Incarnation and Definition of Marriage
Reverend Smith’s gaze shifted from Mary to Jane and back to Mary again. The Pastor broke the long silence: “What! You want to get married in MY church?! Don’t you know where I stand on the issue of same-sex marriage?”
Mary looked the Pastor in the eye: “This is not a “same sex marriage” – don’t you know that Jane is an incarnation of a man. She is one hundred percent man and one hundred percent woman. I fully expect you to sanction our marriage.”
Reverend Smith looked at Mary. It was Mary who broke the silence this time: “What’s the matter? You don’t believe in the incarnation?”
“I have four problems with your incarnation claim” said the Pastor. “Number one; there is no such thing as an incarnation. The Bible speaks of male and female as if it is self-understood that these are two separate entities. The usage of the language in the Bible doesn’t allow us to assume that these two terms (male, female) are interchangeable in any way.
Number two; even if I were to grant that such a thing was possible, how would you, Mary, know that this is true about Jane?”
At this point Mary interrupted the Pastor’s little lecture: “What do you mean: “how do I know”? – I have many proofs that Jane is the incarnation of a man. You didn’t even listen to me and you are already discrediting my theory.”
Reverend Smith continued: “Mary, your comment brings me to my third point. You didn’t SEE Jane as an incarnation of a man, it is something you believe you have proof for. Let me ask you this: What came first? Was it your devotion to Jane or was it your theory? Did you first begin a relationship with Jane and the come up with your theory? Or was it the other way round – that you first “discovered” that Jane was an incarnation of a man and only then did you enter into a relationship with her?”
It was Mary’s turn to remain silent.
The Reverend continued: “My fourth problem with your theory is that even if Jane was, in some mysterious way, an incarnation of a man, but presently all you see is a woman. Your relationship with her is still a relationship between two women. I can never condone, let alone bless, such a relationship as a marriage.”
Some Facts:
The One TO whom all worship is due and the ones FROM whom worship is due are distinct and separate throughout the Bible. At no point in the Scriptures is there any indication that these two are interchangeable.
The disciples of Jesus never SAW that Jesus was an incarnation of the Divine – it was a theory they “discovered”.
The followers of Jesus only came up with this theory AFTER they were already fully devoted to him.
After everything is said and done, the Jesus that the Christian reads about in the Christian Scriptures has all of the characteristics of a created being. When a relationship is formed with the character described in the book, no matter what theory is appended to the character, the relationship remains a relationship between two created beings.
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 
Rabbi, that is an absolutely brilliant analogy!
R’B, for the first two sentences I was puzzled to where you were going with this. Upon reading the third sentence I broke out laughing, for then I knew, LOL!!! I agree; this was brilliant!
However, there is one thing – “The disciples of Jesus never SAW that Jesus was an incarnation of the Divine – it was a theory they “discovered”. The followers of Jesus only came up with this theory AFTER they were already fully devoted to him.”
I know many Christians believe this also, but I don’t think it is correct. I see no evidence for the incarnation until AFTER the death of the Apostles. It wasn’t until the Council of Nicaea 300 years after Yeshua, that the incarnation was formally accepted and all other views declared heresy.
In my opinion there should be made a distinction between the ideas of a “incarnation” and the Holy Spirit of God coming upon a person for a specific work, in this case the work of agency – the result is the same minus misplaced worship.
Kavi, take note.
Thank you!! Yashar koach!! This is now my favorite way to explain to others the problem with worshiping anything but Hashem Himself. This is super geshmack!
Isaiah 31:3 –
וּמִצְרַיִם אָדָם וְלֹא-אֵל Egypt is man and not G-d (The whole verse: Now the Egyptians are men, and not God, and their horses flesh, and not spirit; so when the LORD shall stretch out His hand, both he that helpeth shall stumble, and he that is helped shall fall, and they all shall perish together.)
Hosea 11:9 –
כִּי אֵל אָנֹכִי, וְלֹא-אִישׁ – For I am G-d and not a man (The whole verse: I will not execute the fierceness of Mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim; for I am God, and not man, the Holy One in the midst of thee; and I will not come in fury.)
We see from Isaiah that a man is not G-d (Egypt is man and not G-d) and conversely, from Hosea, G-d is not a man (For I am G-d and not a man). So, the Tenach is teaching us that if you’re a human you are automatically not G-d and if you’re G-d, you’re automatically not human, and never the twain shall meet according to Tenach.
“and never the twain shall meet according to Tenach.”
-except in agency-
Specifically the agency of God in Messiah.
What about the agency of God in Moses? Or God in Isaiah or God in any Prophet?
What’s the difference between the agency of God in Moses and God in Messiah?
Alan,
Absolutely!
But just as we have a record in Tanach of God empowering different angels differently for different jobs, so God empowers different men differently for different jobs.
CP, with all due respect, I’m getting confused by this conversation. I wrote “and never the twain shall meet according to Tenach” meaning never will man become God, nor God become man. And you replied “except through agency of God in Messiah” meaning you think there is a situation where man and God can become each other. I replied by asking you what’s the difference between God in Moses and God in Messiah because I’m sure you don’t think that Moses was God. Then you replied that God uses different men for different jobs meaning that no man can be God, but just a messenger (shaliach) of God.. Something is wrong with our communicating. One or both of us is not staying on track. It’s a little frustrating.
I think CP does not believe Yeshua is G-d. He does not believe in the trinity, and believe Yeshua should not be worshipped as such… Am I right?
RT, I believe you are correct. CP maintains that Jesus is not God, however he holds that Jesus is (a) messiah, and for some reason he thinks he needs to revere/respect Jesus, actually almost worship Jesus, if not actually worship him. If it is just a strong respect, then Jesus would be no greater than say President of the US or Mexoco. I think the great respect for Jesus comes out CP’s idea of Jesus providing atonement.
cflat7 and RT, CP believes that Jesus is the living, breathing Torah.
Jesus is the Torah. You need the Torah to get to God. Since Jesus equals Torah, you need Jesus to get to God. Since Torah = Jesus = man, you need a man to get to God. This is avodah zarah.
Dina, your definition of avodah zarah is narrower than as defined by Tanach.
Daniel 7:13-14
I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, 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.
Read the interpretation CP. This does not talk about your blessed Yeshua… Read the interpretation!
Alan, RT, Eleazar,
I believe in not going beyond the Text for essential doctrine. Yeshua straightforwardly claimed to be Messiah. The claim he is God is something he never straightforwardly said and must be interpreted from Scripture. Yeshua also said no one knows him except the Father, in light of the explicit words of Yeshua I’m puzzled how Christians an make the Trinty an essential doctrine.
Simple, your messiah is Saviour, lord and does many things G-d only is allow to do. Now, he claimed that before Abraham was he is and that he is the only way to G-d. You basically have two gods. Your devotion is split between G-d and Yeshua your savior. This as per Torah is wrong and the worst sin. If you want to have Yeshua as savior without him being G-d, then it makes you a polytheist… Something that Jews have accused Christians since a long time… Maybe they were tired of it and invented the trinity afterward?
RT,
Essentially you limit God to working invisibly ONLY by himself WITHOUT using anyone or anything as tools to accomplish His work.
However, God does more than use “tools”, He delegates authority.
But does not share His Glory! His authority should be clearly defined and the people that have been given authority should be clearly known. The prophets where known, kings were anointed, etc. Yeshua, account was only based on his followers and clearly did not accomplish what the Messiah should have accomplish. Furthermore, he was not the son of David, being born of the holy spirit (a fact that nobody can verify)
>>>>>>Yeshua straightforwardly claimed to be Messiah. <<<<
And none of the messianic prophecies were fulfilled.
And then he died.
False claim.
End of story.
Wait till he come back, wait… die, and maybe in a few thousand of years he will. He will come back in the clouds of heaven! Wait wasn’t that a vision, Beasts are everywhere, what out!
This is also equals to two gods. The BIG G-d sending the small god (Yeshua/Torah) to save his creation. I guess the god of CP is not powerful enough to save his own creation. He has to send someone else and kill him for the sins of others. What a mean god CP!
RT,
Psalm 82:1
“God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment”
Elohim means mighty… What’s your point?
The KJV translates Strong’s H430 in the following manner: God (2,346x), god (244x), judge (5x), GOD (1x), goddess (2x), great (2x), mighty (2x), angels (1x), exceeding (1x), God-ward (with H4136) (1x), godly (1x).
what is mankind that you are mindful of them,
human beings that you care for them? You have made him a little lower than Elohim.
>>>>>>RT,
Psalm 82:1
“God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment”<<<<
So you are saying Tanakh teaches polytheism?
Yes or no?
Elohim can mean mighty. It can be rulers etc. There is not two gods. The Elohim of Psalm 82 speak of Rulers. G-d rules over them, that’s all it say. It does not speak of Jesus, nor does that verse has anything mysterious…
Right again, RT. In Exodus it says that Moses will be an e-lohim to Aaron. It means he will be his leader.
Maybe Moses was part of a trinity of a sort… Elohim is plural…
RT,
No, Tanach does NOT teach polytheism! 😳
However, it does teach a pantheon of strong rulers in the Spritual Realm – ALL subject to Hashem; El Elyon; The Most High God.
In the spiritual realm… maybe, but on earth, there are kings and queens and rulers that are under G-d. Again, those rules and strong rulers are not worshipped like Jesus. False gods are worshipped, some emperors were worshipped and Jesus is worshipped. This is all wrong! Only HaShem of all the Elohim, who is also, God over all Elohim should be worshipped…
RT,
I agree!
However each level of God appointed authority demands proper respect proportional to the level of God given authority.
This is also equals to two gods. The BIG G-d sending the small god (Yeshua/Torah) to save his creation.
RT, The Tanakh itself gives you this phenomenon of G-d sending his sock puppet that must be obeyed at all costs.
G-d does not share glory (Isaiah 42:8)
G-d is alone, there is no other savior besides him
(Isaiah 45:5 Isaiah 43:11 Deuteronomy 4:35,39 Deuteronomy 6:4 Deuteronomy 32:39 2 Samuel 7:22 1Kings 8:60 2 KINGS 5:15 2 Kings 19:15 1 Chronicles 17:20 Nehemiah 9:6 Psalm 18:31 Psalm 86:10 Isaiah 37:16,20 Isaiah 44:6,8 Isaiah 45:21 Isaiah 46:9 Hosea 13:4 Joel 2:27 Zechariah 14:9)
G-d appoints an agent who bears his name, acts as his mouthpiece, (sometimes speaking in 1st person or interchangeably with G-d such as in the burning bush or Gideon’s encounter,) and who is one in whom the people will have faith forever.
(Gen. 32:24 – 30 Gen. 31:11-13 Gen. 19:1-24 Gen. 16:7-14 Exodus 3:2 Exodus 7:1 Exodus 3:12 Exodus 23:20-23 Judges 2:1-3 Judges 6:11-24 Judg. 13:3, 6 and 21 Deuteronomy 18:15-19 Jeremiah 23:6 Isaiah 9:6 Deuteronomy 11:15 Deuteronomy 17:11 Deuteronomy 28:14
The Tanakh has no issues whatsoever with having a Shaliach or angel that says “I am G-d” metaphorically, or spiritually. It has no issues taking an angel and saying to the people “you must obey him.”
The debate over things like trinity and incarnation is actually absurd because the Bible doesn’t spend time asking how G-d does such a thing, it merely and freely states that he does a thing. If a messiah shows up, and Jews start saying his name is “hashem our righteousness,” and he is the mouthpiece of hashem that we must follow, nobody will call them heretics, if the guy builds the temple and regathers Israel.
The trinity and incarnation as doctrines only exist because later gentiles wanted to understand the logic of how you could call yourself a monotheist, and yet still accept the premise of the agent who speaks interchangeably with G-d like a temporary meat puppet.
All Orthodox trinitarians agree that Jesus is functionally subordinate to the father. That means that in Christian theology, Christian’s agree that Jesus is subordinate in will to the father. Jesus’ job is not to be fawned over, but to hand the kingdom over to the father, and to follow his will. That is the definition of the role of the agent.
Its like I’ve said, Christians have not invented this, they were not the last to use this theological model in Jewish history, etc.
Concerned Reader,
That was an awesome answer. I just take issue with Christians making it an essential doctrine resulting in untold division even to the death of many a righteous person.
Concerned Reader,
You write,
“RT, The Tanakh itself gives you this phenomenon of G-d sending his sock puppet that must be obeyed at all costs.”
I once asked RT a question and, since I received no response, I will ask you. . .
How does your nefesh “tabernacle” in your physical body?
____________________
It doesnt matter how, as a nefesh is not an object of worship.
Concerned Reader,
Isn’t this blog post about incarnation?
Perhaps I am mistaken, but isn’t your theory of incarnation encapsulated in the words “sock puppet”?
If so, then my question is valid.
________________
G-d did that. As long as he also said that he will not do it for himself and forbid anybody to worship man, your point is irrelevant!
Behold the suck puppet of god, who came to take the sins of the world… Make sense…
RT,
The fact that neither of us knows how the nefesh exists in our body is, actually, the most intelligent answer.
We know nefesh is in us– we don’t know how.
It is therefore most “conceivable” that G-d Himself can be that nefesh– He is a Spirit.
And to become a Holy Redeemer of mankind, G-d promised to take on flesh in some manner in order to conquer sin through suffering [Genesis 3]
______________________
As such, it may not be so boring for us to examine more about this “seed of a woman”–
“And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your seed and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.” [Genesis 3:15]
For example, from Genesis one question would be,
“Who are the seed of satan?”
______________________
Where is Satan in this verse?
“And to become a Holy Redeemer of mankind, G-d promised to take on flesh in some manner in order to conquer sin through suffering.”
Where does Genesis 3 have God promise to take on flesh in any matter in order to conquer sin through suffering?
This is a flat out lie. Have you no shame?
Kavi,
Where in Tanach does it say that Hashem is Spirit?
Tenach says a woman can have seed too, Genesis 24:60 –
And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her: ‘Our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of ten thousands, and let thy seed possess the gate of those that hate them.’ וַיְבָרְכוּ אֶת-רִבְקָה, וַיֹּאמְרוּ לָהּ–אֲחֹתֵנוּ, אַתְּ הֲיִי לְאַלְפֵי רְבָבָה; וְיִירַשׁ זַרְעֵךְ, אֵת שַׁעַר שֹׂנְאָיו. 60
Genesis 3:15 –
וְאֵיבָה אָשִׁית, בֵּינְךָ וּבֵין הָאִשָּׁה, וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ, וּבֵין זַרְעָהּ: הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ, וְאַתָּה תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב. {ס} 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; they shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise their heel.’
If the verse is about a reptile, then the seed are the physical offspring of the reptile. If the deeper meaning is the Satan, I don’t know how the Satan can have offspring? How do you think the Satan can have offspring? Do you believe as the NT says, the Satan’s offspring are the Jews?
“This is a flat out lie. Have you no shame?”
I honestly don’t think KAVI’s intention is to ‘shamelessly lie’.
Ha, coming from you that’s actually funny.
Kavi, “zara” is properly translated as descendants. Not “Seed” in this context. Women have in many other places “seeds”. Read agar, your translation will say descendant but it is the same word. Genesis 3 does not speak of Satan, but of a serpent. Also, your theory contradict what G-d said simply and purely. I am NOT A MAN. Do not worship any Host of heavens (Including Jesus the MAN). Curst is HE who trust in MAN.
If you want to take vague interpretation of the new testament to prove a point, at least it should not contradict the explicit statements of the Bible!
“This is a flat out lie. Have you no shame?”
I agree with CP, all what Kavi does in unintentional. He only sees the Old testament through the lights of the non-testament. If he would be a Mormon, Jesus would be Satan’s half brother and he would see proofs of that in the Tanakh and new testament… As he is a Christian, he sees Jesus in Genesis 3. I was there once, and was puzzled about the mysterious Seed of the woman. He listened to too many “preachers” who have been thought the same theory, and so forth, until the new testament imposters (I mean writers)
I cannot understand your defense of Kavi. He explicitly stated that God promised in Genesis 3 to “take on flesh” to “conquer sin through suffering.”
Come on, RT, Genesis 3 doesn’t say that ANYWHERE. You will not find such a promise ANYWHERE in Tanach. How could he say that with a straight face and then expect us to take him seriously?
Genesis 3 does not say that, but Kavi think it does. In fact, he probably have his Cross-reference bible that links it to:
Romans 16:20
The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
1 John 3:8
Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.
John 8:44
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
On top of that, he probably hears sermons after sermons saying that the serpent is Satan and the “seed” is Jesus.
The poor guy is deceived, just as much as he still think that Isaiah 7 talks about the incarnation of a virgin. He goes day to day and search the scriptures to prove that Jesus is the messiah. He listens to preachers, just to comfort his own soul and convince himself that worshiping a man is fine! His whole life is based with the fact that he has found Jesus, who is G-d, and that he forgave his sins. He would actually die for that man. He also think that the devil is speaking through me (John 8:44), he also avoid any preaching that does not agree with what he believes, just in case that the devil, the serpent of old, would deceive him. He will not even read what I am saying, actually, he probably just pass through and ignore most of what we all say. Because we are all hell bound and the spirit of truth is not in us. Only those who are born again (Those who believe as he does) have the truth. Anybody else is doomed to hell and cannot do any good. His friends agree with him and all those Jolly Missionary try to convince the rest of the world that they are right (without checking if it is indeed the truth). If they get opposition, well, again, it’s the god of this age who speak through them and they are blinded. And so forth,… My dear Kavi, you are bless, as it is said “Blessed are those who believe without seeing!”
If that is the case, RT, then it is truly sad.
Yes indeed. I start talking with Kavi on dailyminyan.com a long time ago (at least 2015) and he has never been willing to agree on the slightest point, even if it is as obvious as Isaiah 7.
Dina,
Q: “Where is Satan in this verse?”
From Genesis 3,
[a] How can a physical beast of the field speak to Chava? [v1]
[b] How does a physical beast have a mind to twist G-d Words and deceive Chava? [v1]
[c] G-d made all physical creatures of the field– including the snakes– Yet, “THE Serpent” is more cunning than any physical creature He made– this being is unique. [v1]
[d] The word “cunning” is used of people elsewhere in Scripture– not animals [v1]
[e] How can a physical beast have “seed” that impacts the whole human race? [v15]
Logically then, G-d is not speaking about a physical creature– but a spiritual being.
And in Tanakh, the only named evil spirit that converses with G-d in enmity with the righteous is “satan”. [see Job and Zechariah]
_____________________________
Kavi, do you know what circular reasoning is? It is what you just did. You decided (or others decided for you) that the snake is Satan, and then you created a list of questions that seems to support your conclusion.
The fact is that nowhere does the verse talk about Satan.
You ask a strange question, too. How could the snake have seed that will impact generations? Therefore, it must be talking about Satan! So let me ask you, how can Satan have seed that will impact generations? How can Satan have seed, period?
Alan,
Q: “Do you believe as the NT says, the Satan’s offspring are the Jews?”
A: NO– It is a common misunderstanding– the BC/NT does not teach it.
How so?
>> Yeshua was a Jew.
>> Yeshua’s Mother was a Jew.
>> Yeshua’s disciples were Jews.
Why would Yeshua call Himself and those close to Him, “satan’s offspring”?
____________________
However, your question from the Gospel of John is relative to the discussion of Genesis 3. . .
For we read,
“Yeshua said to them, “If G-d were your Father, you would love Me, for I have come here from G-d. I have not come on My own, but He sent Me.
Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you are unable to accept My message. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires.
He [Satan] was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me!” [John 8:42-44]
From this testimony in John, Yeshua is turning back the pages to the beginning of recorded time to teach us that there is a “perpetual enmity” between “the evil” vs “the righteous”.
___________________________
Kavi,
The way I understand what Jesus is saying in this passage is that the default state of the Jews is they are the seed of Satan, and they can only go out from this status if they believe in him.
Here’s another good one –
1 Thessalonians
2:14 For you became imitators, brothers and sisters, of God’s churches in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, because you too suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they in fact did from the Jews, 2:15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets and persecuted us severely. They are displeasing to God and are opposed to all people
If you have a chance, I’d appreciate it if you could show me where in Tenach it says that God is Spirit?
RT
You just explained most of my relatives who are catholic.
Alan,
You wrote,
>>>”The way I understand what Jesus is saying in this passage is that the default state of the Jews is they are the seed of Satan, and they can only go out from this status if they believe in him.”
_________________
However, I think the B’rit Chadashah/NT shows that all mankind is sinful.
[] As to the Gentiles and their hardness of hearts,
“. . . You must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking.
They are darkened in their understanding and alienated from the life of G-d because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardness of their hearts.” [Ephesians 4 and Isaiah 25]
[] As to the Jew,
“But their minds were closed. For to this day the same veil remains at the reading of the old covenant. It has not been lifted, because only in Messiah can it be removed. . . ” [2 Corinthians 3 with Isaiah 6]
[] As to both,
“. . . for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin.” [Romans 3]
__________________
If we go back to Tanakh, everyone sins and therefore everyone is set to die from the day we are born–
[] “The L-RD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.” [Genesis 2]
[] “Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous, no one who does what is right and never sins.” [Ecclesiastes 7]
Satan sowed his “seed” in Adam/Chava, and ever since, sin has sprouted in mankind both physical and spiritual death.
__________________
Kavi,
I appreciate you finding these verses. The translation of Ecclesiastes 7:20 totally butchered the verse. Please see it in the original Hebrew or a good translation.
Q: I agree that every human has a yetzer hara, but in the NT is there any other people besides the Jews who are EVER mentioned as having Satan as their father. Not just that they have the stain of Satan in them from Adam and Eve, but that they are the children of Satan? Any other people in the NT besides the Jews who are “opposed to all people” as Paul says in the NT.
Dina,
“Kavi, do you know what circular reasoning is? It is what you just did. You decided (or others decided for you) that the snake is Satan, and then you created a list of questions that seems to support your conclusion.”
Kavi: Very well, I will re-state the facts as facts, rather than use Socratic methodology.
_______________________
Chava was matched against a cunningly evil and ancient spirit being–
[] “THE Serpent” is a descriptive title– he is greater than the beasts of the field.
[] “THE Serpent” is unique, being able to communicate mind-to-mind with both G-d and mankind.
[] “THE Serpent” is uniquely above beasts of the field– he took the Words of G-d and twisted them into lies.
[] “THE Serpent” is uniquely not a beast of the field– he is innately immoral.
[] In Tanakh, the word “cunning” is only applied to human behavior.
[] Beasts of the field do not have “seed” to commingle with mankind.
[] In Job and Zechariah, “Satan” is described doing the same things as in Genesis 3.
In Tanakh,
— G-d has multiple names
— people can have multiple names
— As such, it is no stretch to know that “Satan” has multiple names.
The Tanakh teaches that “THE Serpent” was never a lowly beast of the field– “THE Serpent” is “Satan”.
______________________
Is the serpent always Satan? Or is it sometimes just a serpent? And how do you know? Can the serpent also symbolize Jesus?
Dina,
The gematria of co’ach nachash (power of the snake) is 386. The gematria of Yeshua is 386.
Haha, good one, Alan!
CP wrote somewhere that Jews are so busy laughing at the myth of Jesus’s trial and crucifixion that they miss the reality behind it.
I don’t know where he got the idea that Jews are laughing. No one is laughing. That myth cost millions of Jewish lives and the oppression, degradation, and torture of millions more. Jews know that if Christians reject this myth and accept the reality, they will never have to fear a resurgence of Christian hate (which, yes, could happen, given how history has an awful tendency to repeat itself). This is why the rare Jew who engages with Christians screams the truth from the rooftops.
In the stirring words of Professor William Nicholls:
The time has come, and came long ago, for Christians to drop all accusations against the Jewish people in the death of Christ. The facts set out in this account of his death [the account in the preceding chapter] are no longer in dispute among serious and impartial scholars. There can be no doubt that the Romans bear the responsibility for Jesus’ death, which they and not the Jews actually brought about. If any person is to blame for Jesus’s death, it is Pontius Pilate, so implausibly represented in the Gospels as his defender. In any scholarly inquiry, many conclusions remain uncertain. This is not one of them. The Jews are innocent of Jesus’ death [Christian Anti-Semitism: A History of Hate, Chapter One].
Alan, I am sure you know that no observant Jews believe the Temple was destroyed for no reason. We believe the Temple was destroyed for the sin of gratuitous hatred (among other reasons). I agree with CP that the death of Jesus and the destruction of the Temple are not coincidentally juxtaposed. The destruction of the Temple, the sacking of Jerusalem, the scattering of Jews across the Diaspora all prove that Jesus was simply not the messiah.
CP is recycling an old lie I had hoped I had laid to rest. Alan, don’t believe him for a minute that the Jewish leadership was destroyed. The Pharisaic leadership remained largely intact, with famous leaders moving to Yavneh and establishing a major center for Torah learning there.
A point Christians refuse to acknowledge is that Pharisaic Judaism, the one most derided in their false scriptures, is the only one God saw fit to preserve after He destroyed the Temple and the only one He saw fit to preserve throughout the generations. The same fate befalls every group of Jews which falls away, whether to embrace Christianity or to liberalize Judaism (as in the Reform movement): a complete loss of Jewish identity usually within three to five generations. This is the definition of karet, the worst punishment in the Torah, but it is a natural consequence. Wittingly or not, those who break away from traditional Judaism forever cut themselves off from the people of Israel.
Dina,
Thank you very much for this very helpful post. And thanks for the chizuk! Yashar koach! Happy Shushan Purim.
Dina;
“Haha, good one, Alan!”
– one sentence later –
“I don’t know where he got the idea that Jews are laughing. No one is laughing.”
Now that is funny!
Come on, CP. Did she say no one is laughing at anything? No. She said: “CP wrote somewhere that Jews are so busy laughing at the myth of Jesus’s trial and crucifixion that they miss the reality behind it. I don’t know where he got the idea that Jews are laughing. No one is laughing [AT THE MYTH OF JESUS’S TRIAL AND CRUCIFIXTION]. That myth cost millions of Jewish lives and the oppression, degradation, and torture of millions more.”
When she said, “Haha, good one” we were not laughing at the myth of Jesus’s trial and crucifixion. I made a gematria that “proves” the nachash represents Jesus (which was a joke because this gemartria proves nothing!). This was in response to Kavi who believes the Nachash is Satan without solid proof. It’s funny how one can “prove” almost anything with gematrias, drashot and wishful thinking.
You don’t know how to follow context. I was laughing about something Alan said, and not laughing at something you said.
Dina,
Back to your comment –
Forget the propaganda – from both sides.
Realize who the real enemies of Israel are and always have been,
They are NOT the
Egyptians
Persians
Babylonians
Greeks
Romans
Muslims
Crusaders
The real enemies are from within,
Otherwise none of the above could touch Israel.
IMHO if Judaism truly wants to be blessed by God, they should renounce the decision of a corrupt Sanhedrin 2000 years ago that turned a innocent devout observant Jew over to Rome for execution. It was these same people who brought judgment on Israel. I totally understand why you reject Christianity, but to be a supporter of injustice again puts Israel at risk.
CP,
I’m not answering for Dina but I’d like to say that I agree with you that the greatest enemies and danger to the Jewish people are the enemies from within, namely the minim and apikorsim.
Is the NT consistent in saying that Jesus was innocent according to kosher Torah law? It seems to give two kosher reasons why according to kosher Torah law Jesus was not innocent: either because he was letting people believe that he was a new kind of demigod – the Son of God – or because he was putting the entire Jewish people at risk of being murdered by the Romans because he was letting people believe he was the king of the Jews and therefore making Rome fear that the Jews would rebel. The NT admits there were 1 or 2 kosher reasons for the Sanhedrin’s ruling that he was guilty.
CP thinks that Jews need to confess and repent of the murder of Jesus, a murder committed by the Romans. The story of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus in the gospels is a complete fabrication.
But if that’s what CP thinks, then he’s in big trouble.
If all Jews need to confess and repent of Jesus’s murder, then let all Christians confess and repent of the murder of millions of Jews by their co-religionists.
They could start by finding out exactly what transpired between Christians and Jews over the last 2000 years. Then the soul searching can begin.
I’m not holding my breath. Christians want Jews to forgive and forget and just move on. They want them to do this without Christian repentance. But they can’t move on from the death of one Jew from ancient times whose death wasn’t even the Jews’ fault.
To call this a double standard is to understate the case.
The soul searching can also begin with understanding that this evil belief of CP’s is what caused the murders and oppressions of the Jews in the first place.
Alan,
The “funnies” continue……..
You see I never wrote what Dina said –
And now she has you quoting me as if I said it!
This has been very typical of this one person.
At first it was very frustrating, irritating and maddening
Constantly having to correct
Remember when the serpent subtly changed God’s words and fed them back to Chava?
—- same methodology.
I’m not sure she even knows she does it
But given she is intelligent skilled writer and professional editor
The author of a New York Bestseller
It is difficult to believe it is unintentional.
We’ve fought over it in the past
Things started to get ugly
I had to catch myself and repent
Nowadays I just try to ignore and laugh it off, hoping perhaps others see what I do.
But when others start to quote me when they are really quoting what Dina said I said
— that’s when you’ll see me respond, as now.
Btw, here is what I really said, (notice the subtle addition of “trial and crucifixion” making it appear insensitive).
“It’s bad enough Christianity has turned this into legend paralleling greek god stories, but the Jews are so busy laughing at the myth, they fail to realize the reality behind it”
CP,
I’ll just keep my nose out of this one.
Me too, Alan ;).
Alan,
I am not very familiar with gematria numerology, but Yeshua is 386.
Your reference should have been serpent = 358, the same number as mashiach.
It’s not a particularly critical issue as I’m not aware of anyone who puts stock in gematria, but for future reference you may wish to know.
_____________________
Kavi,
My gamatria was only a joke. There was nothing serious about it. I was aware of the nachash = mashiach gematria.
Alan: “I made a gematria . . . in response to Kavi who believes the Nachash is Satan without solid proof.”
Kavi: In contrast to what I present, what do you make of the aggadic midrash Pirke De-Rabbi Eli’ezer?
This widely-read tannaitic source says. . .
[] “The Serpent” was an archangel– Samael
[] Samael seduced and impregnated Chava for her to give birth to Cain
Personally, I would think both of us would find this story mythological–
____________________
If you do not like the evidence from Torah, nor the midrash– what are you seeking as “proof”?
___________________
I wrote last week that the simple meaning of nachash is snake and the deeper meaning could very well be other things including Satan.
Alan,
For myself, I would be hard pressed to find G-d provide “proof” of anything–
Certainly, I see that He provides us the testimony of His Words and Deeds– but it’s still up to us to believe it is the G-d of Tanakh who speaks and the G-d of Tanakh who does.
As such, G-d requires Faith to please Him,
>> For G-d provided no “proof” to wicked Abram– but Abram believed G-d’s Words and G-d reckoned that Faith for righteousness. [Genesis 15]
__________________________
In regards to The Serpent in Gan Eden. . .
You spoke of yetzer hara– which I think is far, far more reasonable than the myth in the Pirke de-Rabbi Eli-ezer!
Yet the Talmud states that yetzer hara, the Angel of Death, and Satan are the same [Bava Batra 16a]
So if you start from there–
>> Who is this “He” [“hu” ה֚וּא] who bruises the head of The Serpent?
>> How does He bruise the head of The Serpent?
>> Who is this “seed” of a woman who has the power to overcome The Serpent?
>> Why does He bruise the head of The Serpent?
I believe G-d Himself reveals hidden matters over time– and the process of revealing redemption and the Mashiach Redeemer starts in the Beginning.
__________________________
KAVI
This is for you
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2012/11/22/humility-and-arrogance/
Alan,
Q: “If you have a chance, I’d appreciate it if you could show me where in Tenach it says that God is Spirit?”
K: I think we can find several references,
[] “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of G-d was hovering over the face of the waters.” [Genesis 1]
[] “Then the L-RD G-d formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” [Genesis 2]
[] “O G-d, G-d of the spirits of all flesh. . .”‘ [Numbers 16]
[] “May the L-RD, the G-d of the spirits of all flesh . . . [Numbers 27]
We also find,
>>”Where can I go to escape Your Spirit? Where can I flee from Your presence?” [Psalm 139]
>> “The Spirit of G-d has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” [Job 33]
>> “Thus declares the L-RD who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him. . .” [Zechariah 12]
_________________
The L-RD is The Spirit who creates all lesser spirits. . .
Satan and demons are some of those lesser spirits– and a lesser spirit cannot create physical “seed”.
_________________
Kavi,
Thank you for doing this reseach and for finding all of these verses that mention the spirit of God. There’s a difference between saying “something of God” vs. “something is God” or “God is something”. Devarim 4:24 says that God is a fire – “For the Lord thy God is a devouring fire, a jealous God.” Maybe He is a voice – Psalms 29:5 talks about the “voice of God” – “The voice of the LORD breaketh the cedars; yea, the LORD breaketh in pieces the cedars of Lebanon.” Maybe He is a rock, Devarim 32:18 – “Of the Rock that begot thee thou wast unmindful, and didst forget God that bore thee.” Maybe He is a body of water – Jeremiah 17:!3 – “The ritual bath of Israel is the Lord. (mikveh also means hope).”
God created all of these things in order to have a relationship with us but he is not limited by those creations and His essence is not defined by those creations.
Alan,
You write, “There’s a difference between saying “something of God” vs. “something is God” or “God is something””
Both Orthodox Judaism and Followers of The Way affirm that G-d is Spirit– i.e., “not a physical being”
So, we cannot reduce G-d to the level of His creation.
Let’s look at ourselves,
>>> “I am angry”– does this mean I am an emotion?
>>> “I am hungry”– does this mean I am a feeling?
>>> “I am a rock”– am I really? . . . or, am I just describing a steadfast characteristic?
Yes, the Scripture you mention are indeed physical descriptions of G-d– However, created physical things are not G-d even when He chooses such things to describe Himself.
I would think G-d would say to both of us– “EHYEH ASHER EHYEH” [Exodus 3]
_______________________
Tanakh interchangeably uses “My Spirit”, “Holy Spirit”, “Spirit of G-d”, and “Spirit of the L-RD”
The term, “Spirit of G-d”, simply identifies who This Spirit is– distinguishing Him from non-demonic spirits, demonic spirits, and the spirit of man. . .
Since G-d does not share His Glory– The Spirit of G-d IS G-d– He is Eternal.
>> “And the Spirit of G-d was hovering over the face of the waters.” [Genesis 1]
* He is a Holy Being unveiled at the dawn of creation– not simply a “thing”
>> “The Spirit of G-d has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” [Job 33]
* He is, in some way, Creator.
>> “Then the L-RD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” [Genesis 6]
* He impacts the lives of all mankind.
>> “They also provoked Him to wrath at the waters of Meribah,
So that it went hard with Moses on their account;
Because they were rebellious against His Spirit,
He spoke rashly with his lips. [Psalm 106]
* Israel rebelled against a Holy Being.
>> “Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.” [Isaiah 63]
* Again, Israel grieved a Holy Being.
>> “The Spirit of the L-RD will rest on Him, The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, The Spirit of counsel and strength, The Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the L-RD.” [Isaiah 11]
* He is a Spirit that can enter within mankind.
>> “Where can I go from Your Spirit? Where can I flee from Your presence?” [Psalm 139]
* He is an omnipresent G-d.
>> “The Spirit of the L-RD spoke through me, His word was on my tongue.” [2 Samuel 23]
* The Holy Being speaks and directs the Prophet to do likewise.
** All these Scriptures [and more] affirm that G-d is Spirit and that The Spirit of G-d is G-d. **
___________________
Kavi,
Thanks again for doing this research and for bringing all of these verses. I appreciate it’s a lot of work.
I agree that Jews believe that God is not physical. But that doesn’t mean he must therefore be spiritual. He is above both. He created and creates both. All of these verses that speak of the spirit of God or God’s spirit are to be understood in exactly the same way as all the verses that speak of the eyes, hands and feet of God. They are all metaphors for how God interacts with his Creation. Compared to Hashem Himself, the spiritual and physical, and light and darkness all get their existence and life from the same Source – the One who brings every concept into existence and gives life to them all.
Hold on CR. That’s true that a messenger can use G-d’s name, fight a battle, and be his emissary. The problem lies with the fact that this particular “messenger” requires him to be believed on. Also, he died for the sins of his followers and is worshipped and adored more than HaShem. This goes far beyond any other messengers, who disappeared and that we did not know the names! Moses was never worshipped and his tomb was hidden from people to avoid for people to make a shrine or place of worship over it. Now, everybody in the whole world bow down to that man-god and it is supposed to be fine because long ago a messenger was send and said “I am the L-rd”? Your reasoning does not make sense and only CP and Kavi will agree with that, because frankly, they are full blown worshipper of that man!
RT, scripture has G-d say about that angelic messanger “obey him and do not rebel” He says this about an angel that says the words “i am G-d.”
Can a mere messanger say, “hi i’m G-d?”
I’m aware that Moses isnt worshiped. The problem I have is that G-d knows the tendancy of man is to idolize, and yet he is comfortable with an agent saying this?
Consider that Muhammad is idolized, even though no Muslim calls him G-d, or prays to him.
Consider that Catholics (who know Mary had two human parents) idolize her.
Consider that Charismatics like the Rebbe got idolized even though everyone knew he was just a normal man.
My issue is that G-d knows he despises idols, and G-d knows that people idolize other people (even when they know and acknowledge that these men are just human,) but G-d did not see a problem in allowing one of the host of heaven to say “im G-d”
Then, your issue is with G-d, not man. What else do you want me to say? Do you want me to excuse G-d, or say He was not right to do that?
Its not about having an issue with G-d. The issue is that the “two powers” heresy already existed among Jews themselves (as per the Talmud,) before J and his merry men even existed because of this angelic character that has G-d’s name in it, whom G-d says “obey him and do not rebel,” etc.
When Christians apply deity titles to Jesus, sometimes they don’t even believe in the trinity themselves, but they still do it. For example, Arius did not call Jesus 1 part of an eternal trinity, he believed that Jesus began to exist, and nonetheless, he placed the name G-d on Jesus. The Gnostics did the same thing.
Tertullian the 1st trinitarian placed the name of G-d on Jesus, but clearly had monarchian leanings, IE he viewed Jesus as totally subordinate to the father.
What I’m saying is that this phenomenon of looking at someone who is not G-d the father , and saying, “its ok for this being to say, I am the G-d of bethel,” when we all understand it is an angel, it explains where this issue comes from, how this issue arises, and explains that it doesn’t come from a source outside Jesus’ own historical theological context.
This goes far beyond any other messengers, who disappeared and that we did not know the names!
That fact that they were anonymous makes it way worse RT. Think about that for a second. Imagine we live in the days of Jacob or Joshua and some random guy walks up to you. You say “who are you guy, where are you coming from?” Imagine this unknown guy, (you may not even know its an angel at the time, you may assume like Joshua ben Nun did that its a normal human, Joshua 5.) Imagine this unknown dude says “hey I’m G-d,” and in response you hit the deck afraid for your life. Two seconds ago you thought this was a fellow human being like yourself, and now look at what the Bible has happening!
Imagine we did not know Jesus’ name for a moment. Imagine some random Galilean says to a random stranger in the 2nd temple period, “before Abraham was born, I am, and I have walked with G-d since the beginning, I am in him, and he is in me.” That poor person may say, “wow! What a nutcase that guy was,” or maybe he says “I should have hit the deck and bowed low.”
Now, imagine the stranger who interacted with this no name Galilean goes home and reads his Tanakh. He comes to Joshua 5 and says, “hey, I heard a guy talk to me today the way this angel talked to Joshua ben Nun, maybe that guy was a messenger from G-d, and not nuts after all.”
I’m saying this was a theological nightmare whether Jesus existed or not, and no non Jewish sources even need to come up.
It doesn’t happen often that someone gets hyper elevated, but the fact that the Bible has messengers who have no names (and are assumed by the righteous to be men,) makes the reactions we read in scripture way more problematic!
CR
“21”Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him.”
I can not figure out why God would put his name in ?????, but he clearly tells you that it is not himself. Do you think the bible should do this every time it happens?
RT & LarryB,
Please allow me to point out something that I think is being over looked:
The exaltation of a man or angel is not forbidden; many a righteous king, priest and angel are bowed to in Tanach. The real issue is the LEVEL of exaltation given another. Obviously NONE are to be exalted equal to or greater than Hashem.
I think it is unfair to condemn a person of idol worship just because they treat Yeshua with the ‘proper’ respect due an agent of Hashem.
I could easily call this behavior; ‘unjust judgment’.
CP,
Could you please tell me some teachings of Jesus that make you believe he is an agent of Hashem?
LarryB, I do wish the Bible was more clear, because think about that phenomenon for a moment. A righteous person like Jacob, Gideon, or Joshua hears a no name agent (who Joshua thought was just some random human guy,) speaking as G-d’s mouthpiece, and in reaction to his words they quiver with awe/fear and they ask, “what does my lord command?”
As I said above, its problematic even accounting for the rabbinic explanation. For instance, as CP said, you give honor to kings and priests by bowing in the near east, its just cultural, its normal. Look at how easily that basic respect goes south though. Muhammad is just a standard man in Islam, and Muslims will swear that they don’t worship him, but you may be injured if you draw a likeness of this man.
Scripture tells us that as far as Joshua or Gideon knew, these were just random folks, not assumed to be kings, priests, a relative, etc. these messengers were perceived to be total strangers, and yet they provoked such a strong reaction, and used this unthinkable language such as speaking as if G-d was the one who is talking.
That random soldier that Joshua thought he was dealing with starts saying “hey! I’m captain of G-d’s hosts, now please take off your shoes!” ?
If a stranger came up to you and said, “I am the G-d of bethel,” or told you to remove your shoes, outside, on a random street, you would say, “lock this guy in the Asylum!”
When Jesus was told “you being a mere man make yourself to be G-d!” Jesus points out scripture and says “hey our ancestors dealt with this kind of language, why try and hurt me?”
That’s one reason why I’m not surprised by what happened in Chabad, or in Breslov, or among Shabbatai Tzvi’s followers. You can call it heresy, but the Bible started the trend by allowing random guys (who turn out to be malachim) to speak that way.
How do you know that this or that random guy isn’t a malach? Joshua couldn’t tell.
We trust our leaders. If our leaders decided someone was worthy of respect that’s enough for us. See Deuteronomy 17:8-9.
Also, Con, your argument is not unique to this situation but applies to all forms of Divine revelation. If God told me to sacrifice my child, I would run to the nearest psychiatrist and ask for medication to help with the voice I’m hearing.
So either you don’t accept any Divine revelation at all, or you trust the Bible. You can’t pick and choose. If you trust the Bible, then you can accept that righteous men of a certain stature knew when to believe a message was from God. If you don’t, then ditch the whole thing. Just be consistent.
Finally, Con, a point I’ve repeated ad infinitum: if the mistake were so easy to make, you would expect to see it made more than five times in a 3.5k year span.
And you would expect to see it made randomly, not following a very specific pattern. First comes the devotion to an individual or being taken in by a foreign idea (the two-powers idea was pagan influence), for which justification is only then found in Tanach.
If you can explain away these two related points, then you will have a leg to stand on.
CR,
I reviewed the passages about Joshua and Gidon. I don’t see where a human being or an angel says to Joshua or Gidon, “I (the man or angel) am G-d”. Also, I don’t see where either of them worshiped what they thought was a man or an angel. There are two kinds of prostration to a being who is not Hashem – worship and honor. Only one is kosher. In Tenach, prophets and angels give the message of Hashem to people and it’s understood that the messenger is not the same as the Sender even when the message is given in the first person and even without the messenger saying “So says Hashem”. It’s just understood that what is going on in the verses is that Hashem is communicating to a human being through an messenger. I apologize if I’m repeating what others have already said or if I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. I’m also not nearly as articulate and nuanced in my thoughts as many of the other people here.
Alan,
I don’t know where to start; it is literally all though every Gospel. Yeshua’s favorite self proclamation is “son of man” (he never ever explicitly refers to himself as “son of God”). Yeshua says he only spoke the words the Father gave him to speak, he said his actions where the same as the Fathers and he could do nothing without the Father. He said it wasn’t his will he wanted, but God’s will – even to the death. Yeshua said not to think he came to abolish the Law; not the smallest jot or tittle of the Law is to be abolished until heaven and earth pass away. He came calling for repentance just as the prophets of old.
The one thing I see gets him into trouble with Orthodox Jews, ancient and modern, is the authority he spoke with. He as a man spoke as one of the angels of old who had God’s name in them. I see no teachings of his that are in direct violation of Torah which if so, would be a clear indication he did not have God’s name in him. I think he is the one Moses spoke of, yet not fully realized until the later days.
Let’s put aside modern Christianity and look at Egypt. People had to step up; making a public decision; having enough Faith to smear lambs blood on their door Posts. If they did, it spared the first born from judgment. These lambs where not offered as a sacrifice for sin at a Temple, they were each slaughtered at home; this was and is a very individual act of Faith.
The same is true today in that if one believes Yeshua’s call; return to the simplicity of Torah with selfless zealousness, even unto death. This is what brings true life. We all have a decision even today: to side with the corrupted system he challenged and which unjustly condemned him to death or return to the simplicity of Torah; the righteous will live by Faith – loving God with a whole heart mind and soul, and your neighbor as yourself.
Thank you CP for answering my question. I could almost swear that Jesus taught over and over again that he was the son of God, that he was eternal and he can forgive sins. This is something no prophet or angel in Tanach ever claimed about themselves.
What kind of Torah observance do you believe Jesus wanted the Jewish people to return to? Just a cleaned-up version of the Sanhedrin and the Oral Law, a cleaned-up Pharasaic Judaism? Do you have an understanding of how the Beit Din Hagadol (The High Court/Sanhedrin) had authority from the Torah to institute “fences” for the Torah?
Alan, CP wrote, “The one thing I see gets him into trouble with Orthodox Jews, ancient and modern, is the authority he spoke with.”
This is unbelievable, Alan. You come late to the conversation, so you don’t know that I (and others here as well) spent months with hours of our time posting hundreds of comments explaining the problem Orthodox Jews have with Jesus. I presented numerous arguments on this very topic, and CP still cannot articulate in his own words the Jewish position.
This means that he is so close-minded he cannot hear anyone but himself and those who agree with him.
It’s disgraceful, is what it is.
At some point if I have time I will summarize briefly for you the arguments I have presented so you can see that CP was exposed to the reasons why Jews reject Jesus. I don’t care if he disagrees, but the fact that he can’t even hear us is a little scary.
I can repeat back positions on most topics I disagree with. This shows I understand the position even while disagreeing; otherwise I cannot debate honestly and fairly. This is not limited to religion but also politics and other areas. This is an essential skill for truth seeking, because if you cannot understand the opposing side to the point that you cannot repeat back what they say, then how will you ever find the truth?
CP, you don’t need Jesus to love G-d and your neighbor!
RT,
I agree, but you’ve dismissed the importance of cultural context, therefore don’t realize how much Judaism has changed since it ceased being a Temple based sacrificial system.
Dina,
you write: “So either you don’t accept any Divine revelation at all, or you trust the Bible”
Do you believe all divine revelation ended with Malachi?
J1)Can a Jew today please G-d?
J1) Yes, if he does what is right and follow the G-d of the Bible.
J2) Do they follow G-d?
J2) The one that believe in the Hebrew Bible do.
J3) Is the Talmud Inspired?
J3) That might be long do debate and I am not the perfect person to answer… Let just say that the Talumd is wrong. They still follow G-d and those Jews still hold to Him. They might have some issues and interpretation that are wrong, but that does not change the main part, that they follow G-d.
C1) Can a New Testament follower please G-d with his practices?
C1) Most don’t as they follow Jesus, a man, and worship him as a god. Some may, if they only believe Jesus was the messiah and do not venerate them as a god. That must also be very rare.
C2) Do they follow G-d?
Most don’t, they do not follow G-d and a man is their idol.
C3) Is the NT inspired?
Not at all. It’s a bunch of lies. You have not shown any prophecies that Jesus fulfilled…. This book teaches to venerate a man, thus send people away from G-d. The “old” testament is just a relic of the past that has no meaning…
CR
Would you mind listing the particular verses so I can see what your talking about?
Joshua and Gideon….
“I could almost swear that Jesus taught over and over again that he was the son of God, that he was eternal and he can forgive sins.”
http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Jesus-Christ,-Son-Of-God
Alan, Jesus claimed to be the son of G-d, not G-d the son. Some bible verse might be interpreted and gave divine attributes to Jesus:
John 1:1, “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
2.John 1:14, “and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…”
3.John 8:24, “unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.”
4.John 8:58, “before Abraham was, I am.” 1.Exodus 3:14, “God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM”; and He said, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’”
5.Col. 2:9, “for in him dwells all the fullness of deity in bodily form.”
6.Heb. 1:8, “But of the Son he [The Father] says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.'”
And, behold, I (Jesus in the context seem right) come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” Luke 7:48
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
Also Jesus forgives Sins. Not only he forgives sins (as per NT), he is the only one that can forgive sins. He won’t forgive the sins of anybody that does not accept him as lord…
Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”
said therefore unto you that ye shall die in your sins; for if ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.”
That’s the whole issue, but CP will reinterpret the passage to say that they do not mean what they mean.
Alan;
“What kind of Torah observance do you believe Jesus wanted the Jewish people to return to?”
—– Written Torah with a less invasive ruling authority; Torah observance that originates in the heart of individuals rather than in a councils of men.
“Just a cleaned-up version of the Sanhedrin and the Oral Law,”
—– Perhaps, if it was really cleaned up. But it wasn’t available to the people because it was the Sadducees who needed to clean up their act. Today without a Temple this is not a option.
“a cleaned-up Pharasaic Judaism?”
—– The Pharisees were more for the people and God, but not all of them, (power and money corrupts – just human nature). I think making the Talmud or Oral Torah equal with Torah is a mistake and in fact ‘adding to’. Without the Temple and Judaism spread world wide there is a necessity for Pharisees, however I think they as in Yeshua’s day; go to far in some areas; ‘trading the traditions of man for the mitzvot of God’.
“Do you have an understanding of how the Beit Din Hagadol (The High Court/Sanhedrin) had authority from the Torah to institute “fences” for the Torah?”
—– I’m not sure where they received this authority. It is my understanding they were to decide legal cases not institute new doctrine.
Thank you very much Dina and RT – what you both wrote is very helpful!
CP,
From all of those sources that RT listed, no Jew in Tenach would tolerate any of that. The Judaism that you want sounds just like the Judaism I know about and have been living for many years now (post college). I had a long and convoluted road to get to where I am now. One of the foundations of the Talmud is that Torah-level law is much more important that rabbinic-level law and in fact the rabbinic-level law only comes to protect the Torah-level law. The Great Sanhedrin of every generation since Moses only had authority from the Chumash itself to make rabbinic decrees if they felt they were necessary to protect Torah law and only if the majority of the people could handle it. There were several rabbinic laws that were nullified in the times of the Talmud because the people couldn’t tolerate it. So the rabbis had to be very careful before instituted a rabbinic decree. And again, these decrees were secondary to Torah-law and were only legislated to close up a breach in the people’s observance of Torah-law.
Alan & RT,
As RT pointed out, the NT does teach Yeshua as the “son of God” but this is not something Yeshua comes right out and says like he does “son of man”. the Gospel of John does have a couple places where Yeshua is strongly implying he is that son of God, but it is extremely rare for him to do this.
RT, yes the verse can be interpreted in various ways, just like most of them can. However I agree there are a hand full of strong exclusionary verses in the NT which I have yet to wrestle with. I am no expert, and assume I’m just like a few others doing the best they can, trudging through writings, doctrine, history and Scripture in search of Truth.
Read the interpretation CP. This does not talk about your blessed Yeshua… Read the interpretation!
Which interpretation from which time period RT? There is second temple literature written in Ge’ez (an ancient south Semitic language,) that treats the son of man as an angelic agent identified with the messiah.
Even if you can’t find a Christian theological formua in the Jewish Bible, you can find in abundance the unique agent of G-d that is called his son, called “hashem our righteousness,” that you are told nations will flock to him, that he will unravel the Torah’s riddles, end history’s ailing, etc.
“Read the interpretation CP. This does not talk about your blessed Yeshua… Read the interpretation!”
For me it’s not if the interpretation points to Yeshua or not, it’s the fact that there is much much more going on in the spiritual realm than we can fathom, therefore I think to judge others by what isn’t fully revealed is rather absurd.
The only certain interpretation. The one from the Angel that interpreted the dream of Daniel…
“So he told me and gave me the INTERPRETATION of these things:
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].”
Also, in the original text, the “Son of man” is not there! It is Human being. Thanks for the misleading translators of the Bible, they changed it for us to think it talks about Jesus!
Ben Adam ie son of man/human being. Its not a mistranslation RT
Sorry, that what the NIV said:… I should check their “facts”…
The Aramaic phrase bar enash means human being. The phrase son of man is retained here because of its use in the New Testament as a title of Jesus, probably based largely on this verse.
בַּר bar, bar; (Aramaic) corresponding to H1121; a son, grandson, etc.:—× old, son.
אֱנָשׁ ʼĕnâsh, en-awsh’; (Aramaic) or אֱנַשׁ ʼĕnash; (Aramaic), corresponding to H582; a man:—man, whosoever.
RT,
You write in response to Daniel 7,
“Read the interpretation CP. This does not talk about your blessed Yeshua… Read the interpretation!”
and
“The only certain interpretation. The one from the Angel that interpreted the dream of Daniel…”
_______________________
However, the “interpretation” of Daniel 7 by the High Priest at Yeshua’s trial and its implications caused the bulk of the Sanhedrin to condemn Yeshua of blasphemy.
For we read,
“. . .the High Priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, “Are You the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN.”
Tearing his clothes, the high priest said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. . .” [Mark 14]
_________________________
Zechariah also speaks of the the Messiah coming back with His holy ones,
“. . .Then the L-RD will go out to battle against those nations, waging war as in a day of battle.
His feet will stand in that day on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem. Then the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west. . .
. . .And so the L-RD my G-d will come, and all His holy ones will be accompanying You.” [Zechariah 14]
________________________
Pure non-sense. How did the writer of the new testament know what the High Priest said? Can we trust that as a reliable source?
For Zechariah, this does not speak of Jesus. It says clearly the L-rd. Not a man!
RT: “Pure non-sense. How did the writer of the new testament know what the High Priest said? Can we trust that as a reliable source?
KAVI: The writer learned it from Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea– both were members of the Sanhedrin– and both were followers of L-RD Yeshua.
_______________________
RT: “For Zechariah, this does not speak of Jesus. It says clearly the L-rd. Not a man!”
KAVI: I agree– L-RD Yeshua is not a merely a man. . . He is the L-RD [Exodus 34] who was forced to temporarily tabernacle among mankind as THE “seed” of the woman in order to accomplish a kinsman redemption of all mankind [Genesis and Leviticus/Ruth and Isaiah]
Zechariah is in agreement with Daniel– the One like the Son of Man [the L-RD] will come back to earth with the holy ones with Him.
_______________________
RT,
Oh, I get it now, and this is why you reject Yeshua as the son of man; because you claim by this interpretation; YOU are the ones to be the gods that rule all humanity.
Gods can be interpreted as “Mighty” “Judges” “Angles” “host”, I am not a god, nor anybody important… Nor was Jesus.
Sorry, RT, I was just pointing out that I agree many are termed elohim, but ….. call Yeshua an elohim and instantly 7 people cry blasphemy.
Calling Yeshua an Elohim could be fine, but calling him lord, redeemer and savior is something else!
RT,
“Calling Yeshua an Elohim could be fine, but calling him lord, redeemer and savior is something else!”
elohim with a lowercase e as in elohim acherim (other gods).
Again, to call him elohim, he would have need to have done something or being a ruler/judge/etc. CP, I have a related question. You probably think that Yeshua was king, as it say: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”
Can you show me why you think he was king, or is a king in heaven, if we have no proof that Yeshua was or will ever be a king?
Depending on your answer, do you think that Micah 5:2 was fulfilled, or will only be whenever he decides to come back?
Thanks
Gods can be interpreted as “Mighty” “Judges” “Angles” “host”,
The problem really comes in when you have so many metaphorical titles that could be construed as literally claiming that X person is touched by G-d over and above his peers in a special way.
We can call someone elohim metaphorically, Hashem our righteousness metaphorically, son of G-d metaphorically, walking Torah metaphorically, suffering messiah metaphorically,
(so I guess this means Christianity is Jewish metaphorically?) ; )
but then we all stand back gasping when someone takes these concepts too literally?
If you don’t want a man to believe that stones are his bread, then stop metaphorically comparing the stones to bread! Do you think all these colorful metaphors have no real world effect?
As Alan had said, its likely that if Moses’ grave had not been hidden, he would have been worshiped! and why? Because he acted like a nullified conduit to hashem, bore G-d’s name, did miraculous things, etc. Moses could have been the 1st brass serpent, if history had turned out different.
I can see how it is called blasphemy to call Jesus G-d, but he wasn’t the only one to play the conduit.
When Alan pointed out that its not against halacha to make an image of animals for general use, but only forbidden for worship, he sets up the excuse by which G-d allowed the brass serpent to exist. A brass serpent that the people took for idolatry. (G-d had to know in advance that this would happen.)
This whole argument over how a title can apply metaphorically to a messenger, or how we can have an image of this, but not that, or we can venerate x but not worship Y, reminds me of Christian arguments about communion and how they end the same way, despite the fact that both groups come to it by wildly different roads.
A Catholic will ask: “why don’t you believe in the real presence in the Eucharist?” “the Protestant answers, “because Jesus is being metaphorical!”
The Catholic answers: “And what is the purpose of the metaphor of the Eucharist?” The Protestant answers: “To tell us that Christ is always present with us!” Catholic: AHA!!!! Protestant: DOH!!! Catholic: Gotcha!!!!
Con,
Let us imagine the following scenario.
A herald (not the herald, just a herald) of the king arrives at your village. He rides through the village gates in his coach, flying the king’s banner and wearing the king’s colors. The villagers hurry out of the way, throwing bows and curtsies in his direction. They set him up at the finest inn and give him every honor.
The next day, our herald enters the town square, clears his throat, and unfurls a royal scroll with great flourish.
“I, King Wormley Wigglesworth III, decree,” he proclaims, “that all of the citizens of this village must sing ‘Oranges and Lemons’ at three o’ clock every afternoon.”
Would it be ridiculous to assume that the honor accorded this nameless herald bearing the king’s message as usurping honor due to the king? Would it be even more ridiculous to confuse the herald with the king himself?
Yes and yes.
From our perspective, you are arguing that it would be easy, because of the honor accorded the herald and the use of “I, King Wormley Wigglesworth III,” to confuse the herald with the king himself.
And the king ought not to send such messengers, you argue, because it would be so easy to make that mistake.
Now, one might expect a foreigner to make that mistake, but not the villagers themselves. And if he would ask the villagers, they would tell him everything he needs to know. But if that foreigner proclaimed the herald king, the villagers would be right to be incensed. If one of the villagers were to make that mistake, they would think he was really off his rocker!
CR,
“I can see how it is called blasphemy to call Jesus G-d, but he wasn’t the only one to play the conduit.”
The kosher conduits are tested by the people using a standardized test and if they pass the test they are confirmed by the people as a kosher conduit. What the kosher conduits never did that the non-kosher ones did do was to say they were “one” with either the message or the Sender or both. And even if they didn’t say anything like this, the people have to watch themselves so they don’t slip into making the kosher conduit into a non-kosher one in their minds and actions. Another thing is that a kosher conduit never said is that he/she is a pre-requisite in order for the Sender to hear or accept a person’s prayers or to return to the Sender after a spiritual fall.
I take issue with anyone (Jewish or Christian) thinking these ideas “prove” anything. I’ve already shown that most Christian proof texts can be applied to other men (such as John the Baptist) as easily as they can be applied to Jesus without manipulating anything, and the history of Jewish messianism in later periods backs me up on the fact that other groups have claimed their rabbi fits the same picture of a suffering messiah as Jesus. I even showed how early Christians expected these duplicate messianic claims similar to Jesus’ to arise (according to Revelation 13 and Christian interpreters of that chapter.)
So, to me, I see Christians coming here and bothering Jews about their religious traditions and observances (WHICH SCRIPTURE TELLS THEM TO FOLLOW) and I also see Christians playing proof text madness as if it definitely proves Jesus, when YOUR OWN BOOK tells you claims like that prove diddle, and to place your trust in the mitzvot as Jesus lived them. Stop your focus on the man, stop focusing on whether he was the messiah, and just live like him, and respect those who do the same.
Concerned Reader,
I agree, I wish it was that easy. I can tell you through first hand experience if you follow Yeshua’s teachings, some Christians will reject you as a Legalist or Judaizer.
On the other hand if you view Yeshua’s teachings as more authoritative than Talmudic or Rabbinical teachings, some Jews spurn you as a Christian.
I’m blessed to find a synagogue who accepts me!
CP, can you please tell me some of Jesus’s teachings that you follow?
Alan, it is very easy for honor to devolve into worship. The angel in Genesis 31:13 says “I am the G-d of Bethel.” That angel from Genesis is the same one from Exodus, Joshua, and Judges.
If it can happen to a brass serpent then how much more a righteous man from God who preforms miracles and rises from the dead.
CP, EXACTLY. On the one hand, G-d commands that we make no graven images of any form. On the other, he says build a serpent of brass and gaze upon it. Over time, the people conflated pleasing G-d with serpent gazing. I once wrote a comment called Hezekiah and the serpent gazers. Do you still have that comment Rabbi?
How much more in cases of those like Acher do we have an issue when an agent acts like G-d?
So we should find excuses to make idols or worship shaliaḥ because it seams that G-d allowed it for some reason once… Good reasoning…
Im not saying we should allow it, Im saying dont be surprised when you see it show up.
G-d once said, under no circumstances make an image in any form, and then went against his own ruling.
CR,
“G-d once said, under no circumstances make an image in any form, and then went against his own ruling.”
There are circumstances we can make graven images of animals. We just can’t make them for worship. This is how I learned the halacha. If I’m mistaken I hope someone who knows will correct me.
Alan, you are correct. Con is mistaken.
RT and CP,
Hashem allows us to make graven images and statues of animals as long as they are not intended to be worshiped. The brass serpent is an example of a kosher graven image according to Torah law.
I believe the halacha is that we are allowed to make graven images and statues of animals as long as they’re not for purposes of worship. But we are not allowed to make graven images and statues of humans even for non-worship purposes.
Do you have a source for that halacha Alan?
In the Catholic/orthodox Christian traditions the position of the literature is similar regarding the use of images, at least according to what is written in their texts.
In eastern orthodoxy religious icons are only supposed to be flat (not a bust or a statue,) and are strictly meant for education purposes only, (at least that it was doctrine says.)
The Catholic Church drifted away from the earlier practices that are in their various treatises.
This goes right to the point I was making earlier about honor devolving into idolatry. If you look at the Ebionite Christians, they were Torah observant, and saw Jesus as human, but they also clearly saw Jesus as a mouthpiece, and as possessing a nearly angelic nature. Over time, the honor you were allowed to show Jesus as a unique son of G-d, morphed into viewing him as a deity, and object of worship.
The Church actually had a rule on the books that if Christians destroyed a shrine of pagan idolatry, they were not allowed to re purpose the materials from the site, (lest the pagans would say the Temple was destroyed for gain, and not for true faith.) That information is in a book called Tertullian’s On Idolatry and Mishna Avodah Zarah.
CR,
I will have to find the exact source, but I learned with my teacher a couple of years ago in Maimonides’ Misheh Torah in the section on the Laws of Idolatry. I will find the exact source for you in the next couple of days.
CR,
“Do you have a source for that halacha Alan?”
I found it: Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry chapter 3, laws 10 and 11.
“It’s forbidden to make forms for beauty/decoration even if it’s not for idol worship as it says, ‘Do not make with Me gods of silver and gods of gold”, in other words, forms of silver and gold that are for beauty/decoration, so that people won’t err and imagine they are for worship. It’s not forbidden to make forms for beauty except the forms of a human being….it is forbidden to make forms of a likeness of the the sun and moon, stars and constellations and angels as it says, ‘do not make with Me’ – do not make the likeness of the servants who serve before Me on high, even on a board. Forms of animals and other living creatures except for humans, and forms of trees, grasses and similar things – it’s permitted to make them into forms, even if the form protrudes.”
If it were so easy, why does it happen so rarely within Judaism?
It’s not so easy, but it is an ever-present danger. CP’s example of the brass serpent is very good.
In my reply to CR, I said I agree it is very easy. I take it back. It’s not very easy, but we have to always be on guard. It happens even among some very religious-looking Jews today.
I have admitted that it is rare, but I can see clearly why it keeps happening beyond the issues already mentioned of cleaving to a charismatic leader. Also, there is the literature that was part of Jesus’ Judaism, but that is not part of rabbinic Judaism that shows the ideas were not unknown.
A person who exhibits the expected qualities of the messiah will no doubt be seen as Charismatic and likeable, but he is also described as the one who rights all the wrongs that no human ever has. As Alan said, its an ever present danger, and I was noting that the encounters with agents like in Genesis 31:13 can give people pause if an agent speaks that way.
Dina you keep asking why has it only happened 5 times. 5 times is a lot when you consider that the modus operandi is to either ignore Christian ideas, or openly oppose them, and teach as a matter of doctrine that Christian ideas are absurd heresy.
These ideas reccured in a religious movement that had the ideas excised.
CR,
When a prophet of angel meets a person in Tenach, and they say “I am God”, the prophet or angel has already made it clear to the person he was sent to that he is not himself God but only a messenger of God. We never find a Jew in Tenach worshiping a prophet or an angel who says “I am God” because it was already clarified to them that this being who was speaking with them is in fact not God. Nuvchadnezzar wanted to worship Daniel just for Daniel being able to reveal a dream.
Genesis 15:10 – “And the angel of the Lord said to her (Hagar) I will multiply thy seed exceedingly”. Hagar knew that it wasn’t the angel who was going to multiply her seed but that it was God. In verse 13: “And she called the name of the Lord that spoke to her, Thou God seest me.”
Devarim 11:14: “I will give you the rain of your land in its due season…and I will send grass in thy field for thy cattle.” These verses don’t have Moses begin by saying “So says Hashem”. Moses is just speaking to the people seemingly in his own voice. But we don’t see that anybody hearing these words of Moses ever thought that Moses was saying that he himself would provide the rain and grass. But the simple meaning of these verses is that Moses is saying HE will provide the rain and grass. In verse 13 Moses says “And it shall come to pass if you hearken diligently to MY commandments.” Everybody understood it wasn’t Moses’s commandments but only Hashem’s commandments. Again no preface with, “So says Hashem”. It’s just understood.
Devarim 29:4 : “And I have led you 40 years in the wilderness, your clothes are not worn old upon you, and thy shoe is not worn old upon thy food. You have not eaten bread, neither have you drunk wine or strong drink, that you might know that I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD.” Did anyone think Moses was actually revealing that he (Moses) is the Lord their God? Again, no preface here with “So says Hashem”. It was just understood that prophecy was coming out of Moses mouth, and Moses was not God and neither was he the prophecy, but just a created being acting as a moutpiece for God.
I completely understand that Alan. A human agent can speak in the name of/like his master. Jesus began that way as well. The Christians didn’t always believe Jesus was G-d, even though they all believed to some degree that he was a unique agent blessed with G-d’s name, and speaking just like Moses when Moses said things like “I will give you grass.”
CR,
“I completely understand that Alan. A human agent can speak in the name of/like his master. Jesus began that way as well. The Christians didn’t always believe Jesus was G-d, even though they all believed to some degree that he was a unique agent blessed with G-d’s name, and speaking just like Moses when Moses said things like “I will give you grass.””
But the NT eventually had Jesus saying things that crossed a line even for prophets. It’s very possible that some Jews would have started worshiping Moses if they knew where his grave was – both Jews who saw him and Jews generations later. Hashem prevented that from ever happening. Jews also never worshiped any of the prophets from Tenach even though we know where many of their graves are today.
CR,
“Alan, it is very easy for honor to devolve into worship.”
I agree with you. That’s why there is a rabbinic law from the Talmud that a student is not allowed to daven behind his teacher. The rabbis in Talmudic times saw there was a danger to students if they stood behind their rebbes during tefillah.
“The angel in Genesis 31:13 says “I am the G-d of Bethel.” That angel from Genesis is the same one from Exodus, Joshua, and Judges.” ”
It’s just understood in Tenach that the angel (or prophet) is not God but just the “radio” which is broadcasting the “radio waves” from Hashem. Moses didn’t need a “radio” or “telephone” to have a dialogue with Hashem but it looks like every other person did.
And what do Christians call Yeshu Alan? The “word of G-d.” The radio analogy is roughly equivalent to the notion of Jesus as “word, or what a Christiam calls the logos.”
Any Christian will tell you that to worship the human flesh of Jesus is not what the gospels intend.
It’s not the human flesh the problem. The problem is, how can you know the Jesus was really the breathing word of G-d? I can tell you that I am the word of G-d, that won’t make it true. We can know it is not, because G-d said he would not.
Furthermore, G-d was angry with the Israelites when the made the golden calf, even if they though it was a representation of YVHV who took them out of Egypt. The same was true with Israel and Bethel’s golden calves, who were not foreign idols, but were the gods who took them out of Egypt.
Conclusion. the gospel intend is wrong even if they think Jesus is the “incarnation” of the logos/d’var.
RT,
How can we know if any prophet’s word are from God? First of all, even if the prophet is a true prophet, he is never equated with the word of God; he is separate from the word of God. But how can we we know if a prophet’s words are from God or not – see Devarim 13:1-6 and Devarim 18:18-22
CR,
Christians equate Jesus with the word of God, i.e. Jesus is the word of God. In Tenach this equation is never made. The radio analogy is not intended to equate the Sender nor His message with the messenger. The “radio” (the messenger) is never equated with the message (nor with the Messenger) in Tenach.
The Christians made that equation because the sock puppet/radio analogy doesn’t make sense, in that I mean it doesn’t solve the underlying issue. If I say “talk to me,” but in front of your face I have my hand in a sock that I command you to gaze at, you will look puzzled, understandably.
I understand what the intention is in the rabbinic reading of the agent, IE that you never confuse the messenger and the one sent, but if you have a situation where the one sent speaks as if it is the sender who is talking, it can get confusing, particularly for people outside of the Torah culture.
Even Elisha Ben Abuyah, (who I’m sure understood and learned what the rabbinic explanation of the Shaliach was,) struggled with the idea of how you could have an agent speaking G-d’s word like a radio, and still call it monotheism in a meaningful way.
CR,
I don’t know how to reply and get the gray bar next to a quote of your words.
“The Christians made that equation because the sock puppet/radio analogy doesn’t make sense, in that I mean it doesn’t solve the underlying issue. If I say “talk to me,” but in front of your face I have my hand in a sock that I command you to gaze at, you will look puzzled, understandably.
I understand what the intention is in the rabbinic reading of the agent, IE that you never confuse the messenger and the one sent, but if you have a situation where the one sent speaks as if it is the sender who is talking, it can get confusing, particularly for people outside of the Torah culture.
Even Elisha Ben Abuyah, (who I’m sure understood and learned what the rabbinic explanation of the Shaliach was,) struggled with the idea of how you could have an agent speaking G-d’s word like a radio, and still call it monotheism in a meaningful way.”
Tenach and Jews never had a problem with the “sock puppet/radio” mode of God communicating with his prophets. Moses was the only prophet who didn’t need a “filter (angel/visions/riddles)” to communicate to Hashem. It humbles the prophet to know that he needs a “filter” and that he’s not on the same level as Moses. The Chumash itself speaks about these filters (Devarim 12:6-8).
CR,
Correction to my last post- It’s not Devarim 12:6-8 which speaks about the “filters” that prophets receive their visions through. It’s Bamidbar (Numbers) 12:6-8.
Coming home from work today and picked a random podcast to listen to for the drive .
wow, Wow, WOW!
This has to be one of the best podcasts I’ve ever listened to!
Would be very interested in any feed back.
https://archive.org/details/YeshuaAndThePharisees
It’s not the human flesh the problem. The problem is, how can you know the Jesus was really the breathing word of G-d? I can tell you that I am the word of G-d, that won’t make it true.
You cant tell, and off course that’s the problem. The Christian scriptures themselves admit it is a problem in revelation 13 and Thessalonians.
According to Tenach, no prophet, not even Moses can BE the word of God. He can receive and give over the word of God, but he can never BE or BECOME the word of God. I don’t think there is one example of this in all of Tenach because it would be deifying the prophet to say that the prophet IS HIMSELF the Will/Word of God.
Allan,
I think words get tricky when trying to describe things which we have no reference for; things that aren’t in our current physical realm. Without getting into Philo, John 1:1 and all that, I’d say words are a conveyance of information usually initiating action or thought. If a person lived and gave their life to convey instructions from God, I could see how they could be called the Word of God. Perhaps (imo) the reason we don’t see it applied in the Tanach is because the abstract idea developed after the Hellenization, whereas Hebrew is more concrete and physical. It is at the intersection of these ideas (abstract vs physcial) where misunderstanding the other abounds and most of the arguments take place.
CP,
I hear you. But I don’t think any Jews would accept such a thing. Sometimes we say a great Torah scholar is a “walking Torah” but we don’t mean this literally. We don’t think that a Torah scroll or a Chumash is God Himself. Nor do we worship the Torah. Whatever the “word of God” means, we don’t worship it and it is not God Himself.
Alan,
I hear you also, and agree, but just so you know I don’t put much stock in Christian theology, which is what you are countering with. However that said, if Yeshua was an advent of Messiah then (again IMO) he could rightly be called the Word of God we were waiting for.
It is said all the time; “but he didn’t deliver us from our enemies”.
I’d ask; which ones? I think there was worse enemies than the Romans who came from outside. The enemies Israel needed to be delivered from were the enemies from within; the corrupt Sadducees who controlled the Temple and the Sanhedrin. They had a choke hold on the religious system, the legal system and a lose alliance with Rome. Yeshua was the bait and the final straw, they took the bait and 40 years later judgement came. Even Josephus writes of strange omens in this 40 year period and the Priests knowing judgement was coming.
Alan,
You write;
“The way I understand what Jesus is saying in this passage is that the default state of the Jews is they are the seed of Satan, and they can only go out from this status if they believe in him.”
– This is a classic misunderstanding divorced from the historical context. –
During the time of Yeshua, the Sadducees (and a few Pharisee sympathizers) controlled the Sanhedrin and the Temple. These Sadducees mainly adhered to the school of Shammai whereas the Pharisees were predominantly associated with the school of Hillel. Just the generation before there was held a debate between the school of Shammai and the school of Hillel resulting in the School of Shammai actually murdering many of the Pharisees by the sword.
So when Yeshua (who could of been a Pharisee, John 1:26) was calling these religious leaders who claimed they never would of murdered the prophets, murderers and sons of ha satan, he was talking to the very ones or/and sons of those who murdered the Pharisees at the debate when Yeshua was a child.
BIG PROBLEM HERE vvv!
Yeshua, an observant devoted Jew challenges the absolutely corrupt powerful School of Shammai who has a choke hold on the Temple and the people, perverting their position and association with Rome for monetary gain and continued control – it costs him his life.
After Yeshua and the Temple destruction, even Talmud says no longer shall the School of Shammai be listened to, but rather the School of Hillel.
The first Passover was a sacrifice of allegiance; choose Hashem and be set free or the Egyptian lamb god and stay enslaved. There is a similar choice to be made concerning a Passover in the early 30’s”; choose the School of Hillel or side with the School of Shammai who turned Yeshua over to be put to death.
Still, even today, every individual must make this choice – whose side are you on?
(It’s bad enough Christianity has turned this into legend paralleling greek god stories, but the Jews are so busy laughing at the myth, they fail to realize the reality behind it)
Wow, that’s a whole bunch of non-scriptural explaining for a single sentence. 99.99999% of people take Jesus’ words face value, without all the apologetic acrobatics.
“99.99999% of people take Jesus’ words face value”
Even if the words were verbatim, to take a intelligent, spiritually devout observant Jew’s words at face value is to miss 99% of what is being said.
CP,
The NT doesn’t mention Shammai or the School of Shammai at all. This history is also a frabrication. The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel loved each other, even though the disagreed. And they even intermarried despite their disagreements on some laws of marriage. This is a fantasy that the Jesus was just going after the School of Shammai.
Alan,
So are you saying the School of Shammi did NOT put a bunch of Pharisees from the School of Hillel to the sword in the generation before Yeshua?
Eleazar ben Ananias invited the disciples of both schools to meet at his house. Armed men were stationed at the door, and instructed to permit every one to enter, but no one to leave. During the discussions that were carried on under these circumstances, many Hillelites are said to have been killed; and there and then the remainder adopted the restrictive propositions of the Shammaites, known in the Talmud as “The Eighteen Articles.” On account of the violence which attended those enactments, and because of the radicalism of the enactments themselves, the day on which the Shammaites thus triumphed over the Hillelites was thereafter regarded as a day of misfortune (Tosef., Shab. i. 16 et seq.; Shab. 13a, 17a; Yer. Shab. i. 3c).
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3190-bet-hillel-and-bet-shammai
There are a few good scholarly articles on this online. It’s not clear what happened that day. I am not sure if it happened or not. But if it did happen, it was an anomaly in the loving and respectful relationship between the two schools. There are so many stories in Talmudic literature about the positive relationship and only this one about violence between them. And even this one about violence is disputed among Torah scholars about what actually happened or if it is even meant to be taken literally. Nobody can say for sure that Shammai Torah scholars murdered Hillel Torah scholars. Some scholars say it was the young Zealot hotheads that favored Shammai’s positions who killed some of the Hillel scholars. Other scholars try to prove that the story was not meant to be taken literally. If you do a google search you will find these good articles –
Click to access JDCC-Occasional-Paper-2013.pdf
http://aryehbderech.blogspot.com/2013/06/did-beit-shammai-really-kill-beit.html
http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/36640/is-the-story-about-members-of-beis-shammai-killing-members-of-beis-hillel-true
It was very dishonest of that person whose podcast you listened to to present as fact that Jesus’s anti-Pharisee words were only aimed at the School of Shammai and that the story of Shammai scholars killing Hillel scholars is an undisputed historical fact.
Alan,
Thank you for the links, I’ll check them out. Our big problem is not knowing what really happened. Not actually being there living in that time we are both forced to piece things together the best we can from what others have said, not even knowing how objective their account is.
We have the same problem with Yeshua; we know he existed, called for repentance to Torah, clashed with religious leaders, helped the poor and sick and was killed by crucifixion. Get much beyond that and the debating begins.
However I “speculate” the Temple wasn’t destroyed when God wasn’t looking, therefore “assume” there was a good reason for it. I “think” the corruption of the religious leaders who controlled the Temple and the Sanhedrin is a reason satisfying both questions; Why was Yeshua turned over to Rome? and Why was the Temple destroyed?
Another problem is how things transpired; Yeshua preaches/killed, a small group of Jews; followers of the way coexist in Jerusalem on the advice of Gamaliel the grandson of the famous Rabbi Hillel. Paul is up north starting “Christian” churches right and left, but doesn’t teach anything about Jesus other than his death/resurrection. The Temple is destroyed and Jews/Jewish Followers of the Way are scattered/killed about the same time Pauline Christianity is starting to flourish among the Diasopra/Gentiles.
The Bar Kokbha revolt drove a wedge into an already fragile relationship between Jews and Jewish Followers of the Way. By the time all Jews were banned from Jerusalem, Pauline Christianity was dominated by Gentiles. After the dust settled, this was no time to deal with a non-observant Jewish/Gentile “Jesus Church” the Pharisees needed to keep Judaism from being assimilated.
Right after 135 the last thing Judaism, being is a bit of a crisis needed, is a Jewish/Gentile Church telling them they didn’t have to keep strict observance. Under these circumstances it is understanable that the easiest thing to do and stay on task is just to write off Yeshua completely as irrelevant to Judaism.
But Israel has been coming home for almost 70 years, and its been almost 2000 years since the destruction of the last Temple, there is a little breathing room to revisit the Jewish Yeshua who called for repentance and challenged a corrupted system gave his life for his people, for Isarel.
Sure, with modern Pauline Christianity spewing forth 2000 years of misinformation makes it tough, but if you knowing how to spit out the bones when eating chicken, Torah knowledgeable people ought to be able spit out what doesn’t align with Torah.
CP,
I can never believe anything about the Yeshua of the NT because of all of the things I see there that uproot the teachings of the Torah, all of the butchering of the Torah’s verses in the NT, and all of the self-contradictions in the NT. When the real Messiah comes, if his name is Yeshua or Yehoshua or Jose Feliciano, I will listen to him. Until then, the small amount of good your Jesus has to offer me I can find it in the Torah literature without any of the dross of the NT and with so much more good than I can find in the NT.
“Would it be ridiculous to assume that the honor accorded this nameless herald bearing the king’s message as usurping honor due to the king? Would it be even more ridiculous to confuse the herald with the king himself?
Yes and yes.”
Dina, the problem with your analogy and example is that in the example you have provided, the herald is clearly identified as an official herald of the king. The Bible in a few places does not make it known that this is the herald of the king, but has the herald dressed as a pauper who waits until the righteous are given a surprise to reveal himself as a herald.
When Abraham has his visitors, or when Lot has his visitors, they do not know they are being visited by angels initially.
When Joshua encounters the Captain of Hashem’s host, he has no clue that it is the captain he is speaking to, but assumes that he is dealing with a common soldier.
The Captain of the host then says “I am with you for I am the captain of the host of the lord, and I am now come. Remove the sandals from your feet, etc.”
In that interaction, Joshua does not ask the Malach for his ID, even though just a short time before this occurred, he thought this was just a common human soldier who may be an enemy combatant.
So, I’m saying, given that the Bible surprises people with visits from angels, (and doesn’t inform them until after they are surprised,) it doesn’t surprise me when some people might hear a guy like Jesus speak with words like, “I am with the father before all things, etc.” and ask themselves the question privately “was that guy just a person, or a malach in disguise?”
I wouldn’t be making the point I am in these examples if there were no grounds for confusion. You have an authorized reading of the text and a hermeneutic that you approach it with, that guides you away from seeing any problems.
CR,
I want to attempt an answer. The angels in Tenach eventually revealed themselves by doing things that made it clear they were not humans. The Captain of the Host must have used words or other cues that soon gave him away to Joshua. Sometimes these words and cues are left out of the text. Gidon’s angel also did wondrous things and disappeared that gave him away as an angel. Same with the story of Manoach and his wife. But Jesus acts exactly like a flesh and blood human being and never changes from human ways including dying on the Cross. Does this make any sense?
That’s the whole problem though Alan! Miracles can’t determine that it is a malach that you are dealing with.
Those initial followers of Jesus thought they saw their rabbi ALIVE after he was clearly crucified, and they also noticed that he spoke weirdly like a malach would during his life, IE in 1st person as if G-d were speaking.
Early Christians called Docetics actually argued this question with orthodox Christians whether the man really ate food, was really born, really died, was really human etc.
There were Christians in the past that actually thought J was a malach, there still are to this very day.
We today may think that to be confused about this is absurd. In Jesus’ time there was greater confusion and diversity of thought, and metaphor was not as easy to parse.
CR,
Can you please say your question again? I’m not so sure any longer what we’re trying to figure out.
“You have an authorized reading of the text and a hermeneutic that you approach it with, that guides you away from seeing any problems.”
That’s exactly my point with the villagers, Con, and why confusion arises so rarely from within.
Dina,
I don’t mean this rude at all; I’ve dealt with Christian cults personally, (not accusing you of being a cult!) and they all have a clearly defined hermeneutic which they are not allowed to deviate from – ever! And your right: it is to avoid confusion. But at what cost?
I don’t mean this to be rude at all, but do you still beat your wife?
When the real Messiah comes, if his name is Yeshua or Yehoshua or Jose Feliciano, I will listen to him.
Alan, that’s hilarious lol
I am pointing out that it is easy to confuse the sender and the sent, when the messenger is disguised, and is only outed as an angel when he does a miracle. A miracle cannot prove that one is interacting with an angel or not.
I pointed out that some Christians actually thought Jesus WAS LITERALLY an angel like one of the malachim in the Torah, because of his alleged miracles and alleged resurrection.
Dina believes that its impossible to confuse a herald with the one who sent them. I’m saying its not impossible if the malach is not identified as a malach.
“I am pointing out that it is easy to confuse the sender and the sent, when the messenger is disguised, and is only outed as an angel when he does a miracle.”
So you are concerned that a person listening to someone who looks like a human being but says things like “I am God” might think this person is God? Why are you pointing this out?
“A miracle cannot prove that one is interacting with an angel or not.”
I agree.
“I pointed out that some Christians actually thought Jesus WAS LITERALLY an angel like one of the malachim in the Torah, because of his alleged miracles and alleged resurrection.
Dina believes that its impossible to confuse a herald with the one who sent them. I’m saying its not impossible if the malach is not identified as a malach.”
So you are concerned that a person listening to someone who looks like a human being but says things like “I am God” might think this person is God? Why are you pointing this out?
Yes, Because if an angel can say things like this, it explains how people have confused Jesus, the rebbe, Shabbatai Tzvi, etc. with being a unique son of G-d/waking Torah/mouthpiece of G-d that over time developed into idolatry.
I’m pointing it out, because it explains how the phenomenon happens.
I see a random stranger who says “I am one with the father,” then he multiplies some loaves of bread and fishes, and walks on the lake. After that he disappears into the distance.
Did I interact with a malach, or a human being?
There are a lot of Magicians who do so weird stuff like walking on the water. Are they gods? Don’t forget I can be skeptical if the events really happened. Should I believe it actually happened as the new testament writers said? Can and should I doubt that? If everything in the new testament was proven true, then I might as well become like CP, and not doubt that he came from G-d. What makes me doubt that the new testament’s stories happened is the claims that Jesus had that contradict the Tanakh. If we know everything that is said to be true and that Jesus came back from the earth and flew to heaven, then I might as well accept him as messiah and wonder what the heck he meant with “elohim”. But his claims are so great about himself that it makes me doubt that any of those fantasies actually happened.
I had this conversation with my wife about Micah 4. Is Jesus a ruler? Is he ruling in heaven right now as the new testament said? Can I just say that it as been fulfilled? If you accept all the new testament as reliable, then yes, it has been fulfilled. If you look with a critic eye, you will say no, as Jesus was not a true ruler. The claims become true if you accept the new testament as true, and become false if you do not accept it. CP can say that Jesus will come back from the clouds of heaven, as per the new testament. It will be true. Jesus claims all came to past and he is without sins, so, no doubt it has been fulfilled already in most Christians mind. But all that is circular reasoning. I know the new testament is true because the Old testament said so. I know that the old testament talks about Jesus, because the new testament said so… If the new testament is not true, the all the prophecies about Jesus become irrelevant non-senses and he most likely did not multiply a bunch of fish and bread and certainly did not walk on water. So Jesus was not a weird Malach with a halo on his head. If it is the case, then we are all here for the wrong reason!
do you apply the same standard to Torah?
I think that there is no new revelation in the Tanakh for me to use the same standard. In my opinion, if the Hebrew Bible is not true, then evolution is true and there is no god. So to answer your question, it is mostly a comparison between the two worldviews and which one makes more sense for me. If I doubt the NT, I doubt one leader. Does his message fits with the rest of the Hebrew Bible? I can use the same with the Quran. Does it have the same message than the Bible? If yes, then, there is no reason to doubt. If no, then there is good reason not to accept it as inspired.
RT, you write:
” then there is good reason not to accept it as inspired.”
RT, I think it is a mistake to put to much emphasis on if the NT is inspired or not. One can treat it as a historical narrative and still come away with a pretty accurate picture of what transpired without getting hung up on every word or phrase which only leads to interpretive doctrine debates and divisions.
Whether you are looking for reasons to believe the NT or disbelieve; you will find them; there is plenty of room to err if one so desires.
That said; we do know Yeshua existed and without writing a book, raising a army or starting a new religion, even without the internet, he arguably has been the most influential person who has ever lived, and a Jew at that!
Therefore it is only logical to assume there exists much misinformation concerning who he really is and be willing to do some digging. I think believing every word of the NT is inspired is counterproductive to such a search.
“One can treat it as a historical narrative”
An historical narrative written by his followers? Imagine Cesar would have a book with miracles that he did written by his higher ranking military figure. Would you take it as a historical narrative or a bunch of non-sense a lunatic decide to write about.
Well, I think there are good reason to doubt that Jesus ever walked on water and even that he was raised from the dead. Many “facts” were written when there was nobody to verify its accuracy. Just like when the Sanhedrin speaks, who was there to see that it was actually what happened? Did any of the 70 came and gave his own account to the writer of the new testament? What else was forged? His ascension? his miracles? his place of birth? Could Matthew have written about his place of birth after he realized that the messiah was supposed to be from Bethlehem? Could the resurrection be based on the narrative of Isaiah 53? Could the whole thing have been written for the only purpose to have the Jews leave their religion and unite themselves to the Roman empire without making a second Hannukah? When you compare the 4 gospels, there are good reason to question most of the “Facts” of the new testament…
RT,
A critical look at the synoptic Gospels clearly revels a pieced together narrative from earlier historical facts as best could be attained. Perhaps some redaction to fit Pauline theology occurred and perhaps some exaggeration of events before the end of the 2nd century. Nevertheless, subtract these things and we’re still left with a fairly decent picture of Yeshua; a devoted Torah observant Jew who helped the sick and poor, challenged a religious and legal system of the day corrupted by a few leaders, and gave his life to do so, yet giving the credit to Hashem.
Sure many of the points you bring up could of happened. For example I think it is plausible to conclude the first two chapters of Matthew are a later addition. But so what? For example how does a virgin birth or lack of one change one bit of explicit scriptural theology? – Let’s take a look; Scripture says explicitly that no one knows who the son is except the Father and nowhere does Scripture explicitly claim Yeshua is God. Therefore if in fact Joseph impregnated Mary, what does it change? God still could of done something miraculous in the womb – see it doesn’t change a thing. What if in fact it was a virgin birth, what does that mean to us as we have no idea where the other chromosomes came from; did Mary supply them? Did they come from God? or something else? All this is really no sign to anyone but Mary, because only she knows for sure if she was with a man or not, even then if she wasn’t with a man, she still would no idea if the chromosomes came from her or God. A virgin birth? It only effects systematically derived doctrines and the doctrine of inerrancy other than that – It’s all a moot point!
The real point is who you side with; a 2000 year old corrupt Sanhedrin in collusion with Rome or a devoted Torah observant Jew who gave his life to free Israel from corrupt leaders?
I do believe God takes this choice seriously.
Do you guys see CP’s inherent anti-Semitism in his statement: “The real point is who you side with; a 2000 year old corrupt Sanhedrin in collusion with Rome or a devoted Torah observant Jew who gave his life to free Israel from corrupt leaders?”
In other words, all Jews who reject Jesus “side with a 2000-year-old corrupt Sanhedrin in collusion with Rome.”
I think God takes seriously His promise to punish the enemies of my people whose evil beliefs caused the murder of millions of Jews over the centuries, and the oppression of millions more.
CP,
I’m new around here. But just in the couple weeks I’ve been here what I gather is that you are trying to get Jews to become chassidim of Jesus, preferably your version of him. In the two weeks I’ve been here you’ve written several times how the Jewish leadership was bad bad bad and Jesus was good good good. I’m really getting sick of it. I personally can’t do anything about it but I wish you would cut it out.
Alan, please stick around a little longer. I’m compiling for you a list of arguments I presented to CP over the last few months for why Jews reject Jesus to show you that he’s been given the reasons but lacks the ability to emphasize with our point of view, repeating the same questions and expressing amazement at our sheer stubbornness and foolishness.
Others have also taken hours of their time to patiently explain, and he still cannot articulate a single reason.
Ok, thank you.
CP You have either one of two answers to choose from – You are still beating your wife or you stopped doing that – which do you choose? 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Dina
I don’t believe it’s that CP cannot, it’s that he will not. As long as he doesn’t say why he believes what he believes, no one can challenge him and he can trash talk all he wants.
Dina, Alan, LarryB
So you want to know what I believe?
https://archive.org/details/YeshuaTheTorahMaster
Listen to it, tear it apart if you like and get back to me.
Btw, it’s based on the letter of an “Real” Orthodox Rabbi written in 1757.
CP,
It doesn’t matter to me if he was the most brilliant Torah genius ever. Who knows if he really was, but even if he was, the Tenach and the Talmud show us that brilliance, genius and mastery of Torah are no guarantee of kashrut (kosherness).
Alan,
Sorry, didn’t mean to offend you, this is just a topic I’m on right now – a period of about 100 years during the second a Temple period when the Leadership was corrupt.
Even R’B has commented on it in past Blogs/comments. It not something I just made up.
This is new information for me and really helps me understand many previously puzzling things. Again I’m sorry my excitement over it has irritated you.
Oh, btw, I’m not trying to convert anyone, just standing up and saying there was an injustice done, yet today it is either not admitted, ignored or deemed righteous. To agree with me is in no way claiming you believe he is Messiah.
CP,
I accept your apology. It’s just really annoying to hear you repeat over and over again that we had better consider how the Pharisees were the villains and J was the innocent victim/hero and we need to choose the right side. If you would just stop repeating this one thing. We don’t need you to tell us, we know it’s repeated in the NT over and over again.
CP I have no problem declaring that any injustice done by any Jewish court or any Jewish authority was wrong. What does this have to do with Jesus? Is there anyone that you are interacting with on this blog that believes that Jesus was the righteous person you believe he was and still agrees to his trial.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
CP
So you believe God and Jesus are one? That is what he teaches.
LarryB,
I don’t see what you’ve said anywhere in R’ J Edem’s letter?
http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/falk1a.html
CP
So you only listened to one of Steve Allens audio files?
LarryB,
No, that is why I only addressed his letter on Christianity which I posted a link to above, and while I may not agree with every minute detail, over all, I’m in agreement. You can read the letter, but I enjoyed the podcast on it. There are other things he taught outside this topic that I disagree with, but only on principle, but he may be right according to Scripture. However these are not our Topi; you asked what I believed about Judaism & Christianity.
Allan,
Yes, it is repeated in the NT but never defined. It is obvious it was not all the Pharisees, but it it is never clearly defined who is who – this is the new information that excites me.
To me it is clearly defined that the good guys were the Pharisees. I hold the Saducees, Baitusim and the Biryonim were not the good guys. Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai were both the Pharisees. I’m not going to say anything about the followers of any of the several false messiahs that lived and were put to death by the Romans at that time. If you want to imagine that the NT was only against Beit Shammai but not against Beit Hillel, gezunter heyt as they say.
CP
This is what you gave me a link to, then you changed it. If I went into a church and the preacher there was teaching Islam I would leave and not give what was said any thought.
“Dina, Alan, LarryB
So you want to know what I believe?
https://archive.org/details/YeshuaTheTorahMaster
LarryB,
I gave you (2) two links: (1) one written, (1) one commentary podcast on the written
CP
Your first and second link post was 9 hours apart, with the audio first. If you like Steve Allens stuff go for it.
“Do you guys see CP’s inherent anti-Semitism in his statement”
I don’t think CP is anti-Semite. I think he loves the Jewish People. He probably subscribe to “Israel My Glory” and pay his tithe for the evangelism of the Jews. He probably pray for the peace of Israel and may have prayers meeting to pray to G-d for His people to accept his messiah. True, he believes that all Jews are blind to their messiah, but I do think he love the Jews. That might be the reason why he is here.
What he does not realize though, is that if he is wrong, he causes all those Jews to be led astray from the One and only G-d. All the money he gives and all the time he spends goes against G-d (even if his intention are right)…
CP
“However these are not our Topi; you asked what I believed about Judaism & Christianity.”
I did not ask you that, and my last comment on the subject was not what you believe it’s why you believe.
LarryB says:
March 14, 2017 at 9:26 am
CP
So you only listened to one of Steve Allens audio files?
Sorry, Larry, I misunderstood your question – yes, I’ve only listened to one of Steve Allens audio files. I don’t know his beliefs, I was focusing on R’ Jacob Edem’s apologetic.
R’B, you write:
“Is there anyone that you are interacting with on this blog that believes that Jesus was the righteous person you believe he was and still agrees to his trial.”
Idk, is there?
This proves my point. Do you guys see what I mean?
CP,
Can you please try to explain to me what you feel the Sanhedrin’s sin was in their handing over Jesus to be killed? What sect of Judaism do you think the rabbis of this Sanhedrin belonged to? Do you think their sin was willful and rebellious against Hashem or do you feel they made an honest mistake? And what kind of sin did the Jewish masses commit? I’m sorry if I’m asking stupid questions but this is all new to me. I’ve only been involved with this for the past 3 or 4 months outside of this blog.
Alan, I highly recommend William Nicholl’s Christian Anti-Semitism: A History of Hate. This book explores early Christianity and tries to reconstruct the historical Jesus (much like CP tries to do). He also believes that Jesus was a righteous Jew but he rejects the gospel accounts of his trial and crucifixion and offers powerful evidence against them.
Thank you so much! I didn’t know about him.
RT says:
“I don’t think CP is anti-Semite. I think he loves the Jewish People.”
Thank you for the kind words. I love Jewish people because I IS one – by blood, not by religion; however I am exploring rectifying that.
When my great grand parents came to America from Poland they left Judaism behind, embracing Catholicism. Similar for my other great-great grand parents coming from Germany to Russia to America.
Btw, I haven’t attended any Church for years, only a Reform Synagogue.
I’m currently working through a lot of stuff and I’ll be the first to admit I’m stubborn, skeptical and critical, yet am more open minded than people give me credit for.
Thanks RT, your words are as a glass of fresh water on a long dusty and difficult journey.
Most Messianic do as well… Unfortunately, we are in a weird world that we can’t categorize everybody.
Alan;
“Can you please try to explain to me what you feel the Sanhedrin’s sin was in their handing over Jesus to be killed? ”
—Protecting their positions of power and wealth at the expense of justice.
“What sect of Judaism do you think the rabbis of this Sanhedrin belonged to?”
— Beit Shammai dominated the Sanhedrin, not completely – just the majority.
“Do you think their sin was willful and rebellious against Hashem or do you feel they made an honest mistake?
— self justified rebellion.
“And what kind of sin did the Jewish masses commit?”
— None to not much according to their knowledge of Torah.
CP,
Thank you!
“Can you please try to explain to me what you feel the Sanhedrin’s sin was in their handing over Jesus to be killed? ”
—Protecting their positions of power and wealth at the expense of justice.
“What sect of Judaism do you think the rabbis of this Sanhedrin belonged to?”
— Beit Shammai dominated the Sanhedrin, not completely – just the majority.
“Do you think their sin was willful and rebellious against Hashem or do you feel they made an honest mistake?
— self justified rebellion.
“And what kind of sin did the Jewish masses commit?”
— None to not much according to their knowledge of Torah.
If you could go back in time and you were the head of the Sanhedrin and had the power to make anything happen, what would you have done to have justice served in Jesus’s case?
You say that the Sanhedrin was dominated by Beit Shammai. I could almost swear (but I won’t) that I learned that the Saducess, not the Pharisees (Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel) controlled the Sanhedrin at that time.
You say that the Jewish masses committed virtually no sin. But I thought you said the Temple was destroyed solely because the Jewish masses rejected Jesus?
Could it be a righteous act? A man forgiving sins and requiring people to call him “Lord”. That goes against the Torah. Didn’t the Torah said we should not have pity on such man? Should the judges of Israel be defied and called “Hypocrites”? Would there be any way that this “self justify rebellion” be actually justified as per written Torah?
RT,
“Could it be a righteous act? A man forgiving sins and requiring people to call him “Lord”. ”
Could you please tell me where in the NT Jesus required people to call him Lord with a capital L?
I meant lord, as master… I use “-” when I talk about HaShem…
Oh, ok.
I and the Father are one.” 31The Jews took up stones again to stone Him.
The same when he forgave sins… People though he was blaspheming.
Now could that be a good reason to execute Deuteronomy 13?
RT,
I would guess that CP doesn’t believe the real Jesus said these things. CP, do you?
As per your knowledge of the law, would it have been right to have no pity on him and stone him to death as per what he said? Let just said that he would have gone to the judge of this time and three witnesses would say “Jesus said that he and HaShem are one” would you think it would have been right condemn him for what he have said as per Torah?
If the Sanhedrin was kosher and the witnesses were kosher then I believe it would have been against halacha to let him off the hook for either of the sins of being a false prophet or seducing people to worship him as god.
What about you CP, if what the new testament account is true and what Jesus said in the new testament really was at it is written, would he be guilty of seducing people to worship him as god?
Alan writes:
“I would guess that CP doesn’t believe the real Jesus said these things. CP, do you?”
I believe the Nazarene was a devoted observant Torah teacher, therefore when contractions arise it’s because of misunderstanding, lack of historical cultural context, translational error or gentile redaction.
The “translational error” is the wild card that resolves all the problems! My Bible is full of Translation error, what does not fit my worldview is just discredited… Pick and choosing the verse that fit your kosher Jesus?
RT writes;
“……..would he be guilty of seducing people to worship him as god?”
I’m assuming you mean big “G” ? if so, the NT as written, nowhere portrays Yeshua as seducing people to worship him as God. If small “g”, then only the type of worship equal to honor and respect due a Messiah.
Ok, if Jesus said “Me and HaShem are one” you don’t hink it could be understood as saying he was G-d? So, when the people heard that, did they have to go to seminary to understand what he meant? When Thomas said “My lord and my G-d” to him, don’t you think he meant what he said? Are you only trying to find excuses to what he said? When Jesus said “your sins are forgiven” and only G-d can forgive sins against him, don’t you think he had such claim that could be understood (at lease) to be blasphemous?
RT,
Admittedly sometimes we scratch our heads and wonder what the Nazarene meant when he said x, y or z and have to take into account we are 3 languages and 2000 years removed. However the phrase you mentioned; “Me and HaShem are one” is not one of these times. All we have to do is look at John 17 to see what he meant.
“that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You,”
CR,
“So you are concerned that a person listening to someone who looks like a human being but says things like “I am God” might think this person is God? Why are you pointing this out?
Yes, Because if an angel can say things like this, it explains how people have confused Jesus, the rebbe, Shabbatai Tzvi, etc. with being a unique son of G-d/waking Torah/mouthpiece of G-d that over time developed into idolatry.
I’m pointing it out, because it explains how the phenomenon happens.
I see a random stranger who says “I am one with the father,” then he multiplies some loaves of bread and fishes, and walks on the lake. After that he disappears into the distance.
Did I interact with a malach, or a human being?”
Now I’m with you! Super-excellent point! Super-important questions! It’s a very slippery slope and it’s very tempting to get sucked in further and further, often to the point no return by “mystical” people. Depending on how wacky the person’s statements or actions are is how fast I would run for my life. If he/she said something like “I am one with the father”, I would run away as fast as I could. But whatever the statement or feats they might do, I need to protect myself from getting hurt. How do I do this? By learning Tanach and Halacha and measuring what I’m hearing and seeing against the yardstick of Tanach and Halacha. And if I feel I am not qualified to make the determination myself I will consult with a Torah scholar (or psychiatrist! ) that I trust to be a wise mensch or menschette. It might take weeks or months to make this determination. In other cases, you can make the determination instantly. It only took me a few minutes of looking through the NT to know to run for my life. It took many years in Chabad before I decided there were non-kosher things there and other things that might be kosher but that I just don’t agree with. If I remember correctly, the majority of Jews in Shabbatai Tzvi’s day fell for it. Most got over it and moved on after his was imprisoned and converted but some even to this day believe he is the messiah and god. We have to be grounded in halacha and Tanach and to be connected to well-grounded wise Torah scholars who also have good characters and a lot of life experience. This is how I protect myself. In terms of knowing whether someone is a human being or an angel, if we stick around them long enough we’ll be able to tell. We might not be able to tell right away, but just stick around (as long as they are behaving like a kosher person) and sooner or later you’ll be able to know. But if they disappear and you never see them again, you might never know – and the good news is that it doesn’t really matter anyway! What does matter is that we serve Hashem in a kosher way and we need to know halacha and mussar (and some would say Chassidus) in order to make it happen.
I ask you that RT because people like Joshua ben Nun interacted with a malach that he initially thought was just a human. What standard did he use to determine that it was an accurate assessment that this soldier was indeed the captain of G-d’s host? The Malach’s say so?
I believe he used his knowledge of Torah (halacha, mussar, kabbalah) to make an accurate assessment.
How do we know that Kabbalah was even a knowledge at that time?
RT,
The Talmud talks about it in depth. We have some very ancient kabbalah books that still exist today and there are strong hints to all of this in the Tanach.
Like what kind of hint in the Tanach?
RT,
I have to leave for a few hours. I will get back to you tonight or tomorrow. For now, I would google “hints of kabbalah in the bible or Tenach” or something like that.
RT,
I think it’s mostly based on Isaiah’s and Ezekiel’s visions of the Throne/Chariot –
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/ezekiels-vision/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkabah_mysticism
It’s also based on Genesis 30:37 where Jacob was peeling rods in order to make the sheep come out streaked, speckled and spotted –
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/379348/jewish/Rings-Speckles-and-Spots.htm
I don’t understand any of this stuff but it’s there if you’re interested.
I don’t know CR. Does it really matter? There are issues that have no answers. Today, Baalam would go straight to a mental institution if you ask me. How do we know he was not delusional? Or even better, how did Moses get that information anyway? So, how did Joshua know? Well, it’s not explained and it is just a wild guess…
If I remember correctly, the majority of Jews in Shabbatai Tzvi’s day fell for it. Most got over it and moved on after his was imprisoned and converted but some even to this day believe he is the messiah and god.
Bingo. These were observant Torah Jews, not Pagans!
You said correctly that you shoud consult a Torah scholar to make a determination on whether that was a Malach or a man. The Patriarchs like Abraham and Joshua didn’t have that “wait, check his ID” moment.
People in Shabbatai Tzvi’s day didn’t have that impulse either. They called Tzvi G-d not because he was the father, but because they viewed him as a tzaddik who was the best reflection of G-d’s will. The Christians made the same error. My point on this blog has always been that this phenomenon doesn’t originate outside of the Bible, but within its own pages, stories, etc.
CR,
I have to go now for a few hours but…
“Bingo. These were observant Torah Jews, not Pagans!”
Not just Torah Jews but also Torah scholars. There were other scholars that were screaming like cranes against Shabbetai Tzvi. But people even scholars let their emotions get the best of them.
“You said correctly that you shoud consult a Torah scholar to make a determination on whether that was a Malach or a man. The Patriarchs like Abraham and Joshua didn’t have that “wait, check his ID” moment.”
I don’t understand what you mean that they didn’t have that “wait and check his id moment”. What do you mean?
“People in Shabbatai Tzvi’s day didn’t have that impulse either.”
Many let their emotions rule them.
“They called Tzvi G-d not because he was the father, but because they viewed him as a tzaddik who was the best reflection of G-d’s will. ”
I think they only started calling him god after his death. But I would have to double check.
“The Christians made the same error. My point on this blog has always been that this phenomenon doesn’t originate outside of the Bible, but within its own pages, stories, etc.”
I agree with you.
CR,
““They called Tzvi G-d not because he was the father, but because they viewed him as a tzaddik who was the best reflection of G-d’s will. ”
I don’t think this is correct. I remember learning that they called Tzvi god because they believed he was one with the Father, that they became one and the same. It wasn’t because they viewed him the best reflection of G-d’s will. They believed he became one with G-d. This is how I learned it from an expert once. But I might be wrong.
I don’t understand what you mean that they didn’t have that “wait and check his id moment”. What do you mean?
When you read in the Torah in places like Genesis 31:13 or Joshua 5, the patriarch in question did not say, “hey, let me check my book to see if this is an angel or a man, or let me check halacha.” The angel spoke, and these men listened right away, so well meaning people rashly imitate that example.
If a person has an encounter with a mystical thing, they might not stop to ask those important questions.
All this stuff about mystical messianic figures, malachim, tzaddikim, messaih’s who can die, etc. its all part of the folk traditions that have run amok.
When I see people talk to the Christians like they are foolish morons, I just have in the back of my mind all this folk religion that runs rampant every so often. When someone talks to the Christian like he believes in foolishness, and then that Christian can bring sources to back his positions, it does more harm than good.
CR,
I have a few more minutes –
I don’t understand what you mean that they didn’t have that “wait and check his id moment”. What do you mean?
When you read in the Torah in places like Genesis 31:13 or Joshua 5, the patriarch in question did not say, “hey, let me check my book to see if this is an angel or a man, or let me check halacha.” The angel spoke, and these men listened right away, so well meaning people rashly imitate that example.”
Ok, you’re right it doesn’t say it there. The Tenach is very terse and not everything that was spoken or thought was put in the text. Because in other places in Tenach we are warned about false prophets and false visions and dreams and we are given the laws that go along with them, we can assume that at least a person like Joshua was on guard for both spiritual and physical danger when he saw that Captain and he used his wisdom and practical experience to assess the situation.
“If a person has an encounter with a mystical thing, they might not stop to ask those important questions.”
That’s right and it’s a huge danger. If they don’t ask right away hopefully they’ll ask somewhere else down the road before they really get into trouble.
“All this stuff about mystical messianic figures, malachim, tzaddikim, messaih’s who can die, etc. its all part of the folk traditions that have run amok.”
I agree.
“When I see people talk to the Christians like they are foolish morons, I just have in the back of my mind all this folk religion that runs rampant every so often. When someone talks to the Christian like he believes in foolishness, and then that Christian can bring sources to back his positions, it does more harm than good.”
I don’t understand what you mean.
Con, honestly, what planet are you living on? It’s the Christians who talk to us like we’re the consummate fools. Have you been paying attention to CP? He has used words like “illogical” and “unreasonable” to describe our rejection of Jesus. He still believes Jews are corporately responsible for Jesus’s death.
All we’re doing is defending our faith against aggressive missionaries. How many times have I told you that this website exists only for this purpose, and if Christians would leave us alone, it would disappear?
It sounds like special pleading for Christians, if you ask me, and they don’t deserve it!
I don’t think Christians are foolish morons. I think they should shut up and leave us alone.
I don’t know why you think it’s not okay for us to strenuously defend ourselves against these unwelcome intrusions.
And if you do think it’s okay, Con, then why do you criticize us for it?
Dina, you write:
“He still believes Jews are corporately responsible for Jesus’s death.”
Dear Dina, this is not true.
First off, the “Pauline Christian” position is the sin common to all mankind killed Yeshua, therefore we ALL are responsible.
However;
I’ve gone out of my way to express this is a personal decision to support or not the decision of a Sanhedrin controlled by a few corrupt men and the actual responsibility is on those who actually took part.
As I said in another comment;
I think this is a decision God takes seriously.
CP, you wrote:
“I’ve gone out of my way to express this is a personal decision to support or not the decision of a Sanhedrin controlled by a few corrupt men…..”
I have never seen or heard you or any christian present any evidence that this alleged decision ever took place. Name any other time in history when, at night, during a holy time such as Passover: “the chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against (name the accused) so that they could put him to death.” (Mark 14:55)
In this particular case the high priest asked the accused, “Are you the Messiah?” (Mark 14:61) When he answered “I am”, “The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think? They all condemned him as worthy of death.” (Mark 14:64)
Such a reaction to someone claiming to be a messiah? Mark continues in verse 65: “Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, “Prophesy!” Give me a break! I’m supposed to believe this nonsense???
And the drama continues………morning finally arrives:
“Very early in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders, the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin, made their plans. So they bound Jesus, led him away and handed him over to Pilate.” (Mark 15:1) Pilate questions him but he doesn’t answer. “But Jesus still made no reply, and Pilate was amazed.” (Mark 15:5) Now, how did Mark know that Pilate was amazed? Was Mark there??? I doubt it.
For what happens next, the author of this story counts on the reader/listener being completely ignorant of Roman history. He actually has the nerve to write that Pilate, whose level of cruelty shocked even Rome, suddenly becomes a nice guy!
Continuing on, Pilate says: “….I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him.” ….. “But the whole crowd shouted, “Away with this man! Release Barabbas to us!” (Luke 23:14 & 18)
Barabbas was supposedly a well known prisoner who had committed murder. According to the gospel stories: “Now at the feast Pilate was accustomed to releasing one prisoner to them, whomever they requested.” (Mark 15:6) Oh really??? I wasn’t aware of the jews having a custom of selecting a prisoner for Pilate to release.
The story has Pilate and the crowd going back and forth: “Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again. But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!” (Luke 23: 20 & 21)
The story goes on and there’s a lot I skipped over. I wrote this much to make a point and to show how ludicrous the whole thing is……
I don’t believe a word of it. Pilate is elevated to a person of compassion and the jews are degraded to the level of thugs, spitting and hitting. It is garbage and it makes me sick. One can only guess how much jewish blood has been split because of it. But Hashem is keeping count.
I have heard it said that it’s not what someone is willing to say about someone that reveals how they really feel, but rather, it’s what someone is willing to believe about someone that reveals the true feelings. I honestly don’t understand how anyone can believe this and not see it for what it is, an anti-semitic polemic against the jews.
CP, I do agree with one thing you said: “I think this is a decision God takes seriously.”
Southern Noahide,
Thank you for the time and effort you put in, I hear what you’re saying. But the bottom line is you’ve decided not to believe it because to you it is not believable. Let’s consider a few points:
1) A historical narrative does fill in unknown conversations.
2) A historical narrative records from the author’s perspective.
2) Pilates wife had a dream and warned Pilate to have nothing to do with this.
3) I wouldn’t underestimate the wickedness of man.
4) If the Nazarene was Messiah, you bet there was a spiritual battle.
The one most objective historical fact from non Biblical sources is Yeshua was crucified under Pontus Pilate.
CP So the story is believable to you because these people were cruel. And you know that these people were cruel because of this story. How does that make sense? By the way – another objective historical fact is that Pontius Pilate was the one governor that Rome recalled because of cruelty to the local populace. And what makes one fact “more” objective or more of a fact than another? Finally, ne more question. If a historical narrative is written from the author’s perspective – how do you know that the author’s hatred or cruelty didn’t warp his narrative?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
R’B,
“CP So the story is believable to you because these people were cruel. And you know that these people were cruel because of this story. How does that make sense?
— My meaning is the narrative is not unbelievable solely based on the cruelty it contains.
“By the way – another objective historical fact is that Pontius Pilate was the one governor that Rome recalled because of cruelty to the local populace. And what makes one fact “more” objective or more of a fact than another? ”
— Yes, I’ve also read that about Pontius Pilate and believe it to be accurate. A historical fact is considered more objective if written by an outside party who has no opinion either way. For our topic; a person outside of Christianity yet not opposed to it, would naturally be a more objective source than advocates or enemies of Christianity. In other words, non-partisan extra biblical sources would be considered more objective than the biblical authors.
“Finally, ne more question. If a historical narrative is written from the author’s perspective – how do you know that the author’s hatred or cruelty didn’t warp his narrative?”
— We don’t, which is precisely the reason we look for non-partisan sources and opposing sources, we look at cultural context, language differences and textual criticism pointing to possible redactions.
R’B, if you don’t mind me pointing out; the Tanach and Talmud are not without their own difficult to believe or understand portions. We both know many looking for a reason not to believe use these portions as proof for their position, that’s just how people are. The Gospels are not immune, what a person looks for they will find. However, do you know of many or any explicit in your face contradictions of Torah by the Nazarene?
CP The heart and soul of the Torah and the prophets is that God should be the center of our attention. The heart and soul of the NT is that Jesus should be the center of our attention.
To illustrate. I have interacted with many Christians, such as yourself, who do not believe that Jesus is divine. Yet invariably, these unitarians identify with trinitarian Christians much faster than they identify with worshipers of God who do not believe in Jesus.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
R’B,
I agree 110% the heart and soul of the Torah and the prophets is that God should be the center of our attention! I agree Christianity has wrongly ‘interpreted’ the heart and soul of the NT as being Jesus should be the center of our attention. Yet however they interpret doesn’t change the truth of what really happened and who the Nazarene really was. As I read the NT, I see Yeshua consistently pointing to the Father. I think it is unfair to blame him for the free will actions of others after him. Was it the brass serpent’s fault people burned incense to it?
R’B you write “To illustrate. I have interacted with many Christians, such as yourself, who do not believe that Jesus is divine. Yet invariably, these unitarians identify with trinitarian Christians much faster than they identify with worshipers of God who do not believe in Jesus.”
Perhaps so, but why do you think that is?
I am becoming more and convinced the Nazarene came to gather the lost and be a ‘shepherd to lost sheep without a shepherd’. Could it be he has come to find the lost and gather the exiles in?
Do you think it is possible since you were born a Orthodox Jew and raised a Orthdox Jew you may not realize it took you 13 years to come to Torah? What does this say for the lost sheep of Israel, those who they or their parents or parents parents left Torah who are not raised in an observant environment from a young age – who is calling these back if not Yeshua?
The way I read the NT is the Nazarene came calling for repentance; a return to Torah. Paul took the message and went to the Nations, but with a different caveat; giving people a choice; stay as Gentiles, but be righteous Gentiles or make conversion to Judaism only if or when one is willing to accept the full yoke of Torah. It appears as though Paul really pushed the former choice for Gentiles.
In light of corporate Christianity’s actions and doctrines; I think it is a huge mistake to let them tell you what the NT means and who the Nazarene was.
CP You missed the point. The fact that they identify with Jesus believing idol-worshipers over non-idol worshipers who don’t believe in Jesus tells me that they have made Jesus the center of their universe. Jesus of the NT preached a message about himself – the pointing to the Father is an excuse to justify his self-aggrandizement. Would Jesus of the NT care if someone served God with their whole heart and soul but never heard of Jesus?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
CP,
I’m really trying to understand what you see in Jesus that you don’t see in any other Jewish person who ever lived. Is it because you believe Moshiach needed to die for our sins and Jesus was the one who fulfilled this? Is this the main reason? Because the mussar/ethical teachings in the gospels can all be found in Tenach.
R’B, you are right that Jesus message was self centered. He said clearly “I am the way, the truth and the life…”. CP, may argue that he was just the messiah, but his claims are more than that. CP, you have dodge the question and have not shown any fulfilled prophecies about Jesus. None, nada, Zip! Why should I put a self-centered man as my “messiah” if he was not prophesied in the Tanakh? We can argue on what he said or the meaning of his words, but it is clear that he have a self-centered message. You can hardly deny that. He said that the Jews are not “saved” without him and his death on the cross. There was a great tension between Jews and Christians, and Jews understood that Jesus was more than a rabbi for his followers. Christians preached to them for a conversion of the heart and thought Jews as unsaved. Why, because they were not true followers of G-d in their opinion without Jesus. Now, if Jesus is the messiah, then it must have been said so in the Tanakh. We will never conclude the argument unless you look at the “prophecies” and show us something he did that was actually written in the Tanakh. If there is nothing, we can conclude with sufficient proof that you are having a false messiah as lord… This is simple…
R’B,
“Would Jesus of the NT care if someone served God with their whole heart and soul but never heard of Jesus?”
Nope. What do they have to repent of?
CP,
I think R’B’s question was about “Jesus of the [TEXT OF THE] NT”, not the Jesus of the New CP Version. Is your answer still nope?
CP Which NT are you reading? Every version that I have seen makes Jesus the only path to where you might want to get to. 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Allan,
“CP, I’m really trying to understand what you see in Jesus that you don’t see in any other Jewish person who ever lived….”
What has Yeshua accomplished that no other Jewish person has is spread Torah to the Nations, okay it just happens to be attached to the NT, but don’t the Gentiles need a “Starter Torah”?
CP,
I wonder what % of the followers of Jesus since the Cross have thrown away their paganism for the Universal Noahide Laws or have converted to Judaism? 1%?
Alan, “….Is your answer still nope?”
Please please don’t misconstrue some honest frankness for rudeness.
It all depends what attitude a person goes to the Text as to what they see in it, If Orthodox Rabbis have been able to read the Text and come to the same conclusion – this Messiah is for lost sheep, then why do you think so many see other things in complete mutual exclusion from this.?
CP,
I’m sorry but I didn’t understand. Could I trouble you to rephrase?
R’B, it’s not a specific version he uses. He takes out anything that does not fit what Jesus could have said… That’s why he does not believe Paul’s writing was inspired. If Jesus’ saying does not fit what he should have said, then it’s a mistranslation, an interpretation issue or it was added to fit Catholic’s teaching later. So Jesus could not have said “I am the way”, so it must fall into one of the following category and he just ignores it… It’s quite convenient for him…
R’B, Allan & RT,
Hopefully this will answer everything at once;
R’B writes;
“CP Which NT are you reading? Every version that I have seen makes Jesus the only path to where you might want to get to.”
There are only two or three verses of “exclusiveness” and I’m fairly sure they are all found in John; a late theologically advanced Gospel. To be blunt; I question these verses as being authentic or at the least, misunderstood.
It is my understanding Rabbis of that era did call Talmudim, claiming their teaching is the only correct interpretation of Torah. This could be the case.
However, if we assume the Nazarene is an advent of Messiah, immediately we know it isn’t what we thought. There are so many Messianic prophecies he didn’t fulfill; he is either not the one, or there is a two stage fulfillment. The question then becomes did he fulfill any? We are discussing a couple right now; knowledge of Torah spread among the Nations and the calling back of exiles.
Another possible view of Yeshua is; if the exiles have broken Torah, left and been divorced by God, the conditions of the Abrahamic Covenant must be met before they can start over. The Nazarene through agency may have satisfied the conditions of the Covenant so that the exiles are forgiven and able to come back and start over.
The point being is Yeshua is for those wishing to come back, not necessarily for those who are correctly keeping Torah from the heart. There are a number of verses which imply this very thing.
The error I see being perpetrated by Christians and Jews is the arrogance of exclusiveness; in not realizing a two fold Messanic plan for BOTH Jews and Gentiles, which has not yet reached its completion.
CP,
“It is my understanding Rabbis of that era did call Talmudim, claiming their teaching is the only correct interpretation of Torah. This could be the case.”
In my learning of Torah, I’ve never ever come across any Tannaim or Amoraim (rabbis of the Mishnaic times and Talmudic times) claiming their teaching is the only correct interpretation. It’s exactly the opposite of what you’re saying. You have to learn Gemara with a teacher to believe me!
“The question then becomes did he fulfill any? We are discussing a couple right now; knowledge of Torah spread among the Nations and the calling back of exiles.”
What is your definition of Torah here? And what’s your definition of “calling back of exiles”?
“Another possible view of Yeshua is; if the exiles have broken Torah, left and been divorced by God,”
There’s been no divorce. https://outreachjudaism.org/god-divorce-israel/
“The Nazarene through agency may have satisfied the conditions of the Covenant so that the exiles are forgiven and able to come back and start over.”
He died for our sins? It says somewhere in the Tenach that one Jew can fulfill all the commandments for all other Jews?
“The point being is Yeshua is for those wishing to come back, not necessarily for those who are correctly keeping Torah from the heart. There are a number of verses which imply this very thing.”
Yeshua is for those wishing to come back to keeping the commandments or the Noahide Laws Without Yeshua we wouldn’t know Hashem wants our hearts?
“The error I see being perpetrated by Christians and Jews is the arrogance of exclusiveness; in not realizing a two fold Messanic plan for BOTH Jews and Gentiles, which has not yet reached its completion.”
Without Yeshua we wouldn’t know of a messianic plan for both Jews and Gentiles? The Tenach talks about it, the Talmud talks about it. Jews haven’t been able to talk about it with the Gentiles until the past couple of decades because they would have gotten killed if they did.
Hold on CP, you are talking about the lost tribes, and how they could have come back to torah. Well, that sounds fine, but let us not forget that no Christians ever follow Torah after the first century. Basically, you were much obliged to worship Mary and all the Saints and accept his “holy” father the pope. Furthermore, most common Christians were not allowed to read the Bible at all, and if they grabbed a nice one by luck, it would have been in Latin! That’s not the Torah observant teaching that I would expect the lost tribes to know.
Furthermore, I would like to talk about a Jew who would accept your messiah as Messiah. What would happen of his lineage and his Jewishness? I am telling you, lost, forgotten and gone one or two generations later. Imagine Peter had 10 sons, are they Jew today? Were they on the 3rd century? No, it was long gone and forgotten. So, not only your lost tribes did not know the Torah, but the real tribe got assimilated (partially) because of Christianity. This is simple, if anybody in your lineage would have convert to Christianity (3rd or 4th generation), you would not even know you are a Jew. It’s still like that today, most Jews in my messianic congregation are married with gentiles. Furthermore, they don’t think that the Jewishness comes from the mother (most of them) and so they still think they are Jews, when they are not! What will happen to your grand-children, will they consider themselves Jews or Christians?
RT,
Forgive me if I shouldn’t ask you this question but why do you go to a messianic congregation? If you’d rather not talk about it that’s fine.
So, to answer your argument that this prophecy was fulfilled, I would say, Not at all. It is actually the opposite that happened! Jews were forced to leave the Torah and non-Jews could not care less about it. Go and ask what “Torah” means to any CHristians and most will tell you that you are cursed if you follow it! Thanks Paul!
RT,
I must be not making myself clear.
First off it would be good if you didn’t judge Christianity by paganized Christianity, after all, you could equally judge Judaism false using the same standard; or was the Babylonian exile for nothing? Therefore I think we can agree there is always a righteous remnant following God’s plan; both Christian and Jew. What happened o Peter’s offspring? Who knows, they could be Observant Jews, Paganized Christians or something in between.
RT, you write; “Furthermore, I would like to talk about a Jew who would accept your messiah as Messiah. What would happen of his lineage and his Jewishness?”
Answer: absolutely nothing unless fellow Jews drive him out of the Synagogue.
You also write; “So, to answer your argument that this prophecy was fulfilled, I would say, Not at all. It is actually the opposite that happened!”
I’d have to disagree, not that one can’t point to many a paganized christian but that the Nazarene has set and is setting the stage for this prophecy’s fulfillment.
RT, let’s talk about Paul for a moment. I used ponder if he was the anti-Christ. But if one looks at what Paul was teaching, it is basically in line with Judaism. He taught Gentiles did not have to come under the full yoke of Torah if they did not want to, but could still be righteous before God. He taught Jews were under the full yoke of Torah and non-observant Jews should come under the full yoke of Torah. Acts 15:19-21 is a starter kit or Gentiles.
Admittedly there there have been all kind of perverse interpretations of the NT such as the Torah has been abolished. How much they have affected the text is not known. But if one uses Torah as a standard to judge with, the NT can be interpreted correctly and Yeshua can be seen for who he really is.
The Nazarene has brought many Gentiles to God as righteous God fearers, and lost Jews back to Torah. I am proof of the later as one on such a journey. I think it is “odd” that every Jew wants me to deny the one who found me and led me back to Torah.
CP, do you have new information about your mother that leads to state at least twice in the last week that you are definitely halachically Jewish?
CP, since you prize frankness, allow me to be blunt.
You wrote: “I am proof of the later as one on such a journey. I think it is “odd” that every Jew wants me to deny the one who found me and led me back to Torah.”
As long as you reject the testimony of the nation of Israel, you will forever be cut off from the Jewish people.
One hundred percent of Jews who have followed Jesus lost their Jewish identity within a few generations. Even you are not sure if you are Jewish or not (unless new information has come to light that you have not shared with us). It will not be different for you if you have or are planning to have children.
Even if no children are in the picture, in any case no Jewish denomination will accept you as a Jew unless you conceal your worship of Jesus (which would be a repulsive deception that I am sure you would avoid). You can rail against the system all you like, denounce Jews for their “illogical” and “unreasonable” stance, it won’t change anything.
CP,
A lot of Bob Marley’s lyrics came from Tenach. I credit listening to his songs with sparking an interest in my roots. But baruch Hashem I didn’t become a pot-smoking worshiper of Emperor Haile Salasie which was something that he also promoted. There were a couple of other people in my life besides Bob Marley that pulled me towards my roots. But the one who got me interested in Tenach was Brother Bob. But I don’t believe for a second that Brother Bob led me to the Torah. It was Hashem who led me. Bob Marley was a stepping stone. It was a slippery stepping stone but thank G-d I didn’t slip on it too much before I moved on to higher things.
Alan, I am glad that, while you recognize that Bob Marley was the stepping stone, you do not consider him your greatest teacher and worship him as the only way to God :).
Dina,
It was just the verses from Tenach and his soulful melodies that was the stepping stone. The pot, worshiping King Haile Salasie as god, and promiscuity were also part of Bob Marley’s life and his message. Not a very good role model. But by the grace of G-d I was able to take the good (the verses from Tenach) and not get ruined by the bad.
Hey, I was just kidding! I’m glad you found your way back. I’m glad Bob Marley accomplished a little good with his life ;).
DIna,
I knew you were kidding. Thanks for the CP quote. Oy.
Alan, in mentioning unconsciously anti-Jewish attitudes, I gave you but one example: the way Christians even today see the role of Jews in Jesus’ death and how they view today’s Jews as a result.
Another unconsciously anti-Jewish attitude is that Christianity is loving and spiritual while Judaism is cold and legalistic. Christians love God and perform acts of loving kindness, while Jews don’t love God and don’t care about their fellows, obsessing instead over petty details of the ritual laws.
Malcolm Hay, author of Thy Brother’s Blood, notes that when someone behaves badly, he’s called a “so-called Christian.” When Christians disapprove of a particular Jew’s actions, they never call him a “so-called Jew.” On the other hand, when a Jew behaves well, he is said to be acting like a Christian.
See if you can hear echoes of these ideas in a dialogue I had with CP a while back, again cut and pasted:
CP: Christians constantly talk about God, quote Scriptures to each other, have Bible studies and community outreach. The Jewish community, not so much…Jews have Mezuzahs and Tefillin and Christians can’t stop talking about God [my emphasis].
[from https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2016/08/21/conversation-a-note-from-jim/#comment-31428%5D
Dina: [I responded with several comments, too long to repost, on the Godly speech and charitable giving and volunteerism of Orthodox Jews.]
CP: Thank you for your reply(s). It is enlightening and refreshing to learn of such things among the Orthodox community. Ya’ll sound very Christian‼️ [my emphasis]
[from https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2016/08/21/conversation-a-note-from-jim/#comment-31455%5D
CP likes to say that the religion he practices is closer to Judaism than to Christianity. Unfortunately, the above comments, the insinuations that Jews lack a sincere motive to reject Jesus, the inability to concede that Jews reject Jesus because they love God, the repeated comments about the cold, legalistic nature of Judaism versus the warm, spiritual nature of Christianity all combine to show us how thoroughly Christian are his prejudices.
DIna,
Thank you very much for pasting that dialogue and for your explanation!
Alan, we also must consider Jesus’ teachings led literally billions of Christians over the centuries into hatred, bloodshed, and idolatry. In my book, if that doesn’t outweigh the good, at least it cancels it out.
Christians dismiss this because they refuse to confront Christian behavior before the 1960s, except to meditate on the few pinpricks of light throughout their bloody history who helped Jews, often at the risk of their own lives.
This is beside for the fact that two billion Christians today still are idolaters (sincere and well-meaning as most of them undoubtedly are, and I do not judge them; I simply blame their scriptures). The overwhelming majority of them hold views that are unconsciously anti-Jewish.
For example, Alan, read the quotes below that I cut and pasted from comments written by none other than CP:
Myself and every Christan I know is extremely tolerant of the unrepentant Jewish position of murdering Yeshua.
But this is all besides the point because you still are unrepentant. You rail on historical Christian antisemitism one second then commend modern Christians for their repentance yet stand by the decision of our forefathers to hand a innocent man over to Roman authority to be executed. Even though this is just plain wrong, most modern Christians tolerate your unrepentant position, instead choosing forgiveness and reconciliation.
As long as you continue to embrace and support the decision of 2000 year old religious leaders, whom you don’t even know, you will continue to look for ways to justify your position rather than confess and repent.
Far as I’m concerned, anyone who thinks the Sanhedrin righteous for turning over a fellow Jew to be tortured and nailed on a cross to die for teaching a return to Torah and claiming to be Messiah should share in their judgement, however Yeshua’s interpretation of Torah teaches to forgive them and leave it to God to sort out.
Does that make your blood run cold?
CP, if you want to say that Torah was spread because of Christianity, then you must admit that it was 99% because of Pagan Christianity. Your version (the real one as per you) of Christianity did not share anything to the word if we count by number….
Alan, I am supposed to be neutral and look if Jesus did fulfilled the prophecies. At least, that’s what my family and I agreed… So I keep on going until the bright flash of light (Holy Spirit) comes and reveal that everything has been fulfilled. And that following Yeshua is not gross idolatry.
RT,
“Alan, I am supposed to be neutral and look if Jesus did fulfilled the prophecies. At least, that’s what my family and I agreed… So I keep on going until the bright flash of light (Holy Spirit) comes and reveal that everything has been fulfilled. And that following Yeshua is not gross idolatry.”
I really don’t understand what you mean but that’s ok. We can leave it be.
Alan, great comment, I loved it!
However my relationship with Yeshua goes a might bit deeper than song lyrics. Without going into to much detail; I’ve been around the world as a missionary, even had mob throw rocks at me in India, I’ve seen demons manifest and cast out in the name of the Nazarene, I’ve witnessed miracles, my life has literally been saved on more than one occasion and the calling on the name of Yeshua saved me from killing a man who was one of two trying to kick in the door. Before all this I was a partying, drinking, womanizer, recreational drug user and dealer.
Even with all this I had a desire to attend Synagogue, I happily attended the first one years ago, but one day a lady cornered me asking point blank what I thought about Jesus. I was honest and they let me know I was no longer welcome. Since then I found another, started taking Hebrew and conversion classes. The teacher told me one day I was eligible for conversion, I said I’d love to, but I don’t think you’d want me because of my belief in Yeshua. She wasn’t happy at all, but since we were all friends by then they tolerate me, most the time I feel loved by everyone, there is one gal who gets like Dina every now and then, but I understand and feel bad sometimes hoping I’m not intruding.
Once you’ve been introduced to God through Yeshua, felt and seen the power of the promised Spirit, experienced miraculous answers to prayer, dealt with demons, and know first hand the power behind the name of the Nazarene, there can be no denying him.
I feel I’m between a rock and a hard place. I can relate to the early Talmudim when they asked the Sanhedrin; ‘Is it better to obey God or man?’
Oh dear, Alan, it gets very confusing when Muslims have similar experiences, like this one:
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=8115
Gosh, I can’t decide between Jesus and Mohammed now.
CP,
Thank you for sharing this.
“I’ve seen demons manifest and cast out in the name of the Nazarene, ”
I’ve read a first-hand report in a bio of Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook of someone who witnessed Rabbi Kook cast out a dibuk IN THE NAME OF HASHEM, not in the name of a man.
“I’ve witnessed miracles,”
Me too. So have people who believe in every religion. I’m sure believers in the Baal also saw miracles.
“my life has literally been saved on more than one occasion”
Me too literally.
“and the calling on the name of Yeshua saved me from killing a man who was one of two trying to kick in the door.”
What does “calling on the name of Yeshua” mean? How is this different than praying to him? Jews have never ever called on any name except the Name of Hashem.
“Once you’ve been introduced to God through Yeshua, felt and seen the power of the promised Spirit,”
Being involved in music and African dumming groups I also felt a “spirit”. There’s nothing like it, it feels like ruach hakodesh and close to prophecy. But then I started keeping the commandments and I realized that whatever ruach I experienced before was not the real thing.
experienced miraculous answers to prayer, dealt with demons, and know first hand the power behind the name of the Nazarene, there can be no denying him.”
What does this mean “the power behind the name of the Nazarene”?
“I can relate to the early Talmudim when they asked the Sanhedrin; ‘Is it better to obey God or man?’”
I’m not familiar with this story. Can you please give me a source?
“…experienced miraculous answers to prayer, dealt with demons, and know first hand the power behind the name of the Nazarene, there can be no denying him…”
The power behind the name of the Nazarene? And this guy has the nerve to claim his worship is not avodah zarah?
“I know you don’t like me and are doing everything in your power to assassinate my character.”
I don’t have to do anything, I just listen to you talk and then repeat back your self-recriminating words. It takes no power at all on my part, as you’re doing all the work for me.
Alan, I love what you wrote about music because it’s so true. It has the power to sweep you off your feet and into the clouds!
When you listen you are lifted up. When you make it yourself, you don’t feel time passing; it’s as if you’re outside time and space. When you make music with others, well, words fail even me who can’t stop talking. You have to experience it to believe it.
But none of that comes close to keeping the Torah. Shabbos, kashrus, the Yomim Tovim, taharas hamishpacha. It’s exhilarating, uplifting, enobling. It gives you an inexpressible sense of peace.
(I’m not a reggae fan, though. I’m more of a Mozart person. To each his own!)
Dina,
I know you don’t like me and are doing everything in your power to assassinate my character. However I would like to commend on your improvement. You’ve advanced from merely to misquoting me to quoting me out of context of long running sporadic conversations with yourself. Far be it from me not to recognize improvement. Congratulations.
Alan, I privately predicted to a friend after I posted CP’s quotes that he would complain that I misrepresented him. This is what he invariably claims when I quote something he said that looks bad for him. One cannot help wondering what context would justify such comments.
As I explained to you previously, I posted those comments to show you how Christians today have retained their anti-Jewish attitudes and prejudices of the past, albeit at an unconscious level.
CP proved my point with the things he said. He said them; he can retract them if he wishes. He can apologize to the Jewish people. Or he can stand by what he said. He cannot in all honesty say that I have misquoted him or quoted him out of context.
Christians like CP believe that the context of their words matter. They believe that the context of Jesus’ words matter–not just textual context but also the cultural, social, and historical context. But the words of Hashem? They can play fast and loose with those. The words of the Hebrew prophets? Cherry picking them is cool. And the rabbis? Fair game.
It’s an ugly double standard. I long for and pray for Mashiach’s coming when Hashem will finally reveal Himself to the entire world and vindicate us in the eyes of those who hold us in contempt.
Dina,
I read your Muslim article – not even close. I realize you have no standard of reference.
CP Funny, when I read your description of your experience with Jesus I realized something similar – CP doesn’t have a frame of reference. 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Ooh, that makes choosing the right religion so much easier. I’ll just go with whoever has the coolest and most dramatic redemption story.
R’B,
Fair enough, care to elaborate?
CP fair enough – I need time, hopefully in the near future. 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Dina writes;
“The power behind the name of the Nazarene? And this guy has the nerve to claim his worship is not avodah zarah?’
Seriously? Who did Naaman come to be healed of leprosy? Was it the Temple? Did he seek out the God of Israel or Elisha?
(He found the God of Israel through Elisha)
Dina, your personal defination of avodah zarah disagrees with Tanach.
CP,
There was no power behind the name of Elisha and Naaman didn’t call in the name of Elisha.
Alan, you don’t know what you’re talking about because you never experienced the power behind the name of Elisha. Once you’ve experienced that power, there is no denying Elisha. If you call on him you will be saved from possibly killing me because I am so gosh darned annoying.
Dina,
Good one! LOL!
🙂
Talk about twisting stories to fit your theology. Stop making stuff up, CP. It is wearisome to keep pointing this out.
Alan, Dina;
I couldn’t help but notice neither of you answered plain simple questions but choose to engage in …..
CP,
Please tell me what the questions were. I must have missed them.
CP, I noticed you refused to disavow your ugly comments about the Jewish people that I posted to Alan. Instead you choose to engage in…
CP,
This is probably what you wanted an answer to –
“Seriously?”
There is seriously no power behind the name of Elisha.
“Who did Naaman come to be healed of leprosy?”
To Elisha. But as soon as he was healed he gave all the credit to Hashem. He said that from now on he will only worship Hashem. He didn’t say from now on he will be sure to call in the name of Elisha.
” Was it the Temple? Did he seek out the God of Israel or Elisha?
(He found the God of Israel through Elisha)”
He sought out Elisha the prophet who would call on the name of Hashem to heal him. He said, ‘Behold, I thought: He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place, and recover the leper.’
He did find the God of Israel through Elisha.
But what does this story have to do with the “power behind the name of Yeshua” and “calling on the name of Yeshua”?
Please let me if these aren’t the questions you wanted me to answer.
Alan,you write;
“He did find the God of Israel through Elisha.”
Then why did he take dirt home?
CP,
“Alan,you write;
“He did find the God of Israel through Elisha.”
Then why did he take dirt home?”
And Naaman said: ‘If not, yet I pray thee let there be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth; for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the LORD.
Perhaps he wanted to build an altar to Hashem back home with dirt from the land of Israel. I’m not sure, but he wanted to build an altar to Hashem, not to the name of Elisha.
Why do you think he took dirt home?
Dina says:
March 16, 2017 at 12:21 pm
“CP, I noticed you refused to disavow your ugly comments about the Jewish people that I posted to Alan. Instead you choose to engage in…”
I am truly sorry you distort honest dialog, perceiving it as ugly comments in order to further your campaign of character assassination.
CP, I’m truly sorry you pretend I distort dialogue when all I do is copy and paste your own writing.
Can anyone in the audience show me how any context can justify these comments that show CP’s underlying anti-Jewish attitudes? And then tell me who’s the one who’s spreading the hate?
The relevant comments are linked below:
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2017/03/05/incarnation-and-definition-of-marriage-3/#comment-34352
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2017/03/05/incarnation-and-definition-of-marriage-3/#comment-34355
Alan,
Would love to go into the historical context of ancient Mesopotamia, but I’m at work between classes. The bottom line is Naaman found the power behind or “in the name” of Elisha and that power was Hashem.
CP,
So when you have time please explain what calling upon the power of the name of a human being means. I have to tell you that I don’t see this idea at all, not even a hint to it, in the story of Elisha and Naaman.
CP, there is no such thing in the story of Elisha. You are trying too much. Just read the passage, it does not say that in the slightest. You read your belief in the text!
Alan and RT, believing in the power of the name of Elisha just gives you more options. If you call on the name of Jesus and it doesn’t work, you can try calling on the name of Elisha. And if that doesn’t work, why, there are so many others you can pray to. Why pray to God when you can talk to a real, live, I mean dead, human being?
yourphariseefriend says:
March 16, 2017 at 1:35 pm
“CP fair enough – I need time, hopefully in the near future.”
Thanks, sincerely looking forward to it.
For Alan
I presented CP with numerous reasons why Jews reject Jesus, which can be organized into six categories:
1. The false messiah argument
2. The false prophet/avodah zarah argument
3. The by-his-fruits-we-know-him argument
4. The Deuteronomy 17 argument
5. The descendant argument
6. The witness argument
To repeat all these arguments in detail will take too long, so here is a brief summary.
Jesus Was a False Messiah
Scripture describes a utopian era during which a Jewish king who will be a direct descendent of King David through his son Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10) will rule in Israel (Isaiah 11:1-10; Jeremiah: 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-17; Ezekiel 34:23-30, 37:24- 28). During this time, the following scenarios will occur:
Ingathering of the Jewish exiles (Deuteronomy 30:3-4, Isaiah 11:12, Ezekiel 37:21)
Rebuilding of the Third Temple (Isaiah 2:2, Ezekiel 37:26-28)
National resurgence of Torah observance (Deuteronomy 30:10, Jeremiah 31:32, Ezekiel 37:24)
Universal peace (Isaiah 2:4, Isaiah 65:25, Ezekiel 37:26)
Universal knowledge of God (Isaiah 11:9, Jeremiah 31:33, Zechariah 8:20-23)
Punishment of persecutors of the Jews/vindication of the Jews in the eyes of the nations (Deuteronomy 30:7, Isaiah 17:12-14, Isaiah 25:1-8, Isaiah 60:1-3)
Jesus was not a descendant of King David on his father’s side according to Christians who believe he had no earthly father. According to Jews, he can’t rule as king due to his illegitimate status. Furthermore, we do not know who his father was; he may not even have been Jewish.
Jesus was never anointed king of Israel.
None of the beautiful things described above took place during his non-reign of the Jewish people. Instead, after his death, the Temple was destroyed, the Jewish people scattered and exiled, and the Jewish people turned into an object of scorn and derision among the followers of Jesus, followed by 2000 years of horrific oppression and murder in his name.
Some messiah, huh?
Christians changed the job description of the messiah to a suffering, dying savior who redeems mankind from sin. Even if that were the case, how do they know it was Jesus? Unlike the scenarios listed above, this is not empirically verifiable. You cannot see redemption from sin. But it’s a moot point, because that is not the job of the messiah. This concept contradicts Genesis 4:7, Deuteronomy 30, Ezekiel 18 and 33.
Jesus Was a False Prophet
This is much more serious than false messiah. If you claim to be the messiah, nobody would care. If you die without completing the task, you’ll be proved false. But so what? False prophet is worse, because anyone who speaks in God’s name words that he did not speak is liable to receive the death penalty.
In Deuteronomy 18, Moses tells the people that a prophet who speaks falsely must be put to death. But, he tells them, you might well ask, how will we know? He answers: if the prophet gives a sign that doesn’t come to pass. In other words, we’re supposed to test the prophet by asking for a sign.
But what happens when the Pharisees ask for a sign, according to the gospels? Jesus gets angry at them! Still, he reluctantly and grudgingly promises them the sign of Jonah. But he does not appear to them on the third day after his death. He allegedly appears in resurrected form only to his most devoted followers, and they don’t say a word until he’s been gone for fifty days or so.
Jesus promised his followers that before they died he would come on the clouds to gather his elect. They died. He never came.
Jesus predicted that the Temple and all of its buildings would be so thoroughly eradicated, not one stone would be left standing on the other. The Western Wall remains. The remains of the other buildings still stand.
Some prophet, huh?
But it gets worse. In Deuteronomy 13, we are taught that if a prophet performs miracles but teaches a new type of worship, he is a false prophet. This is why Jews are not impressed by Jesus’s supposed miracles. He taught avodah zarah.
What is avodah zarah? It means foreign worship. The Torah defines avodah zarah in three ways:
1) a type of worship unknown to us and/or to our fathers (Deuteronomy 13:7, 29:25; 32:17).
2) worship of any entity other than God (Exodus 20:3, Deuteronomy 5:7, Isaiah 45:5, Isaiah 43:11).
3) any type of worship not taught to us at Mount Sinai (Deuteronomy 4).
Jesus taught, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, and on one comes to the Father but through me” (John 14:6).
This is a type of worship that was unknown to us and to our fathers and is also a type of worship that was not taught at Sinai. For those who believe that Jesus is also God, it is worship of an entity other than God. Therefore, it is avodah zarah, foreign worship.
This teaching, which explicitly states that you need a man to get to God, contradicts the Torah. It also contradicts the explicit teaching that God is close to all who call to him with sincerity (Psalm 145:18).
CP claims that all this is saying is that Jesus is the Torah, and of course, don’t you need the Torah to get to God? He doesn’t get that saying a person is the Torah is foreign worship.
Jesus taught about himself “I am the first and I am the last,” a description reserved only for God (Isaiah 44:6).
John, Chapter 1, teaches that Jesus is the word of God made flesh, also a foreign concept.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth (NIV: 1-5, 14).
This is such obvious avodah zarah, it turns my stomach.
Jesus gave signs that did not come to pass and taught avodah zarah. Thus, he failed both prophet tests.
We Know Him by His Fruits
Jesus supposedly showed his followers a moral path superior to Judaism’s. But the 2000-year results are in, and we see that his teachings have failed spectacularly. Rivers of blood soak the pages of Christian history, the screams of its victims echo throughout the centuries, idolatry has prevailed.
The community who followed Jesus produced villains that our darkest nightmares could not envision. It produced good people too, to be sure. But the community that followed the Torah produced moral giants and no mass murderers. The people Christians scorn for rejecting Jesus have lived according to Jesus’s ethical teachings; his followers, not so much.
The teachings of Jesus led billions of people over the centuries into hatred, bloodshed, and idolatry. What does this mean? It means his teachings were tainted.
The Deuteronomy 17 Argument
Deuteronomy 17:8-12 tells us what to do if “a matter eludes” us. We are to ask the judges, i.e. leaders, of whatever time we’re living in. They will instruct us according to the law and we are not to deviate an iota from their words. Any man who disobeys their rulings will be put to death.
What more need be said? This passage implies that God will always leave us with trustworthy leaders whose rulings we can depend on. The leaders of the time of Jesus did not accept him as a righteous Jewish leader. That pretty much settles it, doesn’t it?
We Are the Descendants of the Pharisees
Every time I think about Mount Sinai and that my very own ancestors stood at its foot and heard God speak to Moses, I’m filled with awe. As a Jew, I’m a link in an unbroken chain that leads directly back to Sinai. Of course, that makes me a link in an unbroken chain that leads directly back to the original Pharisees.
Every Jew today is an actual, physical descendant of the Pharisees, because the Pharisees and Pharisaic Judaism were the only Jews and sect to survive the destruction of the Second Temple. Our very own great, great, great, etc., grandparents encountered Jesus and were unimpressed with him. I would rather rely on the testimony of my own family who actually met the man than strangers 2000 years removed from him and who are not descended from anyone who actually met him–because those who followed him devotedly left no descendants to witness for him.
The Witness Argument
God appointed the people of Israel to be His witnesses (Isaiah 43:10,12; Isaiah 44:8). He promised that His spirit and words would never depart from our mouths and our descendants’ mouths forever (Isaiah 59:21). He promised that we would preserve His testimony even when we stray (Psalm 78). He proclaimed that He placed his words within Jacob but did not do so for any other nation, who do not know His laws (Psalm 147:19-20).
All of this tells us that religious truth cannot be found among the nations of the world, but only within the nation of Israel.
The only ones who preserved the teachings and knowledge of Jesus are those whom God did not entrust with the important task of preserving His testimony.
CP has asked, how can sinning, imperfect Jews (at which point he has given examples from Tanach of the prophets excoriating the Israelites) perfectly preserve God’s truth?
God said we would do it, and I trust Him to keep His promise and figure out a way to ensure that His testimony would never be lost, forgotten, or altered.
CP objected to the citation of Isaiah 59:21, insisting it refers to the future when a redeemer will come to Jacob. I pointed out that this verse switches to the present tense, following three verses in the future tense. He did not respond, instead repeating the same argument to Rabbi B.
CP might say, as he has said before, that no one is telling you to learn anything from the gentiles. This is a deflection. The only people telling the Jews that Jesus was righteous and they must accept him are either gentiles or Jews who learned about him from gentiles. They have no business telling Jews who among them is righteous and who is not.
After proving that Jesus was a false prophet and a false messiah who taught avodah zarah; that his teachings, unlike the teachings of the Pharisees so maligned in the Christian scriptures and by Christians who sneer at the Talmud, led billions of Christians over the centuries into the terrible sins of hatred, oppression of the innocent, mass murder, and idolatry; that we must follow the rulings of our leaders who the Torah in Deuteronomy 17 promises will not lead us astray; that God promised that His truth resides in us and not the gentile nations of the world–after hearing all of this many times and in many forms from me and others on this blog, CP still cannot (or will not) articulate why we reject Jesus. Only very recently he asked me this question yet again, as if I had never written on the subject. Alan, this is deeply troubling because CP is not an outlier. Christians cannot hear us. They continue to view us with contempt and amazement at our stubbornness and stupidity. They cannot fathom that we reject Jesus because we love God.
Dina,
Roughly about 98% of your post is easily refutable and you’ve perverted my words into things I never said.
I can help you clean it up if you like?
I’ve been through this with you before many times and am not interested in revisiting it with someone who lacks the ability to understand the perspective of those he disagrees with. I didn’t write this for you; I wrote it for Alan.
Furthermore, my work is excellent and my arguments unassailable, so no thanks.
Thank you so much Dina!! Yashar koach gadol!! This is a keeper. I will print this out and save it as a document.
You’re welcome, Alan. I hope this puts CP’s disgraceful attitude toward Jews into perspective for you (meaning, it makes his attitude that much more inexcusable).
Dina,
I am impressed that you have collected this information in one spot– it’s quite useful.
Your charge that chistians believe Jews are “stupid” is one I do not adhere to– perhaps I am not a “christian”?
Your charge that chistians believe Jews are stubborn– well. . . actually that’s a charge G-d makes (quite often). . .
_______________________
I have noticed some considerable flaws in your documentation– but it’s too late in the evening to address them.
More to come. . .
_______________________
Kavi, until you are able to empathize with Jews and understand them, don’t bother.
Your inability to see our perspective stifles honesty in debate.
Your perspective solidifies hostility in debate.
Dina,
Actually I was pondering earlier today what it would mean for an Orthodox woman to come to redemptive faith in Yeshua– almost certainly divorce from her husband, the disconnection from her bonds with family, partial or complete severance from her children. . . that’s a terrible loss.
And if the situation is bad for a woman in the US, I was thinking what fate would await a Haredi woman?
Yet, despite the tremendous cost, Jewish women continue to turn to the Truth in Yeshua– even Holocaust survivors. . .
_______________________
KAVI
While your in the mood to act like an omnivorous domesticated hoofed mammal with sparse bristly hair and a flat snout, I’ll remind you that overall Judaism discourages
conversion. Christians spend billions of dollars and their still losing ground and their numbers are shrinking anyway.
Kavi, I find it particularly vile for Christians to shamelessly exploit the worst tragedy to befall the Jewish people to try to convert them.
Some Jews lost their faith as a result of the horrors they had to endure at the hands of the Nazis and their eager and willing Christian accomplices. I dare you, sitting in the comfort of your home, to judge them.
Some Jews maintained and even strengthened their Jewish faith. The number of Jews who converted to Christianity is negligible compared to these groups.
Do you realize whom you’re talking to? You’re talking to a Jew who has lived under the shadow of the Holocaust her whole life. Tell me, sir, where were the Christians when the Nazis turned my grandmother’s parents and brothers into ashes? Where were they when the Nazis murdered my grandfather’s siblings and their children?
The Holocaust survivors that I had the honor and privilege to know remained faithful, Torah-observant Jews whose uncomplaining attitude and love for God and Torah served as an inspiration.
Don’t you dare stuff in my face Holocaust survivors who turned their backs on God and His people.
Dina,
The other night I was listening to the testimony of a Jewish woman whose father was a pedophile and abused her as a child. She hated him and never could overcome that hatred until she came to know Yeshua as her Redeemer– and Yeshua set her free from that hatred. . .
________________________
For myself, when I was a just a child, I suffered a much different unspeakable tragedy at the hands of “christians”.
Do these tragedies matter to a Sovereign G-d?
Yes and No. . . Are G-d’s purposes in tragedy are never truly known? And yet G-d cares for people.
Should I blame a Sovereign G-d?
Should I blame the christians?
Both?
Neither?
______________________
G-d says He Himself unsheathes His sword against His people– So, Who is the One who truly puts to death? [Leviticus 26, Deuteronomy 28, etc]
G-d has slaughtered His own people for millennia– therefore my own personal tragedy, despite how real it is to me, is in fact most imperceptibly insignificant.
And I certainly do not expect nor desire sympathy from anyone– everyone suffers– so I think it’s best to let G-d sovereignly comfort in His own Way. . .
______________________
Victims like me– Victims like others– We have choices.
We can go the route of Orpah and turn away from the True G-d or take the path of Ruth and turn toward the living G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
_____________________
To use tragedy as an excuse “Either For OR Against” G-d’s Truth is inexcusable–
For when I face G-d after this life is over, I will not be able to use “my tragedy” as a defense against His Truth– to me, it makes no sense to blame the Almighty Judge for something He is Sovereign over.
But what is Truth?
Since I suffered for decades in the aftermath of tragedy caused via the hands of christians– I certainly could have rejected a true christian faith– but, as a Messianic believer in L-RD Yeshua, I instead found and continue to find The True Redeeming G-d who cleanses me from all unrighteousness the same as Moses, Abram, David, and so many others. . .
Sure, we disagree what “truth” is– but isn’t that why Rabbi Blumenthal generously opens this blog to people of ANY Faith?
And I think one reason the Rabbi keeps an open forum is because shutting down dialogue is exactly what the NSDAP did. . .
No matter what you or I have found to be “truth” — Truth must trump tragedy. . . no matter how great the tragedy is. . .
___________________
Kavi, I stand by what I said. Your response drips with self-righteousness. Stop exploiting the Holocaust.
KAVI,
I agree tragedies personal or corporate are usually incomprehensible this side of eternity. Currently we can only see the back side of the tapestry. After one has read the Tanach concerning the judgements of Israel who can say why Israel has suffered so for the past 2000 years? But do see things are changing among western Christianity, yet there is always someone attempting to keep the pot stirred up and keep the hate alive rather than seeking reconciliation. Which venue is of God and which is from the evil inclination of man?
“For lack of wood a fire dies out” – Proverbs
Wouldn’t it be better to deal with today’s injustices while some can be done about them rather than yesterday’s injustices?
Ever wonder why someone would repeatedly defend Muslims while factions of Muslims are currently committing genocide against Jews and Christians, yet spend their time and energy attacking Chrstians for what the Nazis did almost 80 years ago?
Outright lie, typical of CP. When have I ever defended radical Muslims for their genocidal wishes against Israel?
It is vile of Christians whose co-religionists murdered members of my own family in the Holocaust to tell me to forgive and forget.
They dare to preach to us of reconciliation when they still can’t get over the murder of Jesus, whom they still blame Jews for.
It’s frankly disgusting.
Jewish blood is cheap as long it’s not Jesus’.
Dina,
I will re-state Torah more directly–
G-d says He Himself unsheathes His sword against His people–
G-d says He Himself will terrorize His people–
G-d says He Himself will afflict His people with sicknesses–
G-d says HE will do all these things and more!
____________________
If you wish to stand by your words, then it appears you have invented an “idol of tragedy” to legitimize your faith– it’s a foreign faith not in accordance with the Torah of G-d.
Any reader can examine Leviticus 26 and the curses in Deuteronomy for themselves–
So, Who is the Sovereign One who put to death His people for millennia?
_______________________
Your one-sided reading of Tanach ignores the passages in the Bible where God expresses His wrath against those who cause us to suffer and the great vengeance He will wreak upon them.
Hi Kavi,
Sorry to but in this discussion.
I am appalled by your statements implying that G-d is behind the suffering of the Jewish people.
It is no different from what St John Chrysostom have said in his “Sixth Homily Against the Jews” ,described by Malcolm Hay in page 70 of his book “Europe and the Jews:The Pressure of Christendom over 1900 years”,contents too grim for me to repeat here.
I’m sorry for saying this ,but these statements are akin to “crucifying again ” the memory of suffering and pain of the Jews.
I can’t help but to think of the suffering of the Jews in the past whenever I gaze at the cross.The cross is supposed to be symbol of G-d’s love for mankind ,yet it became the symbol of hate and fear for His firstborn ,the people of His covenant.
You’ve stated that “Truth must trump tragedy” .The ultimate tragedy was a wake up call to the truth -that we,believers of Jesus Christ ,who taught love ,peace and forgiveness are responsible for the hate and murder of millions of Jews down the ages .
We are no different from the Muslims who persecute ,rape and kill Christians in present time
Let us not look into the speck in our brother’s eyes and ignore the log in our own.Perhaps this season of Lent (if you observe it) will be a good time to reflect on that.
Peace
Sharon, you are right to be appalled, and equally appalling is CP’s casual dismissal of your weighty words.
CP himself holds anti-Jewish attitudes, so this is not surprising. You are a poster girl for what happens when Christians educate themselves on the history of Christian anti-Semitism, an education CP actively resists and for which he derides others.
I am very moved by your defense of the Jewish people to Kavi!
Sharon,
Let’s simplify:
1) Does a Sovereign Supreme God exist?
2) At Sinai did this same God enter into a conditional Covenant with Israel?
3) Does God keep his promises?
Much ink has been devoted to the whys of anti-semitism and whose to blame when the reasons have already been written down 2500 years ago.
I can play at this also. What if I conjecture the real reason for anti-semitism is Jews (Sadduces / Beit Shammai) of the 1st century kicking Jewish believers in Yeshua and Gentile converts out of the synagogue? Perhaps if they had adhered to the saying as King David did; “Keep you’re friends close and your enemies closer, or the words of Yeshua; ‘Love your enemies’ this Jewish sect would of never morphed into paganized Christianity.
But in the end we are still left with; ‘A man makes his plans, but GOD I directs his steps’
Dina writes (again)
“CP himself holds anti-Jewish attitudes,….”
I don’t hold anti-Jewish attitudes, I just don’t hold YOUR attitude and you think this justifies attempted character assassination – sad.
Hi CP,
Good day.
With all due respect ,what are you trying to prove by these three questions?
That the Jews earned God’s wrath by trying their best to obey His Laws ,at the expense of their dignity and their lives?
Your stated that the second scenario is a conjecture I.e an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information. The following are facts:
Many historians have stated that there are many Christianities during the first few centuries .
The Jewish Christians did not morph into the paganized Christianity that you see today ,but rather the Gentile Church which comprise of Gentiles that did not subscribe to the Torah aka Pauline Christianity.This strand of Christianity grew strong and overshadowed the other strands.
Jewish Christians still retained the Mosaic Law and did not follow Trinitarian beliefs ,despite being kicked out of the Synagogue.Somehow this strand did not survive . You may refer to the works of Hugh J. Schonfield-History of Jewish Christianity or Jeffrey Butz-The Brother of Jesus and the Lost Teaching of Christianity / The Secret Legacy of Jesus -or other books on this topic for further information.
To my knowledge ,the only concern these Jewish Christians had was on Paul’s teachings.
Please correct me with facts if I’m wrong on this one.
Lastly ,I can relate to your quote from Proverbs.
I started this journey with concerns of idolatry and the fact that all elements in my paganized religion are somehow..not original .I was curious as to the beliefs of the 12 Apostles and read the books mentioned earlier around last year.Somehow one thing led to another and the outcome was different ,beyond what I envisioned it should be.G-d knows best.
Sharon,
Have you read Leviticus 26 and the curses of Deuteronomy?
When G-d slaughtered His people over the millennia, He expected the nations to be “appalled” at His mass destruction. . .
[*] “I will make the land desolate so that your enemies who settle in it will be appalled over it.” [Leviticus 26]
[*] “I will also make this city a desolation and an object of hissing; everyone who passes by it will be appalled and hiss because of all its disasters.
I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they will eat one another’s flesh in the siege and in the distress with which their enemies and those who seek their life will distress them.'” [Jeremiah 19]
_______________________
. . . yes, G-d is most harsh in rendering His own judgment.
Yet, G-d finds eternal compassion by giving both Jew and Gentile hope for eternal forgiveness of sin through the True Servant of G-d, HaMashiach L-RD Yeshua,
“Just as many were appalled at you, My people,
So His appearance was marred more than any man
and His form more than the sons of men.
Thus He will sprinkle many nations. . .
But the L-RD was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the good pleasure of the L-RD will prosper in His hand.
As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge, the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors.” [portions of Isaiah 52 and 53]
________________________________
The L-RD determined to suffer tragedy Himself to purposely accomplish redemption. [Genesis 3 and Isaiah 52 and Isaiah 53]
The Almighty G-d is most fair in His Judgments!! — He not only afflicts punishment– The L-RD likewise bears punishment. . .
________________________________
KAVI What happened to us is a BLESSING when you compare this to what happened to the Christians. Yes, we were slaughtered, but it was Christians who were doing the slaughtering. Our rejection of Jesus saved us from the greater curse, blessed be the One True Lord.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Hi Sharon,
Good Day, hope all is well in the Philippines?
What am I trying to say?
GOD is in control, HE keeps his promises. Israel has a very specific Covenant with GOD. You can read the exact Covenant in Deuteronomy chapters 28 to 32. It is so designed that whether Israel does good or evil GOD will be Glorified, but not so with Israel.
Some here will again cry anti-semitism, so allow me to say I doubt ANY Nation in Israel’s shoes would of done any better.
I suspect you might be Catholic. I was raised as a very religious Catholic. In my opinion from what you are reading about Yeshua; you’re on the right track. As a spectator I’ve watched Dina steer you into the history of anti-semitism. This is good to learn just as long as you don’t get stuck there, nor is it mutually exclusive, for example read “Foxes Book of Martyrs”.
As for the anti-semitism; let’s say you become fully convinced (as you should) of all the horrific atrocities committed by ‘supposed – so called’ Christians of history and you apologize on behalf of your Church and on behalf of Christians every where, then what? Do you devote the rest of your life spreading the message of anti-semitism committed by historical Christians? Is that what God calls us to do?
I’m all for learning from history, but if you walk forward while looking back you’re going to end up in a ditch or walking into a pole.
CP I am not here to speak for Sharon but if Israel’s suffering is a sign of God’s displeasure with her (which it certainly is) shouldn’t Christianity’s wickedness be a sign of God’s displeasure with her? Doesn’t it strike you odd that this (the new covenant) was the one that is supposed to make you righteous to the degree that sin is impossible – and this is the result? And if these were not real Christians – then who did Jesus come for? – because for centuries on end – these were the only Christians.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Hi CP,
Just to make clear:
1.I’m not from the Philippines .
If you are really a spectator,you would have known where I’m from by now.
*If you do,please keep it to yourself and don’t reveal it in this blog .Tq*
2. I will be arrested for spreading the message in my country .
3. Understand your concern .I can’t deny asking myself the question “What now?”-but I’d rather face the truth than to be willfully blind.
Thank you.
R’B,
“And if these were not real Christians – then who did Jesus come for? – because for centuries on end – these were the only Christians.”
Your definition of what is a Christian leaves much to be desired. It is a completely different definition than the NT gives for what is a Christian. This reveals an willful distortion of facts or at the very least; ignorance. People who go around claiming Hitler was a real Christian are actually just plain ingnorant of what the NT teaches or are purposely engaging in hate speech.
Without explaining what the NT actually teaches a Christian is, allow me to ask you a question; Yeshua said “the way is narrow and few find it” – so with currently 2 billion labeled as Christians, do you think someone is mislabeling?
CP Who said there is such a thing as a “real” Christian? If Jesus was a fraud – then the words are a contradiction in terms. The question is not “who is a real Christian” but what happens to people and nations when they hear Jesus’ message? And remember, it is their own social context that filters the message – and a responsible communicator will calibrate his words accordingly.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Sharon S,
I don’t catch every comment you write, but do read the ones I see. I thought you said where you live and I may of remembered in correctly, I was just trying to be friendly, it really doesn’t matter to me, just thought it might be fun to talk about and get to know you. Btw, I’m in Californian foothills of the Sierra Nevada’s.
I’m sure I ever asked you, encouraged you or suggested you say blind, in fact if you re-read my comment to you, you’ll see I wrote the exact opposite, even supplying a further reading material reference.
Have a great day,
Adios.
R,B,
“it is ….. social context that filters the message”
On this we agree.
Hi CP ,
Firstly ,I would like to apologise for my unpleasant reply .I did not comprehend your comment thoroughly before posting my reply.
It must be tough being you,especially where this forum is concerned .However I applaud your perseverance and tenacity for staying around and sticking to your principles,though it is a highly unpopular one .It’s a rare trait .
Your points are valid and it made me think .I can see that response coming when I make my stand clear on this subject . The hidden message from all this ? As a believer of Jesus Christ ,I have to choose between Him and the Jewish people.
This come about as I was thinking about Kavi’s reply .How do I respond to Isaiah 53?I used to think that this passage was about Jesus -the narrative of this passage automatically brings me to the Cross .However ,studying the history of antisemitism and reading this passage again in that light convince me that this passage is about the Children of Israel.
Catholics are engrossed in the Passion of Jesus Christ ,I believe even more so than Easter .The Stations of the Cross is a devotional that describes it so vividly .The spiritual zealousness caused by these devotions caused harm to the Jews in the past -we tried to identify with Jesus’s suffering ,yet we harm and kill the Jewish people ,thinking that it is a meritorious act . It is no different than a Muslim terrorist and his act of terror-to him killing infidels and dying for that act merits paradise.
Your tenacity to stick to your principles inspire me to stick with mine -I repent for the sins committed against the Jewish people -a people I have never met before – and I believe that there are Christians (though minority )out there who share the same view as me.
Thank you .
Sayonara .
Sayonara,
(What a beautiful name!)
“The hidden message from all this ? As a believer of Jesus Christ ,I have to choose between Him and the Jewish people.”
You’re right, that seems to be the message, however this message is what I argue against. Sure Dina is right in that those claiming to be Christians have persecuted Jews for 2000 years, but what does that have to do with you and I? It can give us empathy for the Jewish people, but I can’t repent for something I didn’t do. It is pointed out frequently here that a person cannot atone for another person’s sin, so what am I expected to do?
Personally I ‘feel’ this is a diversion to avoid dealing with the real historical Yeshua and his mission; ‘bringing back the lost sheep of Israel’. Isn’t it weird that I believe in just about everything Judaism does, except I believe God sent Yeshua, therefore am ostracized and labeled an anti-Semite, even though I’m a member of the local synagogue. There is a message in that.
I can see perhaps you might be setting out on a similar journey. I’d love to talk more, but for now all I can say is neither Christianity nor Judaism see Yeshua correctly. But that doesn’t mean they are both 100% wrong; they both have truths, where they err is being at opposite extremes when it comes to Yeshua.
Thank you for the kind words. Wishing you the best and may the Spirit of God guide you into all truth.
CP Talking of diversions! – Everyone on this forum on the side of God (Dina, Jim and others) have given more than enough reason why people who revere God should be appalled by Jesus’ self-centered message. It is you, and the followers of Jesus from the beginning (just read the NT) who divert and distract. Instead of giving us a reason to accept Jesus you ask us to repent for his murder which was never committed.
Your lack of self-awareness is astounding.
Please explain why it is good and right for you to demand from Dina that she repent from the sin of murdering Jesus (which probably never occurred) but it is OK for you to be bored when people bring up the murderous sins of Jesus and his followers?
You accuse Jim of not knowing Jesus’ message. Jesus’ message has a 2000 year history. People are still trying to invent new messages for him – but for 2000 years the message was pretty much the same. And by the way – the point of communicating is to get ideas into the heads and hearts of your audience – not to get words out of your mouth.
Although you are trying to invent a new message for Jesus – in one area you are consistent with the popular version. you get up on a high mountain and sermonize that everyone else turn the other cheek – but you have no tolerance for a fraction of what you want others to swallow (I am not talking about you personally – but you cannot swallow the imaginary murder of one yet you want us to swallow the real murder of millions).
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
“Sayonara,
(What a beautiful name!)”
From dictionary.com, sayonara:
“interjection, noun
1. farewell; goodbye.”
Oops, I forgot to respond in regards to Isaiah 53:
Christians say this is ONLY about Jesus.
Jews say this is ONLY about the Children of Israel.
The supposition both share in common is there can be ONLY ONE correct meaning. This is incorrect, God is able to use the same set of words to convey multiple correct meanings; some deeper or hidden more than the simple meaning. How much more true when Isaiah 53 is about the Children of Israel and Yeshua is representative of the Children of Israel. They suffered, he suffered, they weren’t accepted, he wasn’t accepted, he died and was raised, Israel in a sense died and is now raised 2000 years later.
In light of the above it means nothing that the Scripture can be proven to be about Israel, it needs to be proven that it cannot possibly be about Yeshua. As far as I know this hasn’t been proven.
“In light of the above it means nothing that the Scripture can be proven to be about Israel, it needs to be proven that it cannot possibly be about Yeshua. As far as I know this hasn’t been proven.”
That’s rich from a person who cannot prove anything about his belief in Jesus beyond the shadow of a doubt or that he cannot possibly be wrong. Now with Isaiah 53 even though he admits the Scripture can be proven to be about Israel, he demands proof beyond the shadow of a doubt / without the possibility of mistake. Such a contradiction.
CP says: “In light of the above it means nothing that the Scripture can be proven to be about Israel, it needs to be proven that it cannot possibly be about Yeshua. As far as I know this hasn’t been proven.”
He must have forgotten about this scientically analyzed proof here:
Click to access Isa53JP.pdf
Click to access Isa53CP.pdf
I don’t recall that CP properly countered this analysis.
R’B, you write;
“CP Talking of diversions! – Everyone on this forum on the side of God (Dina, Jim and others) have given more than enough reason why people who revere God should be appalled by Jesus’ self-centered message.”
— With all due respect, if they had, we wouldn’t still be having this conversation.—-
“It is you, and the followers of Jesus from the beginning (just read the NT) who divert and distract. Instead of giving us a reason to accept Jesus you ask us to repent for his murder which was never committed.”
— It has been my stated reason from the beginning that I’m not here to give reasons to accept the Christian Jesus. In fact I can recall giving reasons to reject him. However I am curious why the historical Yeshua is rejected by Judaism when I’ve read a number of Orthodox Rabbis who accept a historical Yeshua. I’ve never accused you or “the Jews” of murdering Yeshua; you’ve read Dina’s repeated accusations so much you’re starting to believe her. For the record, what I did say is; ‘The “Jewish position” on Yeshua needs to be repented of’. A murder that was never committed? Are you serious? It is even attested to in non biblical historic sources, if there is one thing we know about Yeshua is that he was killed. Admittedly the identification of the players in who killed Yeshua comes from the NT.—-
“Please explain why it is good and right for you to demand from Dina that she repent from the sin of murdering Jesus (which probably never occurred) but it is OK for you to be bored when people bring up the murderous sins of Jesus and his followers?”
— First off you are again not going to the sources, but instead believing Dina’s words about me rather than my own words. I’ve never once demanded “that she repent from the sin of murdering Jesus” rather I said she should repent from the Jewish position that murdering Yeshua was the right thing to do. Secondly, I admit the horrific atrocities committed by a Church who claims the name of Jesus and has persecuted more than just Jews (which I don’t continually bring up) – what more do you want of me? As already stated; I’m not here to jump on the band wagon of Christian anti-semitism which by the way is counterproductive and creates more anti-semitism. But ya’ll are unwilling to hear my plain words, all you see is a Netzarim.—-
“You accuse Jim of not knowing Jesus’ message. Jesus’ message has a 2000 year history. People are still trying to invent new messages for him – but for 2000 years the message was pretty much the same. And by the way – the point of communicating is to get ideas into the heads and hearts of your audience – not to get words out of your mouth.”
— Jim knows and has rejected the message of Christianity about Jesus. How can he reject the real message and mission of the historical Yeshua if he doesn’t know it? ( if he does know it, he hasn’t expressed it in anything I’ve read from him) —-
“Although you are trying to invent a new message for Jesus – in one area you are consistent with the popular version. you get up on a high mountain and sermonize that everyone else turn the other cheek – but you have no tolerance for a fraction of what you want others to swallow (I am not talking about you personally – but you cannot swallow the imaginary murder of one yet you want us to swallow the real murder of millions).”
— Looking objectively at history seeking to restore the Jewish message of Yeshua amongst 2000 years of misinformation propagated by bias over zealous Jews and Christians is “trying to invent a new message”? Don’t you think you of all people should be at the forefront of this rather that fighting against it?
CP With all due respect – the reasons we gave you were more than enough for people in positions similar to your own to make courageous life-changing decisions. Perhaps this conversation is “still going on” because your position is not rooted in any intellectual honest argument but in your personal experience?
The “historical Jesus” is a non-entity. Every other lover of Jesus comes to this blog with a different Jesus demanding to know why we “reject” his favorite fantasy character. We are not talking about a man that lived and died 2000 years ago, we are talking about the character in a book who is the idol of billions. The reason we don’t talk about the flesh and blood man is because all we know of him comes from the books of the idolizers. The flesh and blood man hasn’t interacted with us – he leaves us alone and we leave him alone. Sort of like, let the dead bury the dead.
Can you explain the difference between “repent from the sin of murdering Jesus” – and “repent from the Jewish position that murdering Yeshua was the right thing to do”? – except for the fact that one implies direct hands on murder (which I did not mean as is obvious from the context) while the other implies consent to murder? Do you really believe that that “murdering” your “historical” Yeshua was the “right thing to do” according to the Jewish people?
CP – How can you speak about the “real” message of Yeshua if he has been speaking for 2000 years and almost no one (aside from you) heard it?
Why should we be at the forefront of the effort to “reconstruct” the message of a man who lived 2000 years ago? We have beautiful messages to study, messages that have not been distorted, messages from people such as Hillel, Rabbi Judah HaLevi, Bachya ibn Pekuda, Nachmanides, and countless other saintly people who had the good and Godly fortune that their names were never used as an excuse for the massacre of millions. Why should we study the message of a man who did not share the blessing that these people merited?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
“all you see is a Netzarim…”
How can we see a Netzarim when there’s no such thing as a Netzarim?
Jim, Larry, Rabbi B., and everyone else out there: have any of you encountered this creature called a Netzarim, and if so, can you describe what it looks like so that I can be sure to see only a Netzarim when I look at CP?
Sharon S,
Haha, sorry I assumed Sharon was an americanized form of Sayonara. Thank you Dina, good catch.
“How can we see a Netzarim when there’s no such thing as a Netzarim?”
I just love it when someone else unwittingly proves my point
Which is?
Dina, you are not going to open their ears by telling them how they are unable to empathize. They are Christians/messianics. Asking them to divorce themselves from that ideological bent is just as difficult for them as it would be for you to divorce yourself from the Torah.
You asked why I am saying its not ok for Jews to defend their faith. I never said it wasn’t OK, I’ve tried to point out to you that you have an uphill battle ahead of you, because when you ask a Christian for evidence of how his faith is credible, or at least consistent, he will bring you the sources, and he can bring evidence of replication of his own ideology from the soil of your own faith system. To them, that is powerful evidence that is not easy to explain away.
He will point out the history of various other failed messiahs, and he will say, “SEE! Jews thought of this stuff all by themselves.”
You have an uphill battle because your defense rests on these people understanding and accepting various premises that you hold to be self evident because of your own understanding and experience.
You take for granted the authority of the sages and the oral Torah, they do not. You take the Exodus as described in scripture as your own unique national heritage and experience, they may not just accept your version of history.
You are asking them to accept a lot of things on merit of your credibility, and the credibility of the people. That is a big leap of faith to ask of them, even if you don’t realize it. This isn’t meant as a criticism of you personally, its meant to remind you that your experiences are your own, so when you say, “until you are able to empathize, don’t bother,” you are asking them to be further in the process then they may be.
CP, you have to realize that your view of Jesus is unique to you, and that because of that, nobody is obligated to accept that.
Concerned Reader,
Thank you for the great contribution, I thought it really hit the nail on the head.
Yes, I agree, my view of the Nazarene is unique to myself (and a tiny few others). I don’t expect anyone to accept it; I just want to discuss it, bouncing of people who are not ‘yes men’.
Con, your assessment of me is incorrect. I can state the Christian position on Jesus and Christian theology in general from the point of view of both Trinitarian and Unitarian Christians, their position on the moral behavior of the Jewish followers of Jesus, etc. I also understand and can repeat your own arguments on the reason for the confusion among various groups who find a basis in the Torah for the over-exaltation of their leaders (an argument I understand, by the way, and which does make sense from an outsider’s perspective).
This means that I am able to empathize with my opponents. The inability to do so makes honest debate impossible. I have spent hours and hours over the last few months explaining the Jewish position from many different angles. I have reviewed these arguments over and over again, and still, people like CP and Kavi cannot even articulate the Jewish position even while disagreeing. I say “don’t bother” not out of malice but for a pragmatic reason: if you lack the ability to grasp your opponent’s argument in a debate then there is no point arguing. Con, I do not lack this ability, and I have shown that by responding directly to arguments in a way that demonstrates that I understand my opponent.
Believe it or not, I’m not trying to convince Christians of anything. I’m defending my faith. That’s really all I’m doing. I shouldn’t have to have any kind of uphill battle, because Christians should practice the Golden Rule they keep on about and leave us alone.
Above, Kavi wrote: “For G-d provided no “proof” to wicked Abram– but Abram believed G-d’s Words and G-d reckoned that Faith for righteousness. [Genesis 15]”
I would like to answer this statement.
Kavi calls Abram wicked. That Kavi maligns Abram is not my concern. Certainly, I find it distasteful for one to say such things about others, particularly those that are especially loved by HaShem. However, I do not consider this to be of paramount importance. Kavi is not the judge of Abram or others and ultimately his opinion on whether or not Abram was wicked or righteous is of no importance. Instead, I would like to address the deception in his words.
The Torah does not call Abram “wicked.” This is important, because Kavi has inserted into the text Christian doctrine to insinuate that only through faith can one become accounted righteous. This addition to the text subtly misleads the reader. One must recognize then that the Torah does not say that Abram was wicked, not when God called him or at any other time. Nor does Genesis 15 say what Kavi would have it say, that faith was the only thing accounted for righteousness. Kavi implies this concept by calling Abram “wicked.” Following in the footsteps of Paul, who notoriously distorted the Torah, Kavi implies that righteousness comes only through faith. However, Genesis 15 does not say this. It does not say that righteousness came to Abram only through faith or that Abram had been considered wicked up until that point. Kavi’ insertion into the Torah distorts the meaning of the Torah.
Indeed, Kavi’s interpretation, inherited from Paul, is contradicted by Genesis 26. One might wonder: if Abram like all around him was wicked, why did God choose Abram rather than another? But it is obvious from Genesis 26 that Abram was chosen because of his obedience to HaShem i.e. his righteousness. There HaShem tells Isaac why Abram was chosen: “I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, and will give to your offspring all these lands; and all the nations of the world shall gain blessing for themselves through your offspring, because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws” (vv. 4-5). Abram was not chosen in spite of being wicked; on the contrary he was chosen for his obedience to divine command.
It is important to note too that Kavi’s opinion comes from the writings of a man who badly mangled Torah. Kavi is not teaching out of Genesis but out of Romans. However, Paul’s letter to the Romans is full of misrepresentations. Virtually any quote from Torah employed by Paul is a misrepresentation. While Kavi quotes from Genesis, his opinion comes from a book that flagrantly distorts Tanach.
One might find himself easily annoyed at Kavi’s denigration of Abram, but more important issues underlie his writing. They imply falsehood. His interjections into the Torah distort and mislead. The reader must not take Kavi’s premises for granted. They do not originate in Torah but in the distortions of Paul. The subtle insertion of the word “wicked” implies that Abram was only considered righteous after believing the promise of God, which Torah does not say. Kavi may mean well in what he writes, but his misrepresentations of Torah must be recognized for what they.
Jim
Jim,
This was very helpful! I really appreciate this greatly! Would these other passages support what you’re saying? –
Moses says in Deuteronomy 6:24-25 – “God commanded us to perform all these decrees, to fear the Lord our God, for our good, all the days, to give us live as this very day. And it will be righteousness for us if we are careful to perform this entire commandment before the Lord our God as He commanded us.”
And God said about Abraham in Genesis 18:19 – “For I have loved/known him because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of the Lord doing righteousness and justice, in order that the Lord might then bring upon Abraham that which He had spoken of him.”
Indeed, they would, Alan.
Jim
In Genesis 15:16 – “And he believed in the Lord; and He COUNTED IT TO HIM FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Devarim 6:25 – “And it WILL BE righteousness for us if we are careful to DO this entire commandment before the Lord our God as He commanded us.”
Genesis 18:19 – “For I have loved/known him because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of the Lord to DO righteousness and justice…”
What I think this might very well show is that BELIEVING is only CONSIDERED as righteousness, but DOING what Hashem wants IS righteousness ITSELF.
Jim,
You write many words, but G-d only needed one verse in Torah to prove Abram was unrighteous. . .
“Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness.” [Genesis 15:6]
G-d Himself found Abram wicked– otherwise why would He need to make Abram righteous?
______________
KAVI Your ignorance of Hebrew is not your fault – but it serves you wrong here as it always does. “Counted for righteousness” does not mean that the man is counted righteous, it means that the act of faith was considered an act of righteousness.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Rabbi,
. . . Despite their great knowledge Hebrew, the Rabbis cannot figure out whether G-d is the subject of righteousness or Abram. . .
[] Rashi says,
Genesis 15:6 – And he (Abram) believed in the L-rd, and He (G-d) accounted it to his (Abram’s) merit.
[] Ramban says,
Genesis 15:6 – And he (Abram) trusted in the L-rd, and he (Abram) reckoned it to His (G-d’s) righteousness.
Therefore, just as Prophet Isaiah teaches,
[a] >> Orthodox Rabbis hopelessly debate this Scripture among themselves [Isaiah 28:13]
“So the word of the L-RD to them will be,“Order on order, order on order,
Line on line, line on line, A little here, a little there,”
[b] >> “Followers of The Way” dwell in the righteousness of G-d’s Truth revealed to all mankind through L-RD Yeshua HaMashiach [Isaiah 28:16]
“Therefore thus says the L-RD G-D,
‘Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone,
A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed.
He who believes in it will not be disturbed.'”
_______________________
Pharisee Paul’s Hebrew was perfectly sound– and to many of those living in first century who likewise spoke Hebrew [e.g., the many priests who came to faith in L-RD Yeshua for righteousness], Genesis 15:6 teaches that the L-RD reckoned to Abram righteousness based on Faith– and this understanding is in perfect harmony with Tanakh–
“. . . the righteous one will live by his faith.” [Habakkuk 2]
“. . . And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the L-RD shall be saved.” [Joel 2]
“. . .Therefore thus says the L-rd G-D, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed.” [Isaiah 28]
“. . . But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.” [Deuteronomy 30]
__________________________
KAVI You have shown that you have no interest in joining the conversation on this blog. You are here to preach and not to listen so there is no point in talking to you. My question to you is – do you think that what you are doing is ethical? How do you feel if you are having a conversation and someone inserts him/herself into the conversation talking loudly while their ears are closed to anything that anyone else is saying? If you are interested in interacting then please answer this question – what do you know about Paul that tells you that he was a scholar of Hebrew? Can you read Hebrew that you so arrogantly pass judgment on men who know Hebrew so much better than yourself?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Kavi,
You have misrepresented the text. Even though you quoted it, you certainly did not read it. It does not say God “made Abram righteous” as you glossed it. The verse says God counted Abraham’s faith to him as righteousness. This does not imply that faith is the only thing God counts as righteousness. Nor does it imply that until that point, Abraham was unrighteous.
Your interpretations of Torah usually rely on reading the text selectively, relying on what you believe to be implied in a verse and ignoring those verses that state outright the opposite of what you claim. Your belief that Abram was wicked until Genesis 15 is a clear example. You infer what is not said or even implied. If you had a verse where Torah declared Abram wicked, you would quote it. Of course, no such verse exists. And Genesis 15:6 does not say that God made Abraham righteous, upon which notion you base your interpretation.
Alan quoted Genesis 18:19, a verse that you might not have realized exists. In it, God says of Abraham: “For I have loved him, because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of HaShem, doing charity and justice, in order that HaShem might then bring upon Abraham that which He had spoken of him.” And I quoted Genesis 26:5, where God tells Isaac that Abraham’s blessing is a result of Abraham’s obedience: “Because Abraham obeyed My voice, and observed my safeguards, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torahs.” These verses contradict your interpretation of Genesis 15:6, your “one verse in Torah to prove Abram was unrighteous.” They too exist. The Torah does not consist of one verse.
And that verse, again, does not say what you make it to mean. It does not say that Abram was made righteous. It does not say the only thing counted to him as righteousness was faith. And it certainly does not say that Abram was wicked.
Jim
CP, was it G-d’s fault that Pharaoh did not let Israel go due to a hardened heart? Or was it rather something in Pharaoh alone, (such as his own prideful belief that he was in the right?) that kept him from seeing and doing the right thing?
Christians and Messianics continue to lay blame on Jews for not treating their sect properly, but you know what? Jesus said to his disciples “do not believe in me unless I do the works of my father.” He also said, “be ye hot or cold and not lukewarm, or I will spew you out of my mouth.”
Also, Jews have listened to what Gamaliel allegedly said, and have left the Christians alone. Jews do not knock on your door and say “hey become Jewish, its sooo much better!”
The Jewish people (based on Torah’s plain straightforward reading of the definition of an annotated king,) reject Jesus and every other Jesus like messiah claimant who has arisen since for the exact same reasons. IE they are COLD towards them all. These clamants are not given a second thought, because they haven’t finished the picture outlined plainly in the Tanach.
No Christian would believe that the Rebbe died as an atonement for his sins, nor would he transgress a moral commandment because Shabbatai Tzvi told them too, but if Jesus or Paul? You would listen.
None of these messianic claimants have brought about universal peace, universal knowledge of G-d that doesn’t require neighbor to teach neighbor, nor brought about a temple, or a restored Davidic monarchy with Jews dwelling safely in the land. IE Messianic criteria are not met.
Jews therefore are at the very least extremely consistent in their reasons why Jesus (and the others who have gone down the same road,) are not suitable for belief by the people.
I think you need to be more introspective. You have been shown that these people are at least as capable as you of making moral judgements, that are not out of step with those of the Nazarene, and yet, you still (like every other Christian,) want Jews to admit they were wrong concerning him, and to change their tune.
Do you even realize that in order for Moses to be accepted as the leader of Israel, he had to speak with the elders of his generation 1st? And only then go before Pharaoh after that? IE even if Jesus (or someone else) was the king messiah, there is no Sanhedrin to confirm or ordain him as yet, because there is no halachic state in the land.
Concerned Reader;
“CP, was it G-d’s fault that Pharaoh did not let Israel go due to a hardened heart? ”
— Depends which verse you read. The reality is, as I’m sure you know through interacting with different students, is the way you approach them can harden or soften their hearts. Even the way I respond to this comment to you has the potential to harden your heart or towards me or soften it, yet it is still ultimately your choice to let your heart be hardened or softened. IMHO, people read spiritual mumbo-jumbo into that verse that isn’t there. (Although admittedly it could be, but there is no way to prove it either way) —-
“Christians and Messianics continue to lay blame on Jews for not treating their sect properly, but you know what?”
— I sincerely hope that is not how you’ve interpreted me! There are some here eager to assign blame for anti-semitism. The only thing I explicitly pointed out is 2 can play at such things. Frankly I have no desire to do so – I’ve other fish to fry —-
“Also, Jews have listened to what Gamaliel allegedly said, and have left the Christians alone. Jews do not knock on your door and say “hey become Jewish, its sooo much better!”
— Oy! Talk about revisionist history! It didn’t exactly go down like that —-
“The Jewish people (based on Torah’s plain straightforward reading of the definition of an annotated king,)……………”
— Agreed —-
“….that the Rebbe died as an atonement for his sins….”
— A completed Tzadik providing atonement is a Jewish concept. I wouldn’t think a Rabbe who converts to Islam qualifies as such. —-
“Jews therefore are at the very least extremely consistent in their reasons why Jesus (and the others who have gone down the same road,) are not suitable for belief by the people.”
— This statement is to broad to answer; belief as what? Messiah son of David, Messiah son of Joseph, Elijah, Michael the Arch Angel, Prophet, Sage? The fact is they do believe he never existed or is the progenitor of anti-semitism or at the least just another failed Messiah.
“I think you need to be more introspective”
— Sorry Double C, no offense, but you missed the broad side of the barn with that comment —-
“you still (like every other Christian,) want Jews to admit they were wrong concerning him, and to change their tune.”
— Ummm…not exactly. I’m actually searching and praying to know the real Yeshua all this stuff is based on. In the process many things have come to light and are not as previously thought. However in the process I’ve noticed extremists on both sides spreading misinformation and hate. When I can read Orthodox Jewish Rabbis who understand what Yeshua taught in relation to Torah and Talmud and have no problem, rather showing respect for Yeshua, then one knows – something’s up. I appears most Jewish people say; “I trust my ancestors on this”. Yet I contend had they personally known these ancestors, they wouldn’t of trusted them. —-
“Do you even realize that in order for Moses to be accepted as the leader of Israel, he had to speak with the elders of his generation 1st?”
— Yes. The same opportunity of acceptance was offered 2000 years ago, however it was violently denied. IMHO, the next Messiah will also ask the elders, be accepted, but will prove false. The Messiah after that will not ask, but will be asked.
CP, a fact I’m not sure you have pondered is that there is no prophecy in the Tanakh which you could only ever apply exclusively to Jesus.
Every alleged fulfillment in the Bible can be a reference to at least one, and much more often, many more people than just one.
Genesis 3:15 can apply to Seth (because he was the surviving righteous offspring.)
Isaiah 53 can apply to every righteous sufferer
Isaiah 9 can refer to Hezekiah as easy as one might apply it to the king messiah
Isaiah 7:14 can easily apply to the children in Chapter 8 who serve as signs
(the New Testament itself actually invalidates the relevance of the Virgin Birth as any kind of dogma because the text says “Mary stored this up in her heart,” and tells us that as far as anyone else knew Jesus was Joseph’s son.
Daniel 9 could apply to any claimant (or anyone’s theory about a claimant,) who died before the second temple was destroyed such as John the Baptist. Its not even required that it be THE MESSIAH, but could refer to just a simple monarch like Agrippa, or even the last king of the Hasmoneans.
For instance, If Psalm 22:16 could actually be read (for argument’s sake,) as saying “they pierced,” that could easily refer to Antigonus II Mattathias, the last king of the Hasmoneans who died by beheading/crucifixion in 35 B.C.E.
Unlike Jesus, he was an actual monarch who ruled in Israel, he suffered and died before the temple was destroyed, also by the hands of the Romans.
My point CP is, even if I were to grant that you could argue that Jesus may be placed in certain texts, its not by any means an exclusive fit, and in fact he doesn’t even fit as well as others do in those same verses.
Concerned Reader;
“CP, a fact I’m not sure you have pondered is that there is no prophecy in the Tanakh which you could only ever apply exclusively to Jesus.”
— Respectfully, you couldn’t be more wrong on this issue. Perhaps my poor writing skills have led you to believe I view prophecies as being mutually exclusive when in fact I support dual or multiple fulfillments as types of an ultimate fulfillment. I often have argued in favor of dual fulfillment against those who only see one. Yet because it is known I’m a Netzarim it is often automatically assumed I argue for only one fulfillment of a particular prophecy.
Thats the problem though CP. Multiple fulgillment means unclear and shaky ground. A type is not a fulfillment. There is a whole list on wikipedia of people who have claimed to be Jesus’ second coming based on this or that shadow or type. My point is, if you believe in multiple fulfillment, you cant say this or that is about Yeshua, because it could be about others in a clearer way as ive showed you.
Nostradamus said the antichrist would be blonde and born in 1962.
I am blonde and was born in 1962. Cue Iron Maiden song….
The point is freedom to believe differently on non essentials. The problem is Ortho-doxy (one doctrine, encompassing Oral Torah in Judaism/Talmud and Christianity/NT) is deemed the supreme litmus test for righteousness before God. When we should be putting more emphasis on Othro-pratic; one practice as the sign of unity without totally disregarding the former. Give people freedom to personally search out God within the set of general guidelines set forth in Torah, lightly interpreted only by the same generation currently living.
Oy! Talk about revisionist history! It didn’t exactly go down like that
Pray tell how Jews have done to Christians even 1/5th of the terrible things Christians have done to them?
Christians assume that if Jews embrace Jesus, somehow they are no longer persecuted by Christians.
Ever hear of Morrano Jews or the Etheopian Jews? Even after converting they were harassed for not being Christian enough. The followers of Jacob Frank converted to Christianity en masse, and they were still persecuted.
The only people who practice revisionist history are the ones who make the Church out to be a victim.
Every indigenous people who survive today and have met westerners knows Christian brutality on some level 1st hand.
The Native Americans suffered in the missions, had children kidnapped and forcibly baptized, were subject to ethnic cleansing, etc. Not too mention forced labor and severe beatings.
This is without even mentioning Christians constantly murdureing other “heterodox Christians.” Its something that no Christian sect was free of, so respectfully, you are factually incorrect.
I have a History degree and Christian brutality is just a matter of historical fact. Before the Crusades, on their way to the holy land Crusaders massacred Jews, and the Eastern Orthodox.
Christians have to search for a unicorn called the “true Christian” and have to rebuild a hypothetical historical model of Jesus to try and escape that simple naked truth. I wish it wasnt true, but alas it is.
I have been patient and understanding with your perspective on Jesus, but I draw the line at someone claiming that “it didnt exactly go down that way.” Yes it did, and its all on record in history books. People read where Jesus said, “take those who would not have me be king over them and kill them in front of me,” and carried it out with lethal accuracy to the letter.
Ever wonder where the practice of a heretic Kissing a cross or screaming mercy before death came from? From the verse above. And from “kiss the son lest he he angry.”
You believe in a personal Jesus of your own creation, not the one this blog is meant to defend against.
“Pray tell how Jews have done to Christians even 1/5th of the terrible things Christians have done to them?”
To talk as you are; ‘who did worse’ or to talk as I suggested could be done; ‘who started it first’ is a smoke screen. Quite frankly, God is sovereign, everyone is/has doing things they shouldn’t, but what is God doing through all this? Yeshua existed and changed the world, and it didn’t happen when God was in the bathroom. I already know many people are generally evil, what I’m not sure of is how Yeshua fits into God’s sovereign plan.
The overall point here CP, I wanted specific examples, but you cant give any, because Jews are not out to shove their belief down your throat with violence.
The Bible does not teach that people are basically evil, but teaches that they can choose good, choose life, and nobody has to grab the Torah and make it easier.
I dont believe anyone is basically evil. In fact, you could make a case that a majority want to live and let live while people of power want to exploit people’s prejuduces to make them do great evil.
I CAN give examples, but choose not to go down that path because it goes in a direction I’m not going, nor do I want to get drawn into the drama of it all, (especially here).You are certainty qualified and equipped to research how the synagogues kicked out the Netzarim. My point is they should of kept them instead of forcing them to be a breakaway minyan. Then perhaps they wouldn’t of fallen into idolatry and Judaism would control a proper view of Yeshua and Torah.
I can only conjecture you’ve lived a sheltered life or hold a subjective definition of evil to think there are not those who are basically evil. Yes, I agree people can choose, but you fail to realize they choose what they want.
Yeah, the operative word is “kicked out.” Ie Nazarenes were excommunicated if they held heretical beliefs, but the NT tells us what the rabbinic stance to Jesus’ followers was. Indifference. Gamliel says LEAVE NAZARENES ALONE. That is exactly what Jews have done, unless Christians provoked a stern response due to their unrelenting persecution.
Do Jews come into a Church and preach Talmud on Sundays? Did they censor NT texts they didnt like?
Give me an example. You are claiming that Jews have wronged Christians, prove it.
Excommunication is not a death penalty.
A shelteted life? I live with a disability that I have had since birth called CP.
I have had both of my legs broken at the hip and all the way down twice on purpose (to straighten my legs.) People have hurled some of the ugliest insults at me in my life.
I have had grown men in their 50s ask me, a 20 something, “wouldnt you rather be dead?”
I’m not even Jewish (I have European and Egyptian ancestry,) but have had anti-semitic slurs yelled at me, just because I “look Jewish.”
I was mercilessly picked on as a child because I was different, and I had to convince educators that having a physical disability did not make me mentally disabled. So, no CP, my life is not sheltered to human ugliness or stupudity.
I can only assume that you are judging me (and an entire people ) very superficially.
Concerned Reader,
Truly sorry to hear all that, and I’m certainly not minimizing any of it, but that wasn’t the kind of evil I was referring being sheltered from. That said, I am happy to see it hasn’t affected your attitude, writing or your accomplishments in life.
“I already know many people are generally evil, what I’m not sure of is how Yeshua fits into God’s sovereign plan.”
I agree with you on this. How does Jesus (or the Jesus myth) play into God’s sovereign plan? I have no clue, but then again I have no idea how Zoroaster, Krishna or Muhammad play into God’s plan.
I’m glad you agree that you don’t know. Does that mean you’ll stop implying that you do?
Oh BTW, circling Twitter right now is a story about the discovery of a 1st century CE stone ossuary with “Yeshua” engraved on it, stored in a warehouse of antiquities. Christians are all agog over it. WDYT?
“Zoroaster, Krishna or Muhammad” didnt change the world, except Muhammad, but he wrote a book and raised an army.
Yes, I’ve read about the ossuary conjectured to be from the same burial chambers the James ossuary was found. Once this is studied out it is clear “Da Vinci Code” theatrics. Yet even if it was actually true it wouldn’t change a thing.
“I’m glad you agree that you don’t know. Does that mean you’ll stop implying that you do?”
Nope, a person needs a position to work from, otherwise it’s like being at sea or driving across Texas; you’d never know if you were getting any where.
Kavi,
In response to your comment: https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2017/03/05/incarnation-and-definition-of-marriage-3/#comment-34835 .
While you consider R’ Blumenthal’s question, allow me to draw attention to the errors in your comment, a comment that is mostly distraction and does not relate to the topic at hand.
R’ Blumenthal pointed out to you that your error was based on your unfamiliarity with Hebrew. To this point, you did not respond. In your response to him, you make no effort to show that you have not misunderstood the Hebrew. You do not demonstrate the truth of your original argument. Indeed, you do not even appeal to the English to strengthen your argument.
Instead you begin by attacking Rashi and Nachmanides and the rabbis in general. Your comments on their disagreement are not relevant to the discussion. Let us assume that the rabbis are blind, as you would have them to be. This would not prove that you read Genesis 15:6 correctly. Your rectitude cannot be demonstrated through their error. So your comments on Rashi and Nachmanides serve as nothing but a distraction. They do not strengthen your original argument, but leave it as weak and limpid as it began.
Moreover, the difference between Rashi and Nachmanides displays their keen insight. They are addressing an ambiguity in the text, while you introduce into the text what is not there—rather, not you, but Paul. Their different readings can be understood even from the English. The words “he” and “him” are used without defining which of the two parties is the subject and which the object. If you have read Nachmanides comments, you will see that though they are counter-intuitive, he really makes a rather deep point. It is a point well worth consideration.
On the other hand, Paul, whom you consider eminently qualified, introduces into the text what is not there. He is not contemplating any ambiguity. Rather, he is pushing his own ideas into the text. He abuses Genesis 15 in two ways. He pushes into it more than the text says, and he ignores the scriptures that argue against his point. His argument is empty. And it is to your benefit to consider those passages that have shown Paul’s error rather than steadfastly ignoring them as you have done to this point.
In short, your comment engages in ad hominem and non sequitur. What it does not do is strengthen your argument—rather not yours but Paul’s. It serves only to distract from the issues. As you consider the ethics of speaking without listening—and consider that well—consider also this: why you could not shore up your argument through demonstration.
Jim
Pingback: Assessment and Rebuttal | 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources