As I recall there are several omissions in his genealogy, for some reason to come up with 14 generations.
David
You fail to realize that it is not I that needs to make an argument – it is those who want to believe in Jesus that need to present a claim – so it would be more correct to say that YOUR only argument is that lineage could pass through a stepfather and this claim is soundly refuted by Esther 2:15 (Esther was adopted by Mordechai but she still retained her biological lineage) – not that this argument of desperation needs to be refuted
Hi Yisroel,
I wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth or argue the point but just confirming the stepfather argument is the only argument, at least from your perspective.
Thanks
David Again – I have no arguments – it is those who want to believe in Jesus that present arguments and all I do is show how they are unsound – I’ve heard the “lineage through the mother” argument as well – and I have demonstrated how it is Scripturally unsound – but these are not my arguments – these are my responses to Christian arguments
Paul, please prove what you wrote from Scripture:
“Jesus did not come to reign as King at His first advent. He came to offer the Kingdom to His people, He came to authenticate His credentials, He came to be rejected by most but not all, He came to be rejected, to be crucified on the behalf of sin, He came to die, be buried and to be ressurected the third day. All according to Gods will.
When you Jesus never accomplished anything, I would say, Yes He did. He accomplished everything that His Father sent Him to Do, all of the above.”
Prove that the Messiah will fail to reign as king at his first advent. Prove that the job of the Messiah is “to be rejected, to be crucified on behalf of sin,…to die, be buried, and to be resurrected on the third day” rather than reign as king during a period of universal peace, universal knowledge of God, restoration of Israel to the land, restoration of the Third Temple, national resurgence of Torah observance, vindication of Israel in the eyes of the nations, exaltation of Israel, and so on, as the prophets described.
Show me from the Hebrew scriptures that changing the Messiah’s job description so radically is justified.
Finally, if you want to prove Jesus’s credentials from his family tree, you ultimately fail. Jesus may well not be a descendant of King David because we do not know who his father is. The genealogies of Matthew and Luke are of his adoptive father Joseph. Furthermore, not only do the genealogies contradict each other, but there is a 15-generation difference between the two, leaving them with a 300-year discrepancy if we say that a generation is about twenty years.
Paul, for a person who claims he has such great “faith,” I wouldn’t say your faith in G-d is all that strong…
You seem to find it impossible that G-d could preserve the tribal lineage of the tribe of Judah and the kingly line of David or any other tribe for that matter, post the destruction of the Second Temple…
But G-d says otherwise…
Jeremiah 33:17 For so said the Lord: There shall not be cut off from David a man sitting on the throne of the house of Israel.
Jeremiah 33:18 And of the Levitic priests, there shall not be cut off from before Me a man offering up a burnt offering, or burning a meal-offering or performing a sacrifice for all time.
We know of Levites today, Paul Summers. Rabbi Eli Cohen is a Levite, along with Rabbi Tovia Singer. Heard of them? They know their tribe…
Most Jews today are assumed to be of the tribe of Judah or Benjamin, since the Kingdom of Judah was primarily made up of those tribes…Maybe some Shimon mixed in there.
G-d makes it clear that the Davidic line will never be cut off.
Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall remain for many days, having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor pillar, nor ephod nor seraphim.
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.
Notice that Hosea 3:4 doesn’t say anything about Israel having a Davidic king ruling over them during the exile. It doesn’t say that a Davidic king will come before the destruction of the Second Temple, go away for a few thousand years, and then come back…
No…Rather it says that WE WILL HAVE NO KING DURING THE EXILE. Your jeezer is not our king. We didn’t “miss” our Messiah. You missed Hashem…
Shalom
Hello Yehuda
I dont disagree with you. God does know His people and their Heritage. God today can and does look at a individual Jew and trace them to the garden of eden. That’s not what Im suggesting for a second.
My view is not from Gods perspective, but from mans.
Im aware of the Levites also.
The davidic line will of course NEVER be cut off. Thats true. King David from old will again sit on the throne of Israel, in the Messianic kingdom. But Jesus will be the King over King David, making David a prince unto Jesus the King of Kings.
Hosea3.4 Israel suffered the loss of a king since babylon, and prince since the roman destruction. No temple, no priests. No idol worship also. These are true as of today. It says Israel will remain many days hence in this condition.
3.5 Does say, afterwards. After what? After these things Israel will seek God, (the Messiah Jesus), And David their King. When? At the end of days. It has to be still future because you as a nation are stil not repentant fully, you still haven’t called on Him to return, because the days of Jacobs trouble, The great day of the Lord is still future also.
You are also correct about it not saying about a king coming and then going away. Jesus was never seated as King, because He was never meant to. His Kingship is stll future for Israel.
Jesus came as the prince of peace, awaiting the people to accept Him. Once accepted as prince, He could rule and reign as King. For Israel as a nation on the whole this was rejected. Individually Jews did and still do accept Jesus, through faith. But that’s a Church context now. For Israel as a nation, restoration complete is still future.
Thats why Israel and the Church are two separate entities coupled through Messiah Jesus.
Paul, cite support from the Hebrew Bible for your statements:
“But Jesus will be the King over King David, making David a prince unto Jesus the King of Kings.”
“After these things Israel will seek God, (the Messiah Jesus), And David their King.”
“You are also correct about it not saying about a king coming and then going away. Jesus was never seated as King, because He was never meant to. His Kingship is stll future for Israel.
Jesus came as the prince of peace, awaiting the people to accept Him. Once accepted as prince, He could rule and reign as King. For Israel as a nation on the whole this was rejected. Individually Jews did and still do accept Jesus, through faith. But that’s a Church context now. For Israel as a nation, restoration complete is still future.
Thats why Israel and the Church are two separate entities coupled through Messiah Jesus.”
Stop pontificating and start proving.
Hello Dina
Fortunately proving scripture is something that God doesn’t need to do. And He doesnt need me, to prove anything.
I appreciate your think the NT and Pauls letters are as useful as a chocolate tea pot, but heres a quote from Romans, quoting Ps 89:30-37.
What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of the circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? Will there unbelief make the faithfulness of God without affect? Certainty not? Indeed let God be true but every man a liar.
Paul, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You come here to try to prove your theological claims from Hebrew Scripture. When I challenge you to cite Scripture, you say that you don’t need to prove anything because, well, you just know, and we should just have faith and listen to you.
If you can’t find support in the Torah for your statements, then your answer that “Fortunately proving scripture is something that God doesn’t need to do. And He doesnt need me, to prove anything” is a huge problem for you. If the Torah is true and it doesn’t support Christianity, then Christianity is false.
If A equals B but B does not equal C, then A does not equal C.
If you come to us with a claim that contradicts the Torah, you had better be able to defend it with Scripture and with reason not only to us but to God–because if you cannot then you are guilty of the grave sin of idolatry, and blind faith is no defense against that.
Paul, pay attention: if you cannot defend your claims from Scripture, you’re wasting your time preaching here.
All you can do is preach, because you have no argument.
Paul, you say you do not need to prove anything, only to have faith in truth, but even Moses himself had to prove himself to the elders of Israel before people could trust him. G-d told Moses specifically at the burning bush. Gather together the elders of Israel and tell them, “I Am has sent me to you.” Moses (a levite) had to first present himself to the other Levites, so that his claims should be at least partially verified.
Exodus 3:16 Go, assemble the elders of Israel and say to them, ‘The Lord, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—appeared to me and said: I have watched over you and have seen what has been done to you in Egypt. 17 And I have promised to bring you up out of your misery in Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—a land flowing with milk and honey.’
Moses presents himself as commanded, says G-D’s unique name to them for some verification, does signs for them, and then does signs with Aaron for Pharaoh. Moses does not chastise the Israelite people for their unbelief in his signs until Sinai, because G-d had said in Exodus 3:12 “And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you[b] will worship God on this mountain.”
The ultimate sign of Moses’ true prophecy is that he completed the Job. If Jesus comes back and completes the Job, Im sure nobody would have any complaints.
Yes, Paul’s statements make little to no sense…He identifies G-d as “jesus” in Hosea 3:5 and David as simply a future Davidic king at the end of days…
This is surprising to me, as I’d expect Paul would associate the “David” part of the verse with the jeezer…But he got a little too over zealous with his deification of his jeezer…
Now even he doesn’t know what he’s talking about!
Hello Yehuda
The text says ” and David their King”
This of course means, some other than God. David their King is not Messiah, or God. King David is David the resurrected King David.
The terminology King David is not a messianic title for the Messiah as, The Son of David is.
Historically there has only been One King David who sat on the throne of Israel, in the future that right and covenant still stands because the Davidic covenant is eternal.
As a matter of fact David IS messiah. Messiah is NOT a title. The title would be David HaMelech.
No Paul, you are absolutely incorrect. The expression “David” is understood to be a title for the Davidic king who will rule at the end of days, aka, THE MESSIAH! Even christians agree upon this with Jews.
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. (Jesse was the father of KING DAVID.)
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.
And I’ll have you know that the expression “Moshiach ben David” never appears in the Tanach…Not even once…So that’s some food for thought…
Paul, you say that Jesus didn’t come to establish Christianity, (and I would tend to agree,) but you are also clearly saying that without appeal to his person, ressurection would not be possible, and that repentance doesn’t cut it to gain life eternal. Judaism alone doesn’t cut it you seem to believe.
You forget that With the father, all things are possible, and this is what Christians seem not to realize. G-d gives his criteria for how to be righteous and obtain life. He tells Israel plainly that the Torah of Moses is not too difficult for them to follow. That being the case, Jews don’t need a savior to set them free from sin. That’s like saying you need to be set free from G-d! After all. Who defined the perammeters of what sin is? G-d! Who defined what constitutes true righteousness? G-d! To whom should we appeal? G-d!
There once was a moshiach who was only human just like you and me, and he had doubts just like us, he bled like us, he sinned like us, he even killed a man once! This man (unique in his way) got to speak with G-d one on one, and G-d loved him so much, but even G-d got mad with him. This man was raised by the purported hitter of his generation, a father figure responsible for genocide, and yet, G-d used this man of extremely flawed upbringing, to bring a people onto the stage of history, set to change the flow of world events. His name was Moses, and He wasn’t perfect, but with G-d who in the world needs to be perfect?
Christiahs hold to a premise of G-d’s absolute response to good, absolute response to evil, etc. but it never plays out that way in scripture. HASHEM always seems to make do with creation just as it panned out in Judaism, he doesn’t do this all or nothing approach that Christians advocate in their understanding.
The NT says that “the last enemy to be destroyed is death,” but in TANACH, death is not the enemy of G-d, death fulfills G-d’s purpose. The angel of death, (as an emissary of G-d) smites Egypt as G-d commands him.
You Christians always talk about G-d’s nature, you argue about whether it is only one, or somehow it is three in one. You point to Genesis 18, Joshua 5, etc. and say, “see the angel that bears G-d’s name, and reveals his face.” “He acts as G-d’s immanent presence, his mouthpiece that was manifested to the prophets.” “He became incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth.” I would say this to you. Zechariah 14:9. G-d the father will be king. The father will get all in all. His name will be one, not three!
G-d (the father) says “my glory I will not give to another.” We are told “trust not in princes, nor in the son of man in whom there is no hope.” Even when G-d’s presence did rest on a serpent of brass (to heal Israel’s snake bites,) even when his word emanated from the burning bush, ISRAEL DID MOT WORSHIP THESE MANIFESTATIONS, THESE CONCRETE EXAMPLES OF DIVINE POWER. When Israel actually did engage in worship of different manifestations,(whether in place or objects) they were punished. (2 kings 18:4) it wasn’t just objects that were destroyed to prevent idolatry, but places of worship as well that were designated idolatrous. Jews worshipped HASHEM in many places, high places, but these were declared idolatrous, why? Because place can still be a form, a place can become a corrupting influence, even if it’s from G-d. See the Samaritan preoccupation with Mt. Gerizim? Did G-d not have half the people of Israel stand on Mt. eBal, and the other half on Gerizim (where the blessings of Torah were told to Israel?) Why then is having a temple to HASHEM on mount Gerizim wrong? Deuteronomy 4 and Deuteronomy 13 answer this. It was not commanded,
It is not that Judaism doesn’t know (historically speaking) about speculations on the nature of the angel of the lord, (is it created, uncreated? somehow G-d, or his manifestation? it’s literally the case that Israel is actively prohibited in Deuteronomy 4:19 from worshiping any of the host.
If G-d were an ocean, the Christian theology is like trying to put that ocean in a water bottle, and the commanding the world saying, “if you want the water, you must come to this bottle to get it.” Judaism gives a resounding NO to that sentiment.
Hello PF
With the comment that you just made about rating as low, I hope for the Jewish people that you are not a Rabbi. If you are in the secular, then all I can suggest that you speak to a rabbi.
I will leave that with you.
To the point of circumcision.
I quoted, God requires mercy not sacrifice. If a child was ill and couldnt be circumcised then Im sure common sense would prevail. Or for example the parents were travelling to the temple, and on route they were robbed, left in a state that they were incapacitated to reach the temple in time. Common sense again prevails.
This just shows again, that the Law cannot be totally lived out in full because circumstances sometimes get in the way. Thats why salvation is not obtained by the Law, but through faith by Gods grace.
However the discussion in context, was comparing Jesus healing on the sabbath, and the temple service being carrried out on the sabbath also. Jesus is just making the point that healing on the sabbath is not contra to Law!!
The discussion is not on the merit on who can and who cannot get to the temple on time. Its about God working miracles on the Sabbath.
Jews already have a knowledge and relationship with the father. It is the Christian assertion that this is insufficient. That is not the testimony of the Hebrew Bible. We do not need G-d to incarnate to know what the father is like.
Because My belief that Jesus is God incarnate, then both are one, acceptance that is. If both Jesus and G-d are one and the same, Jews already follow G-d, and Jesus becomes irrelevant to the equation.
You are adding a human nature to the equation. G-d does not need to possess a human nature to forgive from sin, he does not need to take a form to speak to people. These are all assertions of Christian theology, but the Tanakh shows that G-d doesn’t need to be incarnate to do anything.
Hello
Yes I suppose you are correct, God doesn’t have to be incarnate to do anything. God is unlimited in His ways. But that doesnt show or prove that God didnt choose to be incarnate if He so willed it.
I cant discuss what God might or might not want to do, I can only discuss what He said and what is written.
Your view on irrelevant is only seen through one view, a view of rejecting Jesus, thats fine. The the other hand its very relevant if you believe that Jesus is Gods express image, in the flesh. Because rejecting Jesus is rejecting God. As for Israels present situation, I see it as very relevant.
Your view on irrelevant is only seen through one view, a view of rejecting Jesus, thats fine.
I didn’t used to reject Jesus Paul.
Paul, regarding incarnation of God, you wrote, “I cant discuss what God might or might not want to do, I can only discuss what He said and what is written.”
What God said and what is written is very clear. If you really care about God’s word then read Deuteronomy 4 very carefully, several times. Then you will see that your belief is idolatrous–if you really care about what God has to say on the matter and not what you wish He would say on the matter.
You know that is really a despicable remark, ‘you hope for the Jewish people he’s Not a Rabbi”.
I tell you what, He has probably forgot more than YOU will ever KNOW.
Then what is your response as conclusion. You are merely Speculating, Assuming, Guessing. You have NO idea since you don’t KNOW Torah. When it comes to Shabbat you wouldn’t even know what is meant by “Work”. It is quite simple to see with the “Hebrew” meanings. Torah has its own methods in dealing with these matters and so it’s not left up to Gentile imaginations. And THAT is the scrutiny that Jsus is bound by and Not HIS imaginations either.
Hello
You seem to think that academia is worth more than common decency and good manners?
Its sad that you focus on my comment and not on the other.
Can you imagine if I said “A typical remark, worthy of a Jew”?
Knowing Torah Law word for word, and applying it with God surley has to be coesive.
Paul How defensive! – you can rate yourself – read your own comments and compare them to some of the other Christians who comment on this blog. As it relates to circumcision – you didn’t begin to answer the question – if common sense prevails if the child is ill and the circumcision is delayed – then who told you that common sense doesn’t prevail and the mandate not to violate the Sabbath doesn’t override the mandate to circumcise on the 8th day? There is no question that the mandate for the leper to shave his head on the seventh day (Leviticus 14:9) is set aside for the Sabbath. And you didn’t begin to address the other question – which is – how do you know that the act of cutting off a foreskin should be prohibited on the Sabbath? what defines “work” that is prohibited on the Sabbath? The discussion is NOT about miracles on the Sabbath – the discussion began when Concerned Reader pointed out to you that Jesus accepted the traditions of the Pharisees as authoritative (there are several proofs to this – you can read about them in Supplement to Contra Brown Vol. 5 #69
Just an FYI for our Christian readers. It hasn’t just been my personal examination of the Christian Bible’s own ethics (in historical context) that has highlighted the Jewish ethical core (even Pharisaic core) of the NT in my estimation, but also scholarship’s recognition over the past 50 years of the Jewish tenor of many ethics and practices taught in Christian tradition. Manuals of Christian ethics like the didache and Didascalia (2nd-4th centuries,) and later treatises against idolatry and sermons/treatises on morality by the various GENTILE Church fathers bear striking similarity in historical content to their Counterparts in Rabbinic traditions on ethics, practice, and exegetical reasoning. In a sense, history shows that If you removed Christian theology and speculations on Jesus’ nature from the equation in the NT, you would be left with one big book of second temple Jewish ethics and practices. The Brill series’ on Christianity are very informative.
http://www.brill.com/essays-halakhah-new-testament
http://www.brill.com/tertullian-idolatry-and-mishnah-avodah-zarah
http://www.brill.com/mapping-new-testament
More books on the subject
https://books.google.com/books?id=6glHmK_rZYUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=new+testament+and+Jewish+law&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDUQ6AEwA2oVChMI4JDOjKzpxgIVwn2ICh2yfwH_#v=onepage&q=new%20testament%20and%20Jewish%20law&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=iWiEut-zdW4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Jewish+law+in+gentile+churches&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAGoVChMI8e6zvKzpxgIVg6WICh2nFQFJ#v=onepage&q=Jewish%20law%20in%20gentile%20churches&f=false
I basically realized (while I was still a Christian) that for Christians and Christian tradition to give Jews a hard time just for being traditional rabbinic Jews, ie for being halachically observant of teaditional non Jesus oriented Judaism, or to call them LEGALISTS OR VIPERS was to be entirely hypocritical and to ignore the Fundamental ethical foundations of our own faith structure. I am confident from the available historical evidence in saying NO PHARISEES would = NO JESUS.
The interesting part is, rabbis have been trying to tell the Church this for A VERY LONG TIME!
Read Rabbi Jacob Emden’s letter about the sabbatean heresy, AND HIS VIEW OF CHRISTIANITY. Pay close attention to Nachmanides’ disputation with Pablo Christiani, (listen and look sharp for when the priest asked Ramban the question: Do you hate Jesus? FYI for those who don’t actually want to study, his answer was NO I DONT HATE JESUS. THE CHURCH HAS PERVERTED HIS TEACHINGS INTO IDOLATRY. (In accordance with Deuteronomy 4:19.)
I don’t have to see teaditional Jews, Pharisees, and rabbis, as vipers or liars, because I know that in its primitive days, the Church itself was just an apocalyptic subset of common second temple, and Pharisaic beliefs. Jesus’ own disciples held teaditional Jewish beliefs about the messiah and his role before they followed Jesus. If you brush teaditional Judaism off, you brush yourselves off. Sorry to be blunt, but those are the historical facts (that even the likes of Dr. Michael Brown would agree with.
Heaven forbid that you Christians should think that I hate your Jesus. For all intents and purposes, Jesus was how I first heard about the bible as a book at all. Isnt it odd though, that Christians call Jesus the WORD OF G-D, and yet the LEAST IMPORTANT THING FOR CHRISTIANS TO LEARN IS HOW THE MAN LIVED DAY TO DAY IN HIS CULTURE, AND HOW HE TAUGHT OTHERS TO LIVE. EVERY MEANINGFUL ETHIC OF JESUS (such as poverty and the sharing of goods,) HAS BEEN TURNED INTO MEANINGLESS ALLEGORY BY THE CHURCH.
Thanks for this, Con. I didn’t check out the websites yet, but I wanted to let you know about a book I read that was very informative along these lines. I think it was called The Jewish Origins of the Sermon on the Mount, by Gerald Friedlander, a British scholar, and it was published in 1911 or so.
Yeah, the sermon on the mount really isn’t “New” at all, it’s basically right out of the liturgy. 🙂
Hello cr
Sorry, I dont follow you.
Paul, My statements (and the books I’ve posted) demonstrate pretty well that Jesus (and his early followers) observed traditional Judaism of a Pharisaic variety, not unlike the Judaism that Jews practice today. There are many teachings in manuals like the didache that are very influenced by second temple Jewish oral traditions about how to conduct your life, what food to eat, forbidden practices, etc. Church manuals of discipline for non Jews reflect a confirmation of the norms that Jews today would call the noachide laws, or what in second temple times were called the laws of the Ger Toshav/G-d fearering Gentiles. In other words, Jesus was a Jew, and not just culturally speaking, but religiously speaking. He believed the Pharisees sat in moses’ seat. Jesus would not recognize in any way Christian theological terms, Christian holidays, or Replacement theology. Christians are trying to teach Jews about “the truth.” What Christians forget is, Jews already know how to relate to G-d, they already know the truth.
C.R.,
You wrote:
“…Jesus was a Jew, and not just culturally speaking, but religiously speaking.”
My response:
Absolutely, and he was an in your face type of prophet like so many before him. That’s why he differed on many occasions with the establishment’s human traditions (and hypocrisy) which were out of line according to his understanding of God’s will.
Mark 7:1 – 23
Matthew 15:10 – 20
Matthew 12:1 – 7
Matthew 23:13 – 36
As well as His contemporary, John the Baptist:
Matthew 3:7 – 10
Matthew 14:4
I happened to read Only your first reference, that is, Mark 7:
I would just say this, If this were Jsus and he come to Me saying This I would tell him he had better go read Isaiah again because he doesn’t even understand what it says and what it is talking about.
Of course, does anyone think the Xtian text would have included a Pharisee telling him this. This is why Tanach is so much different than Xtian texts. All it takes is One occurrence, as here, to negate all else.
I just glanced at chapter 7 in Mark and I do not understand what Jesus has against clean hands and clean dishes. Seriously! He is not having dinner in my house if he won’t wash his hands.
Also, in this chapter he abolishes the kosher laws. Anyone who says Jesus did not contradict the Law should read this chapter and then tell me that again with a straight face.
Finally, he says yet another vicious thing about the Pharisees flouting the commandment to honor your parents, a hypocritical statement for him to make considering his own disrespectful treatment of his parents and the parents of his followers. Too bad for Mark, the teachings of the Pharisees regarding this important commandment were recorded in the Talmud.
Here are two examples:
1. The Talmud records the story of a gentile named Dama ben Nesina who demonstrated such great respect for his parents that he is held up as an example. All little Jewish children are told this story. The high priest was missing a gem from his ephod that Dama owned. The rabbis approached him and offered 1,000 gold shekels for it. Dama went into the next room and saw that his father was sleeping with his head resting against the chest that contained the precious stone. He returned to the rabbis and told them he would not be able to sell them the stone. Thinking he wanted more for it, they raised the price to 10,000 gold shekels. Just then, Dama’s father awoke. Dama retrieved the stone and insisted on selling it for the original price, explaining that he would not awaken his father for all the money in the world. In another story about this same person, Dama was attending some kind of council meeting, of which he was a respected member. His mother burst into the meeting and began to beat him. Dama did not defend himself but instead pleaded with her to allow him to take her home. As a reward, God caused his herd to produce a perfect red cow, for which the overjoyed rabbis paid Dama 10,000 gold shekels (Kiddushin 31a).
2. Rabbi Tarfon was out walking with his mother when the strap of her sandal broke. He got down on his hands and knees and placed his hand under her foot and walked with her back home, using his hand as a shoe (Kiddushin 61b).
Now of course, I don’t expect Christians to believe these stories. But that’s not the point. The rabbis wrote them specifically to teach the importance of honoring our parents and to what a great extent we should go toward doing that. This is quite the opposite of Jesus’s assertion that the Pharisees taught their students not to honor their parents.
Hello cr, David
Yes Jesus understood Jewish tradition and culture very well. As ive stated earlier traditions of old are irrelevant to Judaism if they dont impact and go contrary to God’s written word. I hope you didnt think I thought otherwise?
Traditions, and culture are what defines one race from another.
It’s my own opinion that (based on the rules found in Acts 15 and found in Paul’s epistles) that the statements that Jesus “abolished kosher” were later inserted by Editors into the NT. It wouldn’t make sense for Jesus to have taught, “kosher is abolished,” when in all of the NT ethical treatises it states, “do not consume blood, do not eat things strangled, do not eat meat sacrificed to idols.) the texts go on and on about these rules, especially about not eating meats consecrated to idolatry.
C.R.,
Why do you hold to the Noahide law as opposed to the Adamite law?
Concerned Raeder I believe that Boyarin go this one thing right – he wasn’t abolishing the laws of kosher altogether – he was arguing with the rabbinic enactment that requires hand washing before eating I wrote about this in my critique of Boyarin and in Supplement to Contra Brown
I may have read this totally wrong, but Mark 7:15 (“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”) seems to be saying that what goes into you (such as non-kosher food) can’t defile you. Christians see it that way too; one of the Christian online Bibles summarizes this as something like “Jesus abolishes the kosher laws.” I can’t remember where I saw it.
And compare that with Isaiah 65. Could it be speaking of Xtianity there, Hmmm, sounds to me like it could be.
Dina, it seems to me that Jesus’ statements in Mark cant be referring to non kosher food being made clean, because later Pauline Gentile Christians still had remnants of certain key dietary restrictions in their practices, as did Christians in much later periods. It wouldn’t make sense to prohibit consumption of blood for example, or meat sacrificed to idols, ( in Acts 15, or in Paul’s epistles) if Kosher were truly supposedly abolished by Jesus.
I think Jesus’ statements in Mark can be better interpreted in ways that fit the historical context of second temple era arguments. If Jesus were talking about kosher food that happened to come in contact with something that was not kosher, that might make more sense, especially because just prior to this statement he was talking about utensils and ritual hand washing. In his day the hand washing and blessing was incumbent upon the priests, not most of the laypeople. Maybe that clarifies a bit.
Yes, thank you!
CR
but doesn’t the Catholic church see it teach it, that way?
Larry, yes it’s true that the abolishing of all Jewish laws is what the Orthodox Churches presently teach today. But, my point was, while the Church does this today, it consciously has to ignore aspects of its own sacred texts and history in order to do it. It’s sad really that more Christians don’t study their own history.
The didache, Paul’s epistles, and other early Christian disciplinary texts talk about abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols, abstaining from blood, and abstaining from things strangled. These (I believe) are genuine historical holdovers of former kosher observances. Many early Christians were vegetarian for example. All of these things suggest to me (partially) that the Church changed its views about religious practices over time as it separated from Judaism.
We know from studying Christian history for example, that the Church went through a systematic purge of all of its connections to Judaism in the 2nd-4th century when it was declared the official Roman faith.
Easter used to be celebrated in the month of Nissan, various rules for G-dfearers were what served as the basis for Christian ethics, etc. It all changed in the early days when the Church became state sanctioned.
If you read Justin’s dialogue with Trypho, he says that in his day, Torah observant followers still existed. Further, if you read John Chrysostom’s homilies “against the Jews” closely, one of the things Chrysostom is most mad at (interestingly) is that some small remnants of Christians are still observing long held Jewish customs, even Gentiles who attend his Church.
The Christians in Ethopia still observe a form of dietary restriction, and still circumcise their sons. They do it for cultural reasons, claiming they have Jewish ancestry. It’s just interesting that Christian history itself testifies partially against Christian anti Judaism. Christianity is a diverse and mixed bag.
” It wouldn’t make sense to prohibit consumption of blood for example, or meat sacrificed to idols, ( in Acts 15, or in Paul’s epistles) if Kosher were truly supposedly abolished by Jesus.”
but then why doesn’t matthew include “all foods clean” when he repeats the same story?
he could have understood it like you and included those words, but he doesn’t.
The NT has been so edited that it shouldn’t be trusted for its mere assertions,
C.R.,
Your mere assertion regarding the NT would also of course apply to the Hebrew Scriptures which scholars now are mostly in agreement that the books of Moses aren’t really even “of Moses” or of one person.
So then should we not “trust” the Hebrew Scriptures either because of this editing?
By the way which passages to you “trust” for your Noahide guidance, or perhaps you don’t even limit yourself to Hebrew Scripture preferring the editing of the great non-scriptural Jewish thinkers of present day and antiquity?
I’m pretty sure what you are referring regarding multiple authors of Torah. That theory has been pretty well debunked. Their reasoning was SO flawed that the principle they used could be applied to Most authors.
David, Torah is more trustworthy because Even if the Documentary hypothesis of authorship of Torah is true, it would not alter the fundamental facts or premises of Israel’s history as Jews traditionally understand it, nor would it affect Israel’s duty as a nation to observe the commandments as they were given at Sinai.
You see, in the Hebrew Bible, Moses (a Levite along with the other Levites (his kinsmen) and the other elders) received the Torah on Sinai with the people as a whole. Moses’ person itself is not entirely relevant to the premises of Torah’s content, namely, that Israel nationally received the Torah on mount Sinai and is duty bound to observe it.
Even if we were to grant the documentary hypothesis, traditional Jewish history wouldn’t substantially change.
The premises of various authors of a J source ( the Y-Wist source,) the P source (the earliest pentateuchal source, known as the priestly source,) the E source (Elohist source,) and the Deuteronomy source, reflect (in their way) real Jewish history even as the facts are expressed in scripture. Mainstream Scholars just can’t accept or make judgements about the truth of traditional Judaism’s claims. The content of JEPD however still expresses historical Jewish experiences.
For starters, when Moses has his first face to face experience of G-d in Midian, (at the burning bush,) and then goes back to Egypt, the Torah says Moses speaks directly to his kinsmen (the elders, the Levites, the spiritual shepherds of Israel,) to tell them that G-d spoke with him. He then says TO THEM, HASHEM HAS SENT ME TO YOU, just as HASHEM commanded him to say to them at the bush. Moses said, “they won’t believe me, what should I say to THEM.”
In the Torah, it is the job of the Levites (the purported authors of the P, D, and J sources,) to LEAD THE JEWS in the true worship of G-d, and to keep the knowledge of G-d safe from outside influence. MOSES must have realized this when he (as a newly rediscovered levitical Jew raised as an Egyptian in Pharoah’s court) went back to Egypt.
Moses knows There was already a community of G-d fearing Sons of Jacob, and elders of the Hebrew slaves, etc. That’s why he goes to them when he (Moses) claims to have had a prophetic experience.
As far as D (the Deuteronomy source) goes, Jews already believe that this book is what Moses (a Levite) wrote after receiving the tablets, etc. So, the idea that priests (Levites) of G-d wrote most of the Torah’s textual accounts, and that they kept the religion safe from outside influences is not threatening at all as you suppose.
The E source can be traditionally explained from reading the prophets. The Torah tells stories of all of Israel’s struggles as a nation with idolatry. Many Jews (the northern kingdom for example) worshipped all the different Elohim, ie the heavenly host, and forced their co religionists to do likewise.
The prophetic books all chronicle the struggle between Y-wists (the prophets) and the elohists, (people who worshipped G-d along with other partners, ie the host of heaven.) The Elohists (like the ones in northern kingdom) worshipped the whole heavenly host, (Baal , Asherah, (believed to be hashem’s consort.) DOING THIS BROKE DEUTERONOMY 4:19.
BTW, what do these verses mean to you? Numbers 11:16-17 Exodus 18:25-26 Deuteronomy 17:9-13 Nehemiah 8:8
What do you make of all these verses ESPECIALLY in light of Mathew 23:1-3?
Then Jesus said to the CROWDS (who may not have followed him) and TO HIS DISCIPLES : 2 “The teachers of the law and the PHARISEES sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4
The Torah tells you that G-d himself gave some of Moses’ spirit in judgement to the judges and Levites, and that they should be followed by the people for their good and preservation. It even shows G-d sent Moses himself to his brethren, the Levites.
As I hope you can see, the Documentary hypothesis needn’t be a threat to Jews. Scholars can impute questionable motives all they want, but the meat and potatoes of Jewish duty to Torah doesn’t change. The C.B Demille movie isn’t Jewish history.
Blessings man.
C.R.
So what is the basis of your assertion?
Or is it a mere assertion of your own?
The documentary hypothesis is just an assertion David, a scholarly hypothesis. I’m just saying, even if it can be verified it doesn’t impact the point Judaism is making about what is important. Christians are the ones who are always asserting things about someone else’s traditions, about someone else’s culture, and making these without adequate exposure to the worldview in question.
the Yahwist source (J) : written c. 950 BCE in the southern Kingdom of Judah.
the Elohist source (E) : written c. 850 BCE in the northern Kingdom of Israel.
the Deuteronomist (D) : written c. 600 BCE in Jerusalem during a period of religious reform.
the Priestly source (P) : written c. 500 BCE by Kohanim (Jewish priests) in exile in Babylon.
Even the documentary hypothesis posits the Levitical and royal role in preserving (editing/clarifying etc.) Jewish religion. If the Torah was written between 500-950 B.C.E. As the hypothesis states, The religious modus operandi is still just as it is expressed by the Torah.
This is very interesting, Con. Back in the days when you were a Christian, I would never have imagined myself saying that I’m beginning to appreciate that Comparative Religion degree of yours :).
Well, even the time as a Christian is part of who I am.
Of course, Con. It’s just fascinating to see you present the same information from a different perspective.
Its hard for people to appreciate that degree, because it requires a level of skepticism and distance from religious truth claims that most devout people find deeply unnerving. When I first started in college I was very protective, very hesitant of questioning deeply held views.
It takes a lot of courage to ask yourself why you hold these beliefs so deeply in the first place, and to see if they stand up to scrutiny.
I was kidding about your degree. Initially I would get annoyed when you mentioned it because you seemed to give the impression that one could only attain truth if one studied comparative religion at college when in my experience I knew that one can do the same thing by reading voraciously and studying hard and thinking analytically. (In fact, I think that in college you are not taught to think analytically, which is a shame.)
But at any rate, maybe I’m understanding you differently, but you aren’t giving that impression now at all :).
Hi Con, who or what made you leave Christianity? I read your input here and I am wondering one thing: do you think that Christianity was invented by the Romans or hijacked by them in the person of Constantine?
I know that the Orthodox Christian revere this guy when we know that he changed many things and hated the Jews… This is very disturbing to say the least!
Peace to you!
Here comes David with the ol’ christian “suicide bomb” argument!
The suicide bomb argument goes like this: Once a christian realizes that they have no case for believing in jesus, since the NT blatantly contradicts the Tanach, the christian gets so desperate that the christian attempts to slander the authenticity of the Tanach and even G-d Himself! (Chas V’Shalom!)
This phenomenon is unfortunately very common…
People like David who make this suicide bomb argument are essentially admitting that their belief in G-d is not dependent on His Torah, but rather, upon jesus.
Think about what that means: Even the NT writers did not need to verify jesus’s supposed “death and resurrection” in order for them to believe in the authenticity of the Torah as being a divinely inspired work of G-d. They believed in the words of the Tanach independent of jesus’s existence, just as other Jews did hundreds and hundreds of years prior!
David here’s the big secret: Jews certainly do have Emunah. No one is denying that. But when you claim to devote your Emunah to Tanach, but simultaneously claim to have Emunah in a book which contradicts the Tanach, in this case, the NT, you put yourself in an absurd position of idiocy.
You as a christian, claim to believe in the authenticity of the Tanach independent of the NT…But after further investigation, you basically admit that the only reason why you believe in the Tanach is because of what is said in the NT…But since what is written in the NT clearly contradicts what is said in the Tanach, this means that the NT must be false…Why? Because the claims of the NT concerning jesus’s supposed “messiahship” are completely dependent on the authenticity of the Tanach! In other words, if the Tanach is false, then the NT is false. But if the NT is false, this does not prove that the Tanach is false…
Christians who claim to believe in “god” solely because of their exposure to jesus in the NT do not believe in Torah in and of itself. They do not believe in Hashem, rather they believe in the false god of christianity, namely jesus.
This is an anachronistic way of thinking. It’s somewhat akin to saying that the only reason you believe in the authenticity of Algebra is because of Calculus: You cannot accept Calculus independent of investigating what Algebra is…Algebra is an integral part of Calculus.
Likewise, a christian sounds like an idiot when he or she tries to claim that they believe that jesus is the Messiah of the Tanach without even learning what the Tanach says in the first place!
But unfortunately for the christian, unlike calculus and algebra, the NT and the Tanach are not complementary to each other…Rather, they contradict each other…
Shalom
Dina,
It’s not a personal rant against “you” per se, but a counter argument to your unprovoked anti-Christian rant disparaging Christian values as pertaining our emphasis placed on God’s plan to draw as many as possible to himself in the age to come, and your misrepresentation of the Christian position of the standard for gaining life in the age to come as well as your denial Hebrew Scripture and denial of historical facts with regard to the various Jewish/Israelite positions over the centuries regarding the standard of who does and who doesn’t gain life in the age to come.
You erroneously claim that the “righteous” includes those who don’t believe God exists. As you can see by the verse below, the righteous serve God and the wicked do not. Please explain how you conclude that you can serve that which you don’t even believe exists.
It’s a relationship with God that is at the heart of the matter and motivates one to serve God. Going through the motions of outward acts of righteousness for personal gain for those who are not serving God (ie. those who don’t even believe that God exists) gains one nothing in the life to come.
JPS Malachi
3:18 Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.
On another subject with regards to your anti-Christian comments with respect to Jesus and what you mischaracterize as a vicious attack on the Pharisees. Is God “vicious” because He truthfully characterized the people as “stiff-necked”?
In the first place Jesus is not accusing ALL Pharisees, scribes and teachers of the Law; only those applicable to the accusations. His criticisms are qualified and descriptive in regards to whom it applies. For example, Matthew 23:13 criticizes those scribes and Pharisees who close the door on people seeking the kingdom of God (life in the age to come). He’s not talking to those to whom it doesn’t apply such as one would presume, the Pharisee Nicodemus.
But even if he was accusing all or nearly all (as was the case with God’s appropriate use of “stiff-necked”), the fact of the matter is truth is an absolute defense to the charge of defamation.
If what Jesus said was true then it is not defamation and it therefore wouldn’t be a vicious attack any more than God could be accused of a defaming vicious attack for speaking the truth about His stiff-necked people.
Just out of curiosity, why is it that you can accept that an entire people can be stiff-necked (meaning stubborn, going after their own ways, unwilling to submit to God’s will in the biblical context), but you have difficulty accepting that a much smaller segment of the population are stiff-necked?
Let me guess, its because Jesus said it.
David,
Either you are ungracious or you failed to note that I conceded your point about the non-uniformity of opinion among the rabbis concerning the afterlife and admitted my error in that regard. I challenge you now to admit your errors, some of which I listed for you in the previous comments.
I must also point out that you have still not addressed my central arguments; instead you are focusing on the error to which I already owned. Why will you not address my arguments directly?
Here is my comment with a list of your false statements that you will substantiate or retract if you are honest and the list of my as yet unanswered positions.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2015/05/10/daniel-7-and-acceptance-of-scripture-an-open-letter-to-bru/#comment-21035
Although you continue to evade, I will answer your further contentions:
I believe that good deeds will be rewarded and wicked deeds will be punished (absent repentance) as taught in the Hebrew Bible. I also believe that if God is fair–and He is–then He will take into account the reasons that different people don’t believe in God. Some people never heard of Him; some were indoctrinated to believe that it’s all a myth–but they lived righteously. If God is fair–and He is–then He will reward them for their righteous living. At any rate, I am content to let God sort it all out according to His justice and mercy. My business, as I stated previously, is with following God’s commandments, not with God’s business of reward and punishment (another point you failed to address). If God wanted us to focus more on His business, He would have talked about it more in the Torah.
About Jesus’s attacks on the Pharisees (or at least what the Christian scripture says he said), there is a great difference in Jesus’s words and the rebukes of the Hebrew prophets, and the difference is not because Jesus said it.
It seems that you think I hate Jesus or have some vendetta against him. I don’t. The truth is the truth, and I don’t care who says it. Jesus said some things (or at least your scripture attributes these sayings to him) with which I wholeheartedly agree, such as a large portion of his Sermon on the Mount. Are you projecting your hatred of the rabbis and the Talmud?
You ask why is it different for Jesus to call the Jews the children of the devil, liars, and murderers (in John no distinction among Jews is made)? Or to call the Pharisees vipers, hypocrites, and other awful names? (I make the point about John because you said that Jesus is not accusing all Pharisees. In John, all the Jews are lumped together.)
The condemnation of the Jews in Christian scripture is different because of its personal nature (all that name calling, for example). 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–in this last case, Paul is not even rebuking the Jews; he is slandering them to the Gentiles).
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.
So, David, that is why it is different for Christian scripture to condemn the Jews than for our own letters from God to chastise us, as a father chastises his son (Deuteronomy 8:5).
And THAT’s why he’ll be one of those who are Shocked when he “realizes” the True meaning of Isaiah 53.
Dina,
That doesn’t seem credible. Jesus was a Jew. You’re in denial and arbitrarily selective.
“Dina,
That doesn’t seem credible. Jesus was a Jew. You’re in denial and arbitrarily selective.”
David, I don’t know which one of my arguments you are responding to that you think isn’t credible, as I presented quite a lot of points to ponder, but one thing is for sure. I never denied that Jesus is a Jew.
At any rate, at no point have you presented a counterargument to my main points, instead attacking my character or making sweeping statements without proof. (An example of a sweeping statement is “You’re in denial and arbitrarily selective” without showing what you mean. You need to back up what you say with evidence. What am I in denial about? What am I arbitrarily selective about?)
This tells me that you have no argument.
And I’m sorry because I was looking forward to a good, long slog :).
Peace, man, as Con would say.
Dina to David “you ask why is it different for Jesus to call the Jews the children of the devil, liars, and murderers (in John no distinction among Jews is made)? Or to call the Pharisees vipers, hypocrites, and other awful names? (I make the point about John because you said that Jesus is not accusing all Pharisees. In John, all the Jews are lumped together.)”
Sorry to jump in, but no matter how many times that argument was addressed and explained it is still repeated. It looks like there is no way for you guys to see the answers. It really doesn’t! ” In John all the Jews are ‘ lumped together” I wonder if jesus had to ‘lump’ also himself in that hate , According to you he has to include himself as he also is a Jew. Then what about all thousand followers in the books of acts that are Jews , Nobody feels hated , Nicodemus in John asking questions is not feeling hated, sick people coming for the healing are not called any names. Jesus disciples do not receive a call’ let’s go and hate other jews” . Your conclusions are real nonsense. Also you do not understand the way gospels are written . They all portray the same events, but in each one the ‘ reporter’ focuses on different details. Gospel of John is not contradicting others and conveying the ‘call to hate all Jews” while others tend to hate just the leaders. . When particular
hypocritic character of a certain group of leaders is being addressed- this is what jesus related his words too. Not to people because they are Jews, not because they are pharisees, not because they reject him, but because the confronted groups’ teaching was hypocrisy with given examples to read. Jesus came to die for all Jews. He didn’t do selection; less or more hated or neutral.
Eric, the question isn’t which groups feel hated or don’t feel hated in Christian scripture. In fact, in real life, I don’t think the Pharisees felt hated at all. I don’t think Jesus hated them. I don’t even think he said all those things that are attributed to him.
The problem is that the speech itself is inflammatory, and it fell, not into the hands of the Jews to read as self-criticism so they could improve their ways (as with the Torah and Prophets) but into the hands of Gentiles who were already predisposed to hate Jews.
I’ve explained this many times but you don’t seem to be getting it.
Did you read the rest of my argument? About the differences between the two books? One is a book of self-criticism, the other a book that criticizes its theological enemies.
What is a morally higher road to take? To look inward and examine your own flaws, or to fling criticism at others?
While the Christian scriptures may never have been intended by their authors to be read that way, because their audience is Gentile, that is the de facto position.
Eric You have not read the Christian Scriptures – John’s Jesus dehumanizes those who don’t accept him simply because they don’t accept him – John 3:19-21 – If you like him then you are good and if you don’t like him then you are bad
Ypfriend, it looks to me you have no clue what Christians scriptures are teaching’
“John’s Jesus dehumanizes those who don’t accept him simply because they don’t accept him – John 3:19-21
” This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.”
Not coming to the light of God you call dehumanizing?hmm. interesting..
Verses 16-17 explain you what type of light is Jesus talking about. simple truth that God sent His son to the world to SAVE people. ( He doesn’t have to condemn sinners , he offers them his son who paid the price) You do not want salvation offered , then your choice. It is like at Noah’ times. The boat was ‘salvation’ and how many trusted God to board it? Just Noah’s family.
Eric
It seems that you don’t understand what John’s Jesus is saying – he is saying that if you don’t “come to the light” i.e. accept Jesus, then this proves that your deeds were evil and that you hate light but those who do “come to the light – i.e. accept Jesus are people who “live by the truth”
If that is not dehumanizing your opponents then what is?
Do you really believe that Eric? That everyone who doesn’t accept Jesus then he must be a “lover of darkness”? And that those who do accept him were “lovers of light” even before they accepted him?
No matter what you say, it’s the result. Not long ago I read an “News” article. It had nothing to do with religion but it was speaking of hypocrisy. It didn’t use That word, instead it used “pharisaic” as the pejorative. No matter WHAT you say it is YOUR bible, and its followers, that has created that pejorative whether it is to One Jew or the multitude.
Stiffnecked also means Not succumbing to Xtian proselytizing.
very good sharbano
Double entendre :).
Hello Sharbano
Are you sure you want to use that quote?
The Believer in Jesus the Messiah, proclaims the Lord God of Israel. Xtian proselytising as you say, should be rejected. Scriptally and contextual speaking, anyone who refused and rejected the Lords words were refered to by Moses as stiffnecked.
So I take then, scriptually you are the above, and we are in agreement at last?
Of course. There were Jews at Sinai who were stiffnecked enough NOT to worship the calf.
Hello
Yes there were I suppose some who didn’t worship something they shouldn’t have, but contextual they are not referred to as stiffnecked. These are referred to as faithful. Stiffnecked is a negative word not positive.
Moses does not refer faithful followers of God as stiffnecked.
Peace to all! I am not worthy to be here but I have a few questions concerning your knowledge of the Law and the Bible. Thank you!
Why Psalm 89 says: “35 Once for all, I have sworn by my holiness—
and I will not lie to David— 36 that his line will continue forever
and his throne endure before me like the sun; 37 it will be established forever like the moon,
the faithful witness in the sky.”
Did the line of David still in place? I do not understand. Can you help?
Thank you!
ChristianPaul,
G-d makes it clear that the Davidic line will never be cut off.
Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall remain for many days, having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor pillar, nor ephod nor seraphim.
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.
So even during times of exile, we can be certain that the throne of David will be established once again at the end of days. This also happened once during the 70 year Babylonian exile, where there was no king sitting on the throne, yet the Davidic dynasty was reestablished through Zerubabbel when he ruled as Governor of Judah after the exile. Currently, there is no one sitting on the throne of David…However, there are plenty of potential candidates among the Jewish people living today. At the end of days, someone from the Jewish people will be revealed to be the new king, also known as the Messiah son of David.
Shalom
Hello
This has echoes of Christianity and “double reference ” prohecy teaching which bends scripture to fit a distorted view of the hebrew texts.
And who is your “potential candidate “? This son of david the messiah.
Have you told him yet that he has potential?
Of course ruling out The King David of scripture who will return as the scripture quite clearly and literally speaks off.
Paul, I didn’t mention anyone in particular. I simply used scripture to demonstrate to you the fact that the Tanach speaks of a Davidic king who will rule at the end of days after a long exile. Whoever that will be will revealed when it is revealed. All we can do to hasten this redemption is to follow the Torah and hope for Hashem to establish His kingdom through the Davidic dynasty at the end of days.
May it happen speedily in our days!
Shalom
Thanks Yehuda
Im glad you cleared that up.
Thank you Yehuda!
I am trying with my poor faculties to understand. Then if I hear you right the Psalm 89 is a future promise.
Shalom!
ChristianPaul, it is also important to note that not only is the Davidic dynasty said to be eternal, but also the Levitical priesthood. Jeremiah 33:17-18 lumps these two eternal positions together:
Jeremiah 33:17 For so said the Lord: There shall not be cut off from David a man sitting on the throne of the house of Israel.
Jeremiah 33:18 And of the Levitic priests, there shall not be cut off from before Me a man offering up a burnt offering, or burning a meal-offering or performing a sacrifice for all time.
So yes, it can be interpreted as being a future promise that the Levitical priesthood and the Davidic dynasty will be restored again when the Moshiach comes at the end of days.
Shalom
Yehuda thank you! Very interesting!
If I understand correctly I must assume that a 3rd Temple will be built in order to fulfill the Scriptures. Do you think that the sacrificial system will be back into place? If yes what is the purpose of such a system?
Peace!
Hi Christian Paul,
You do not need to assume anything. The Scriptures are clear on this point. The Third Temple will be rebuilt and the sacrificial system will be restored (see for example Ezekiel 40-44).
ChristianPaul,
Yes, a Third Temple will be built when the Messiah comes as Ezekiel 37:24-28 says. Ezekiel chapters 40-48 describe this Temple in detail and some of the rituals that will take place once it is built, including the return of the sacrificial system.
The purpose of doing this is, in the most simple understanding, to fulfill what G-d expects us to do according to His Torah. Since we are in exile now, we have not Temple to perform many of the commandments that are required, so we long for the rebuilding of the Holy Temple and the coming of the Messiah son of David. The sacrifices serve many purposes in the Torah, including giving thanks to G-d as well as atonement for certain sins.
Shalom
Thank you Yehuda!
Are you a rabbi? Your response are quick and you seem to know much.
Peace!
ChristianPaul,
No, I am not a Rabbi. I’m just a Jewish guy. 🙂
ChristianPaul
David is still our king – Jews who are loyal to God have a loyalty in their hearts to the dynasty of David. His pslams still give expression to our national destiny
Dear one, how can we know that someone is from the Davidic line?
Do you have a special instruction to recognize the future king? I presume he can not be a Levite.
Therefore is it true that all Jews are from the Judah tribe therefore potential candidate to the messianic throne?
Thank you!
It should be noteworthy to anyone who has read the scriptures that there is very very very little written about the man who will be king at that time. When that time Does come, may it come speedily, it will be so obvious there will not be any doubt. There will be no need to ask his pedigree. The man isn’t as important as the state of the world will be. It is THIS that the majority of scripture speaks of.
Sharbano,
Do you have to bow down to him because he will be king?
Bowing is a sign of respect for someone of exalted status. Also when you leave a King’s presence you do NOT turn your back on him. I’m sure many have seen films of someone in a king’s presence and they bow and back up and leave.
Most have lost ALL traditional forms of respect. It used to be children called adults Sir. NEVER EVER would you refer to an adult, Or EVEN MORE SO, your parents, by their first name. Many do that today. You would refer to your teachers by Mr. X, or Mrs. X. If this kind of respect is given to these people how much more so to a King. You would bow and say Your Majesty.
One can see the benefits of this even in parenting. If a child misbehaves and he replies with a “Yeah” and you instruct him to say Yes Sir, his demeanor will change to one of humility. As it says, “Spare the rod (of authority) and spoil the child. Lack of respect by society has degraded the society
Thank you Sharbano for your quick and wise response!
Peace!
I had a thought.
Now that we are in The Nine Days, a period of intense mourning for the destruction of the First and Second Temples which both took place on the Ninth of Av, I’ve been thinking about the time period of the sacking of Jerusalem in the first century CE.
It occurred to me that many of the books of Christian Scripture, including the Gospels, were written before and after this time period. Notably, the most anti-Jewish of the Gospels, the Book of John, was written only a couple of decades after the destruction of the Temple.
This Gospel attacks the Jews not long after large numbers were slaughtered by the Romans and the rest enslaved and taken into exile. Matthew reviles the Pharisees only a decade or two after many of them were tortured and murdered or exiled.
It takes a certain kind of cruelty to beat a horse while it is down.
Who were the people who penned these words? What manner of men were they?
For the Christian who is interested in the truth, it’s a question worth pondering.
Quite the interesting point, considering the first book was written WELL AFTER his ‘death’. Which also makes useless the claim of any events foretold.
Dina,
Concerning the Jewish bible, when was it written? First the five books of Moses and then the rest?
Do you consider to be divine written by God like the Koran for the Muslim?
Christian Paul,
Yes and yes.
Dina thank you for your response!
The first yes is difficult for me to understand for I am asking a date if it is possible to give:
Concerning the Jewish bible, when was it written? First the five books of Moses and then the rest?
Peace!
Hi Christian Paul,
Sorry to be so unclear. I was answering yes to your question about the order of the books–first the First Five Books and then the rest. The writing of the Torah began in 1312 BCE. Later books were added at later dates. I do not know the dates for all of them.
Thank you Dina for your quick response!
1312 BCE does it correspond to Moses living Egypt with Israel?
Also how Moses knew what happen before the Flood? Did he get direct inspiration from God or learn it from the Egyptians?
Peace!
Hi Christian Paul,
If I may be so bold, may I recommend that read the Bible? It will answer all these questions.
Mrs Dina, sorry I am slow to understand. I did try to read the Bible but I did not see any date and Moses did not, I think, said how he knew what happen before the Flood.
For instance what are the Nephilim and the sons of God?
Thank you and peace to you!
.
That’s okay, Mr. Christian Paul. The Bible gives you the order of events. I’m the one who misunderstood; I thought that’s what you were asking.
Moses recorded the events in the Bible, so it makes sense to assume that he knew of them. I have to look up the Nephilim and sons of God but haven’t the time right now. I will try to get back to you on that as soon as I can, unless someone else responds in the meantime.
Peace and blessings!
The words, even letters, were dictated by G-d To Moshe. Don’t forget, the son of Noah, Shem was present and taught Jacob.
As far as the Nephelim they were men of renown. Using the sons of G-d is a misnomer. The Hebrew Elohim here doesn’t mean G-d, Elokim. The term Elohim merely means powers. In other words the sons of the powerful. This is the best way I can think to explain it. Moshe also is called Elohim, as are judges.
Thank you Dina and Sharbano!
May Israel live forever in the blessing of the Holy One!
And pray for the little nothing that I am. Thank you!
Peace!
Christian Paul,
You are a child of God created in His image, and He loves you more than you can imagine. Always remember that.
Hi Dina, you made me cry. Thank you for you comforting words!
May all people and nations recognize that you are beautiful witnesses of the Holy One!
Peace!
P.S.: I am fighting against pride and it is a difficult combat. If you have any advice I will hear you. Thank very much!
Hi Christian Paul,
You are asking an important question, because we all have pride which we must combat in one way or another.
I’d like to share my thoughts with you, and if anyone else wants to contribute, please jump in!
The first thing to understand about pride is that everything that happens to you that is outside of your control, including the circumstances of your life, comes from God. Recognizing that we are not in control is a giant step toward acquiring humility. We cannot control other people; we cannot control things like traffic or long waits at the doctor’s office; we can only control our own behavior.
The second thing to understand is that every life, including our own, has infinite worth and a unique place in God’s plan for the world.
Someone with true humility has an accurate perception of his flaws and virtues and thus can know what he needs to work on in order to grow. Such a person has self-confidence and can thus evaluate praise and criticism objectively. This is great for growth because he can accept constructive criticism and is teachable.
Therefore, someone who thinks too poorly or too highly of himself lacks humility.
A good technique to increase self-awareness in these matters is to take a moral inventory of yourself at the end of each day. Sit down with yourself and think through (or write through) the events of your day and ask yourself if you acted in a way that reflected arrogance. Ask yourself if you treated anyone with disrespect or unkindness. If you owe anyone an amends, apologize at the first available opportunity (unless by apologizing you might be causing more pain). Ask yourself if you forgot to bring God into the picture whenever you felt resentful about anything that was not in your control (such as resentment over someone else’s behavior or treatment of you).
This helps to increase self-awareness and can help you overcome all sorts of negative character traits. I like to also finish off by listing and thanking God for at least five things that I am grateful for that day. This helps me remember to appreciate life’s blessings and to become a more grateful and positive person.
I hope this helps!
Peace and blessings!
Christian Paul, I left out an important aspect of the personal inventory. When I review the events of the day, I also note what I did right, such as handling a tough situation with one of my kids calmly and effectively. This helps me to keep track of my progress and encourages me to continue going forward.
Hi Dina, I am very thankful for your words.
One phrase stroke me: “Therefore, someone who thinks too poorly or too highly of himself lacks humility.”
Therefore if I clearly understood you: humility equals truth on oneself.
Peace to you and many blessings!
I’m happy to be of service, Christian Paul.
If some one needs expert view on the topic of blogging
and site-building afterward i recommend him/her to
pay a quick visit this webpage, Keep up the good
job.
Reblogged this on 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources.