The Historical Jesus and the Historicity of the Christian Scriptures
Much ink has been expended in the effort to uncover the historical Jesus. The questions abound. Was Jesus a radical revolutionary against the oppressive Roman Empire or was he a pacifist who decried the use of force? Was Jesus an imposter or was he a messenger from on high? Was he a prophet or was he a deluded dreamer? What theology did Jesus preach? Did he preach a Trinity or did he advocate a pure monotheistic faith?
All of these arguments center on the work of literature that is known as the Christian Scripture. It is in this set of books that the character and the history of Jesus are depicted. This series of books brings a new set of questions to the discussion. Who authored these books? When were these books authored? Was there another document that preceded these books from which these writers drew their narratives? Are these books reliable?
It is not for me to attempt to resolve these questions. I do not believe that these questions can be resolved decisively and conclusively. The events in questions took place in the distant past. Any theory, no matter how convincing, can only remain speculation.
What we can do and what is incumbent upon us to do is to put this discussion into perspective. In the complexities of the conversations certain common denominators tend to get lost. By recognizing the common thread that is present in all of the theories about Jesus and the books that describe his life we can bring some balance to this debate.
Any discussion about a human being must recognize its limitations. No man can truly know what transpires in the heart of his fellow man. Only God can see the heart (1Samuel 16:7). What we can judge are the words and the activities that our subject brought out into the open. Since this discussion is about a man who lived and died a long time ago, we cannot evaluate all of his words and actions. We can only measure those words and those actions that were preserved in the writings and in the hearts of those who were impacted by his life. In other words this can never be a discussion about Jesus. We can only discuss the impression that Jesus left behind him in this world.
These impressions themselves are ever-changing. New interpretations of Jesus’ words and teachings are being developed on a regular basis. Is it at all possible to determine with any accuracy the content of the original impression that Jesus left behind him? I think that not. But I do believe that we can be confident about one element of the original impression that Jesus made on those who lived with him. There is one constant quality that every strand of evidence affirms concerning the impression that Jesus left behind him. There is no dispute that Jesus raised up a following that saw love for Jesus as a central feature, if not the central feature of their universe.
Since that time, all who considered themselves followers of Jesus accepted this constant. All who follow Jesus accept that a person’s love for Jesus or lack thereof is the most important defining quality of man. These followers of Jesus defined themselves and they evaluated their connection to other people primarily on the basis of their feelings toward Jesus.
Yes, there was and there still is conflict about which Jesus to love. Is it a Trinitarian Jesus or is it a Unitarian Jesus? Is it a pacifist Jesus or is it a Jesus who wants to see his enemies destroyed? But all who like to see themselves as extensions of Jesus’ impact on human society agree that love for Jesus is a central feature of their worldview.
The books of the Christian Scriptures were products of this community. It is difficult to determine with any certainty the precise theological parameters of the writers of the gospels, but there is no question that they saw love for Jesus as a principal element of existence. The most important line in the universe of the gospel writers was the divide between those who love Jesus and those who don’t.
It is naïve to read the books of Christian Scripture without recognizing this truth. These writers loved Jesus in an extreme way. It is clear that these people would not have demanded the same standard of evidence that an objective outsider would demand before accepting something positive or before discounting something negative about their hero.
To say that the books of Christian Scriptures are historical documents is misleading. Yes, these books were written a long time ago. But do these books present objective historical facts? It would be foolish to believe so. It is clear that these books are presenting the worldview of people whose hearts were completely committed to Jesus. Not only were these books written by people with a deep love for Jesus in their hearts, but these books were written with the express purpose of promoting and justifying that love. Few factors can distort a person’s view of reality to the same extent as the factor of love for an individual.
The ramifications of this truth are manifold. When the Christian Scriptures report that Jesus performed many glorious miracles, we need to read those words with the understanding that those who wrote them had a deep motivation to believe those reports. When these writers present fanciful Scriptural interpretations that exalt Jesus we need to recognize that there was a driving force in their hearts that wanted to see these interpretations in the words of the prophets. When the gospel writers vilify those who did not share their love for Jesus, we need to realize that the centerpiece of their worldview would have them reinterpret reality in this way.
We can know very little about Jesus today, so many centuries after his death. But we can be sure that he left behind him a legacy that elevated people’s love for him to an extreme degree.
The question that needs to be asked when reading the Christian Scriptures is if this love is justified. What legacy of justification did they leave for this central element of their message? Perhaps more important is the question of what kind of legacy of respect did they pass on concerning the ethical and moral responsibility for people to question that love.
Did the community that Jesus raised respect the process of honest questioning before loving? Or did they redefine honesty according to the love that was so central to their universe?
These are the questions that we should be asking about the historical Jesus. For this is the imprint that he left on the minds and hearts of men.
Yishai on Deuteronomy 33:4 – Oral… Yaakov on Podcast: Isaiah 1:1-9 LarryB on Anachronisms – excerpt f… Yaakov on Anachronisms – excerpt f… Jim on Anachronisms – excerpt f…
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- December 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- Addressing Atheism
- Bible Trial
- Debate Forum
- Faith Structure
- Isaiah 53
- Oral Law
- Reflections on the Haftorah
- Response to Dr. Brown Line of Fire
- The Charolite Faith
- The Righteous Gentile
- The Ultimate Truth
- Tzvi Jacobson
As usual, you get it exactly right, Rabbi B. I love the last lines:
“Did the community that Jesus raised respect the process of honest questioning before loving? Or did they redefine honesty according to the love that was so central to their universe?
These are the questions that we should be asking about the historical Jesus. For this is the imprint that he left on the minds and hearts of men.”
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Cutting through all the bs and getting right to the heart of the matter – how can you not love this guy!
I have a question; in rabbinical Judaism is it allowed for talmidim to love their Rebbe?
Shema It is allowed to love your Rebbe but it is not allowed that that love should lead you to pre-judge others – if it does then that love went too far
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Thank you for the answer, I find it most agreeable.
You must already know my Rebbe instructed me not to judge, so I won’t be judged. For the way I judge others is how I will be judged, — with the measure I use, it will be measured to me.
Long before Jesus appeared on the scene, a potential convert approached Hillel and said, “Teach me the Torah on one foot!”
Hillel said, “Love your fellow as yourself. The rest is commentary, go and learn it.”
Rabbi Akiva said, “Love your fellow as yourself, this is the fundamental principle of the Torah.”
We have our rabbis who “[cut] through all the bs and [get] right to the heart of the matter” and their followers didn’t persecute other peoples and commit mass murder.
Our rabbis also did not say:
“You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:444).
“But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me” (Luke 19:27).
“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).
“Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works” (2 John 1:9-11).
“And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar” (Matthew 23:35).
How could you love this guy?
Great points. Didn’t Hillel also say “whosoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whosoever that saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.” In the parable you mention Luke 19, the servants hated the noble man. They may very well have had a good reason, he may have been a horrible man. There have been many terrible rulers. Also, Jesus did not say this was a good ruler, he only said to murder those who did not like him. How could you not like this man indeed.
Brother LarryB, i just want to praise your observation on the parable in Luke 10. A couple of suggestions to look in a different angle:
You said, “In the parable you mention Luke 19, the SERVANTS hated the noble man.”
If we look carefully, those who hated the noble man were not servants but his PEOPLE (v. 14, “am” in Hebrew, the Jewish people in Israel). There are ten SERVANTS; only two were obedient to the noble man, but the one man disobeyed and was criticized harshly by the noble man. The rest of them were relunctant to execute the punishment ordered by the noble man (v.24-25).
I agree that he may have been a horrible man. Yes, you are right in saying, “There have been many terrible rulers. Also, Jesus did not say this was a good ruler.”
However, you seem to equalize the terrible ruler to Jesus himself. If Jesus was comparing himself to this terrible ruler, he must have been so stupid. However, i believe the Jewish rabbi at that time was much smarter than we think.
In interpreting the parables of Jesus, we must be very careful because he was hiding secret messages (Sod in Hebrew or Marshall), especially about the relationship between Israel and church, the Jews and gentiles. Please look at the context of the parable; it begins with verse 11,” And AS THEY HEARD THESE THINGS, HE ADDED and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. ” This parable was addition to the events of Yeshua’s entering the house of Zaccaeus, the SON (SEED) of ABRAHAM. Yeshua was not sent to gentiles but only to the lost house of Israel. Now, because they thought the kingdom of God will appear immediately to Israel, Yeshua wanted to say “no, it will be delayed. The gentiles will occupy this land but Israel, the Kingdom of God is not totally lost but will be restored in the last age.” Yeshua prophesied the coming age of gentiles in the promised land through the historical events of Archelaus (this is the noble man in the parable).
““The Saviour probably derived the details of this parable from the actual history of Archelaus, the son of Herod, who after his father’s death went to Rome to receive the sovereignty over part of his father’s kingdom in accordance with the intentions of his father’s testament. Its confirmation by the Roman emperor was necessary, because Herod’s empire in reality formed part of the Roman Empire. A Jewish deputation at that time also went to Rome to dispute Archelaus’s claim to kingship, bit the emperor nonetheless appointed him as ruler (though not as a full sovereign king) over half of his father’s kingdom.” (Geldenhuys)
Conclusion: the PEOPLE (the Jews) hated Archelaus (the noble man).
First and second servants obeyed and did a good job in creating a paganized religion called “Christianity.” but the third servant (v. 20 true follower of Yeshua) said, “you have not laid the original good news to the Jews, nor have SOWN the SEED of word of God. Apart from the SEED OF ABRAHAM and the Jewish root of Messiah, your kingship is invalid. so we can’t compromise. Sorry.” Now, the rest of them is a sort of warning to the gentile churches in the last age. True gentile Christian church should be reluctant to join the punishment rather should be on the side of the third servant.
Shabat Shalom le col ha mishpacha sheli!
Gean Guk Jevon
Thanks for pointing out my error. It is ( his ) people, I’ll get back to that, not the servants who hated him. The servants, probably employed, we are told one who was afraid to do what he was told because the king was a hard man. His fear seems justified based on 27 where the king orders his servants to bring those who hated him, to be murdered in front of the king. You mentioned ( his ) people like this is nothing. “Kings do not own people” and only a horrible person/king, would order people murdered because they disliked him.
What I find even more disturbing is he wanted to watch them murdered in front of himself, for the crime of disliking him.
You point out “The rest of them were relunctant to execute the punishment ordered by the noble man (v.24-25).”. This is incorrect. They argued over giving 10 minas to only one servant. 24-25. They murdered the people who disliked the king. I would like to point out the servants were just as guilty as the king. No, they were more guilty. They were the ones who actually committed murdered. Note; ( his ) people committed no crime as the parable records. And, the servant who was afraid to do what he was told because of his fear of the king, had no fear to murder for any reason the king pleased.
This parable stinks to high heaven as it teaches it is ok to kill for the reason of disagreeing/dis liking others you think are yours.
Jesus should have never used this parable except to point out the flaws with this type of thinking.
You can spin this but the next thing Jesus did was order his servants/deciples to go and steal a colt. 30-34
Your conclusion “True gentile Christian church should be reluctant to join the punishment rather should be on the side of the third servant.” Is not accurate and the third servant does not condem murder.
“Jesus did not say this was a good ruler, he only said to murder those who did not like him. How could you not like this man indeed.”
Counter missionaries use below as a proof text against Jesus as messiah:
“Isaiah 11:1-12:6 Describes a leader imbued with a spirit of God, wisdom, understanding, council, strength, knowledge and fear of God. He will be a righteous judge and he will smite the wicked dead. Here too, it speaks of the nations seeking him (11:10 – as in Genesis 49:10).”
— Letter to a messianic
Sometimes I wonder if people counter just to counter rather than seeking truth.
Jesus never sees himself as a mere prophet or guru.He sees himself as equal and one with
G-d.He declares that he is the way to G-d.His Torah teachings are his own spin on it for he says “But I tell you” before launching into his own teachings.He calls on his audience to “eat his flesh and “drink his blood”. There are many other verses in the Gospels that clearly states Jesus as being more than a prophet.
I don’t deny that there are positive teachings aspects such as mercy,love and forgiveness.However all this teachings are against the backdrop of Jesus as the centre ,not G-d.I don’t think Jesus’ intent was just to preach these values and to leave it at that.
In my opinion you should consider Jesus from all aspects ,including how he viewed himself and his mission before making an assessment. Are you comfortable with his ethical teachings while ignoring his call to be worshipped? If you love Jesus and all his Torah teachings ,then he must be the centre of your universe. Jesus demands no less than that.
Since you mentioned “double standard”, do you realize that you are guilty of one as well?
You mentioned many times that the actions of the Church does not represent true followers of Jesus. Yet you bring up the actions of the Sanhedrin in Jesus’s arrest and ask if Dina , a Jew would repent of them.
If you demand repentance of present day Jews for the actions of their leaders (in Jesus’s arrest), then you should repent for what the Church did to the Jews for 2 millennia. Christianity or Jesus should not be an exception to the rule.
Please take a step back and seek the truth.
Thank you for the enlightening post. I didn’t realize the extent others where misunderstanding.
Since Jesus didn’t write anything we don’t know how he saw himself. We have a record of how others saw him. We can infer his basic teachings, not literal word for word quotes. In your second sentence you confuse what he said about himself (“one with”) and what his antagonists said he said (“equal with”).
You take issue with “But I tell you”. Jesus taught outside tradition by not quoting other rabbis. I like that. Jesus taught honestly what he believed. Traditional orthodox types are uncomfortable with this type of teaching. They see it threatening their authority. The “eat his flesh and “drink his blood” statement eludes to an OT prophet writing.
Jesus is more than a prophet or teacher. He is the messiah who came before the great diaspora. A question here; Do you think God would allow the Temple destruction and the greatest scattering of Israel ever and send no one beforehand?
Jesus taught God was his center. He taught God should be our center. Jesus taught against a political economic religious backdrop who vied to be the center. The claim Jesus demanded to be the center of the universe and worshipped as God is pure rubbish and absolute falsehood – the tunnel vision view of his antagonists.
Sharon S, you write;
“Since you mentioned “double standard”, do you realize that you are guilty of one as well?”
Although I appreciate being called out engaging a double standard, this is not the case. I will kindly return the favor pointing out your mistakes below:
The actions of the church do not represent the true followers of Jesus any more as the actions of the Sanhedrin do not represent all Jews. The difference is I condemn the actions of the church while Dinah supports the actions of the Sanhedrin.
Since I’ve never supported anti-Semitic actions of the Church, there is nothing to repent of. Dina on the other hand, supports the Sanhedrin decision to hand Jesus over to be killed. I my opinion she would do well to repent of such support.
Using your own words;
‘In my opinion you need to take a step back and consider all aspects before making an assessment.’
Great posts! I’ve stopped interacting with CP, who now calls himself Shema, because of his fundamental dishonesty. But this is his most outrageous and audacious whopper yet:
“Dina on the other hand, supports the Sanhedrin decision to hand Jesus over to be killed. I my opinion she would do well to repent of such support.”
It is audacious because CP knows that I don’t believe the story ever happened. How can I support an action that never took place? He also knows, since I told him straight up, that if the story really had happened as recorded–which it did not–then I would not support their actions because I do not support delivering innocent people to their death.
Blaming present-day Jews for the death of Jesus is anti-Semitic. Rabbi B. asked CP to leave because of his anti-Semitic comments. Yet he keeps returning using different screen names.
I appreciate your thoughtful comments. Thank you for pointing out CP’s double standard.
To any unbiased reader it is evident why you decline further interaction
Your ability to paraphrase yourself out of failed arguments is amazing, but not stealth enough to be acceptable.
Which reminds me, I owe you a thank you. Due to your assertion the western wall is proof of failed prophecy. I come across some interesting information. At the beginning of the first century rabbis recognized four possible temple locations. Through recent archaeological finds using the Tanach and other historical writings. The Temple site is in the City of David not on Haram esh-Sharif. (Temple Mount)
The foundation of the Temple in the City of David was pulled up and the site became a abandoned field. The wall everyone is davening before is the retaining wall of the Roman Antonia fortress.
I wonder if “tradition” will ever let them admit their error?
Shema The same type of people that believe this rubbish are also of the type that believe that Jesus never existed or that he is a fabrication of the Roman Emperors
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Thank you for your insightful reply
Please refer to some of your comments and my corresponding replies as follows:
“Jesus taught honestly what he believed. Traditional orthodox types are uncomfortable with this type of teaching. They see it threatening their authority. “
>You can view Jesus as a reformer I.e seeking to lead his community to greater adherence of the Torah, or spreading deviationist teachings I.e teaching what G-d has not commanded or out of the religious framework of his day.
>the religious authorities may want to ensure that these teachings are not “deviant” in nature,not necessarily threatening their authority.
>There are many movements going around at the same time as Jesus’s ministry.Are there any records of the religious authorities checking up on them as well?
“Do you think God would allow the Temple destruction and the greatest scattering of Israel ever and send no one beforehand?”
>The temple destruction and scattering would not have happened if Jesus is indeed the Messiah.
>There’s the second coming argument -but even then the era after Jesus’s first coming should elevate the Jewish people ,not usher in their period of persecution and suffering.
“The claim Jesus demanded to be the center of the universe and worshipped as God is pure rubbish and absolute falsehood – the tunnel vision view of his antagonists.”
>Do you believe that the Christian Scriptures is a faithful record of Jesus’s teachings and ministry?
>If yes,then there are many verses in there which shows that he demanded that sort of worship.
1. He spoke with authority that set him apart from scribes (Mark 1:22, 27: Matt 8:9, Luke 7.8)
2. Jesus reconfigured divine commandments based on his own authority (Matt 5:21, 27,33,38,43)
3. In one instance he claimed authority to transcend the Sabbath since the Son of Man was “Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27-28)
“Taken from “How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus’ Divine Nature—A Response to Bart Ehrman” (page 59)”
>If no ,is the Sanhedrin really behind Jesus’s arrest? What if it is fabricated?What if the Roman authorities were concerned about Jesus’s growing influence and is responsible for his arrest instead?
“The actions of the church do not represent the true followers of Jesus any more as the actions of the Sanhedrin do not represent all Jews. The difference is I condemn the actions of the church while Dinah supports the actions of the Sanhedrin.”
>I have read your comments and Dina’s response at length .Dina’s response should not be taken as supporting the actions of the Sanhedrin. Refer link below:
>The church comprise of clergy and laity who were devoted to Jesus.
>The same entity that persecuted the Jews is the same entity that sends missionaries to distant lands ,thereby bringing Jesus’s fame and Torah teachings to the ends of the earth,
Aren’t they the true followers of Jesus as well?
>Why acknowledge the good and distance yourself from the evils done by them?
“Using your own words;
‘In my opinion you need to take a step back and consider all aspects before making an assessment.’”
>I have considered all items discussed at length before making an assessment
In the interest of tolerant fair communication and mutual respect I look forward to addressing your complaints concerning Jesus.
You’ve said; “….religious authorities may want to ensure that these teachings are not “deviant” in nature,…”
> If this were true one would expect to find some Talmudic argumentation on deviant teachings (as with other rabbis) rather than cultural wholesale denial.
“The temple destruction and scattering would not have happened if Jesus is indeed the Messiah.”
> This an incomplete statement resulting in an incomplete conclusion. Two things unaddressed: 1) Jesus as a type of messiah ben yoseph. 2) Messianic duties contingent on Israels’ acceptance. The truth of either or both results in the Jesus we currently have.
“Do you believe that the Christian Scriptures is a faithful record of Jesus’s teachings and ministry?”
> For the most part, yes. But not to the literal errant level that alleged pagan overtones can be considered as fact. I give grace in these areas.
“1. He spoke with authority that set him apart from scribes”
> Expected from messiah
“2. Jesus reconfigured divine commandments based on his own authority ”
> Expected from messiah.
“3. In one instance he claimed authority to transcend the Sabbath since the Son of Man was “Lord of the Sabbath””
> You are reading into the english text out of context (note your caps). Allow me to paraphrase: ‘The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Therefore a son of Adam is lord of the Sabbath.’
“What if it is fabricated?”
> This is unanswerable. What if it is all a fabrication from Genesis to Revelation? I don’t believe that to be true. Neither do I believe we have these texts as originally received (documentary hypothesis). What is the evidence/motive for fabrication? Jewish believers just woke up one day and decided to fabricate a document to make Jews look bad? You expect me to believe Jewish followers of Jesus some how knowing these texts would span the world creating anti-semitism, cumulating in the personification of Hitler, bringing about the holocaust, maliciously fabricated the NT ???
“Dina’s response at length”
> Dinas’ adept art of creative paraphrase has fooled you. I suggest you read anything she writes carefully. You will note she admits to rejecting the killing of the innocent but falls short of rejecting the Sanhedrins’ decision to hand Jesus over to be killed.
“Why acknowledge the good and distance yourself from the evils done by them?” (organized Christianity)
> This is a common misconception; that good can’t come from evil in a world where God is sovereign. Good or evil coming from a group of people does not validate homogeneous holiness or wickedness of the entire group as Dina would have you believe.
You might try the Texas two step and take two steps back. In my opinion you are researching with great bias.
Your posts are thoughtful and written with sensitivity. I really appreciate your writing!
I’d like to clarify the Jewish position on a few points:
1. The concept of messiah son of Joseph is discussed in the Talmud but is simply one opinion among many. It is baffling to see a Christian who does not consider the Talmud authoritative and who rejects the Talmud’s teachings on practically everything else latch on to this concept that is not even taught in the Hebrew Bible.
2. The concept of messiah son of Joseph as discussed in the Talmud is very different from the Christian concept of messiah. The Talmudic concept is of a Jewish warrior who will die while defeating enemies of Israel in battle. Although he will die, our oppressors’ defeat will be great. Finally, the messiah son of David will arrive on the scene shortly thereafter.
3. The fulfillment of the messianic promises does not hinge on the acceptance of the messiah. Search the Hebrew Bible from cover to cover, and you will not find such a concept anywhere. The messiah will be accepted the same way Moses was accepted–when he proves himself by successfully carrying out his mission. All false messiahs throughout history were repudiated the same way Jesus was: by being defeated with no good results and usually devastating results for the Jews (see Bar Kochba and Shabbetai Zvi).
4. The writers of the “New Testament” were likely not all Jewish. Some were, undoubtedly. Whatever the case may be, they could not have predicted that their words would sow such enmity toward the Jewish people. I am sure that had Jesus known what the writings of his followers wrought he would have been devastated.
5. To address CP’s bizarre accusation, which he has hurled at least three times, that I accept the “Sanhedrin’s” decision to send Jesus to his death: the most bizarre aspect of this accusation is that CP knows I don’t believe the story ever happened. So how can I support it? It makes no sense. I can only support it if I believe it happened. Furthermore, I already stated that I would never support something like that if it had happened. I must emphasize, once again, the anti-Semitism inherent in the belief that Jews must repent of the murder of the Jesus. This dangerous belief led to the massacres of eventually millions of Jews over the centuries. This belief is what drove pious Christians to hatred of the Jew. How could you love Jesus and not hate the ones who killed him and are unrepentant? I am grateful, Sharon, that most Christians today do not subscribe to this horrific idea, at least in my country, the United States.
“Shema The same type of people that believe this rubbish are also of the type that believe that Jesus never existed or that he is a fabrication of the Roman Emperors”.
> Your answer implies you did not watch the video. I did and saw nothing of what you speak of. I think you would enjoy the video – you don’t have to believe it. However it is highly convincing – especially finding a Roman coin under the western wall foundation stone.
Did you watch it ???
I don’t have to watch it – did you watch all the videos of those denying Jesus existence etc.? They are also pretty convincing and make an enjoyable watch.
Shalom be with you in this trial.
Thank you always for kindling the discussion to draw us close to the truth!
I have expected some excited praise for my enlightening interpretation of Yeshua’s parable in Luke 19, but only brother Larry responded with unenthusiastic criticism. Sad….
Without any pause to be appreciated, my comments on Luke 19 had been buried by other firy arguments; now i am also burned with that argument about the location of the Temple.
This was new and interesting to me because when i visited those places, i have never doubted the actual spot. Now let me publish here my 2 days indepth research about the temple mount controversy (I won’t be sad even if this article should be buried in an hour because i know the intensity of the fire between you vs. Rabbi, Sharon, and Dina)
1. Yeshua’s prophecy of falling down of all of the stones of the temple was indeed fulfilled. In Mt 24:1, He said all the “BUILDINGS (oikodomas) ” of the temple will fall down, not the foundations of the walls or temple which still stand today. So no need to change the location to fit for NT account.
2. I watched the video and tested it with Tanach and my experience. My conclusion is the temple was on the Temple Mount, not Inside of the City of David.
1) Nehemiah 2:15 relates the BROOK and wall. The tourist- looking archaeologist said “there was only one brook in that area, which was Gihon in the city of David”
Alas! You know that the word ‘brook’
Is נחל which means River or Valley not the fountain (מעיין )! The brook was Kidron which is filled with currents of waters in rainy season. It seems that Nehemiah was talking about he was walking along the outside walls of the temple that went alongside with kidron valley.
2. Western movie star looking archaeologist was curious about the Roman coin found in the foundation of the walls and since it was dated years after the time of Herod, it must not be remains of the second temple. — Do we have evidence that the temple constructions have never been touched or repaired or visited by anyone who comes after the death of Herod and happened to drop a coin?
I had an opportunity to join excavations at Tel Lachish. As you know, archaeologist have found some Assyrian army’s arrowheads in the siege ramp which they built before capturing the fortress city in 791 BCE.
Then should we say Lachish was built after the king Hezekiah? No, i have dug the sites with a Korean excavation team and revealed the city walls of Lachish built in time of King Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:9)! And the other team from USA and Israel had continued to find ancient stuff there. One small artifact found in the ancient site cannot tell the date or historicity of the site.
3. Since there is a rocky spot in the middle of Haram al Sharif, it cannot be used as the Threshing floor which David bought and designated as the house of God? We know that the rocky spot is surrounded with vast plain space perfectly fit for threshing floor and the Temple platform. Moreover, the threshing floor prefers to be a highest point of the area where you get the strong wind to blow the chaff. Many Tanach verses say they WENT UP from the City of David to put the ark and establish the temple !
When my family visited to city of David from the temple Mount, i had to GO DOWN! And while my wife and 4 kids entered into the Hezekiah’s tunnel, i had to drive my baby on the stroller on the ROCKY and CURVY roads to Siloam Pool to meet them. And now i know why the city of David was not a good place for the Temple platform!
Wow, I can believe you didn’t watch it long enough to find a moment where you can legitimately call “BS”. I’ve read and watched a lot from those who deny what I believe. In my opinion that is one of the best ways to learn.
Assuming you are not going to watch it. I have a simple question you should have the answer to. The Tanach and historical writings indicate the Temple was in the City of David at the site of the Gihon spring, how do you reconcile that with the modern traditional Temple Mount?
(these two sites are 600 feet apart wall to wall)
Shema 1Kings 8:1 explicitly tells us that the Temple was OUTSIDE of the city of David. On what basis do you say that the Tanach or any other writings indicate otherwise?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
My questions in the previous reply is for you to consider other points of view in evaluating the actions of the Sanhedrin/Pharisees / religious leaders in the Gospels .There may be other reasons why they do what they do and it may not be necessarily bad.
I asked if the religious authorities in Jesus’s day check on the activities of other movements at this time , such as the Essenes or Zealots .You did not reply to the question . Instead your reply shows that you refuse to consider possibility that authorities in Jesus’s day may not have such a negative agenda than is described in the Gospels. I sense you seem to have a deep mistrust of Jewish tradition with the “cultural wholesale denial” remark.
To be honest I’m not very sure on how to respond to your replies on the Messiah. I am grateful to Dina for sharing the Jewish position on the matter . As a non Jew looking in , the Messiah is supposed to direct mankind to G-d and not to himself. The destiny of the Messiah should align with the destiny of his people , Israel and not be opposed to each other . Israel is to be liberated and vindicated first before the salvation of the Gentiles , not the other way round . With Jesus it is the exact opposite and that is why he is not Messiah material.
By the way , Matthew 12:8 (NIV ) states “8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
So does Mark 2:27-28:“27 Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Your response to my query on Christian Scriptures (CS) is quite interesting . You believe it is a faithful record for the most part , except for the “pagan overtones” . I’m guessing verses such as “eat my flesh and drink my blood” (John 6:56) ?How do you judge if a verse in the Christian Scriptures have pagan overtones? I am aware that there are scholars out there who thinks the same way you do and writes books on this subject . I have read some of these books in the past . In my opinion, either you accept the Christian Scriptures as a faithful record in its entirety or not at all.
Fabrication of the CS- Let me clarify my question . If you do not believe that the CS is a faithful record of Jesus’s teachings and ministry then why bring up the Sanhedrin and their role in Jesus’s arrest? I also proposed another alternative view which is taken from “Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate” by William Nicholls-which is the possibility that Jesus may have been arrested by the Romans , not by the Sanhedrin and asked if the account of his arrest by the Sanhedrin had been fabricated . My apologies if this upsets you .The purpose again is to for you to consider other points of view .
You state- “Good or evil coming from a group of people does not validate homogeneous holiness or wickedness of the entire group as Dina would have you believe.” Which I take to mean that good or evil actions of a group does not determine the holiness or wickedness of the group- I agree wholeheartedly. Correct me if I’m wrong , by your reply it seems you agree that the Church ,comprising the true followers of Jesus , who lived out the calling to bring the Good news to the ends of the earth , is also responsible for the persecution of the Jewish people?
I do not mean to be rude .It seems to me that you have a serious bias and mistrust when it comes to the Jewish people and its traditional texts , more so since you claim to be a part of this community . You have to be careful as other people out of there (like me) may take your comments wrongly thereby giving them reason to mistrust or fuel hate for the Jewish people ,thereby contributing to antisemitism.
I feel that you have ignored my answers and just rephrased your objections. But let us first address a matter of paramount importance:
I quote you here:
“I do not mean to be rude .It seems to me that you have a serious bias and mistrust when it comes to the Jewish people and its traditional texts , more so since you claim to be a part of this community”
In responding, yes I agree what you have said is rude. I forgive you. Knowing the book(s) you read and revere; I appreciate your mind has been poisoned with past hates and atrocities from one point of view seeking to exploit them for their own means.
I suggest you first study history from a secular point of view, then study all sides from the various religious zealots. You have the cart before the horse and only see the part of the whole picture presented to you.
On to previous answered questions:
“I asked if the religious authorities in Jesus’s day check on the activities of other movements at this time”
>I’ve answered: the mere existence of Essenes hiding out in the desert is proof. It implies they feared for there lives. If you want Talmudic details, Yourphariseefriend has them. But I doubt he will be forth coming with anything incriminating. He knows at the end of the second Temple period there were a small group of corrupt Roman/Greek sympathizers mixed among the religious leaders who ran the show.
On to the next:
“I’m not very sure on how to respond to your replies on the Messiah. I am grateful to Dina for sharing the Jewish position on the matter .”
>I’m sorry, but you’ve been fooled again. Although Dinas’ view is Jewish, it is one of many. She would have you believe it is the only one. The reality is: In terms of Jewish history it is a view that became predominant only after Rambam and Rashi.
Next, you appear to have entirely missed my point on the “son of man is lord of the Sabbath” ? In Greek this can be taken in two ways; 1) The Messiah is master of the Sabbath. 2) Since the Sabbath was made for man, every man is the master of his Sabbath. You have to realize rabbinic Judaism then and now, declares they are the master of your Sabbath telling you how to keep it down to the smallest detail – mind you, adding a lot, all apart from Tanach!
“In my opinion, either you accept the Christian Scriptures as a faithful record in its entirety or not at all”
> I disagree; God gave you a brain – use it. We follow God – not solely words on paper. “study to show yourself approved”
You still want to lump all Christians in the same pot for the sole purpose of rejecting Jesus and those who truly follow his teachings. Let me ask you: Do you do the same to Islam? Is every Muslim a terrorist ?
Sharon S, with all my heart I encourage you not to take history from religious zealots from any faith. Study from a secular point of view – even then history is written by the victors. It is not easy, just about everyone emblishes, omits facts or out right lies. You have to prayerfully study all sides.
Me for example, I used to be many different things but have changed as I studied. Recently I was a sold out Zionist. I am beginning to question if the Israel we see now is a gift from God or if He is allowing it because some Jews and Christians still haven’t learned their lessons.
Shema What you are doing here is pretty serious – you are making false allegations and telling the audience that I know that your allegations are true but deceptively hide the “information.”
You made a claim about the Temple being INSIDE the city of David and you claimed that the Tanach said so. I pointed out to you that the Tanach said the opposite. On what basis did you believe what you were sold? You could have checked the Tanach before buying the story – but you didn’t because it fit your bias.
It is clear to all who are reading these exchanges that you follow your bias telling the world that you are using your brain. You fool no one but yourself.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
I do not wish to argue. In studying I come across things and ask your opinion. Although I appreciate your answers, you must know I am growing increasingly skeptical of the Orthodoxy of all faiths. Your answers are sometimes valuable giving new insights. Sometimes exactly what I expected from Orthodoxy. Something’s you don’t answer.
For example your answer on the Temple location was valuable. However it doesn’t determine if the Temple was at the Gihon spring at the upper end of the City of David or further up outside the City. I’m continuing to research where the threshing floor was. This is quite difficult, because we are talking about a difference of only 600 feet.
For me this is a curiosity. In all honesty (please don’t take offense) it doesn’t matter to me where the presence of God used to be, what matters is where the presence of God is now. Although if could be proved beyond doubt the original Temple was not in conflict with the Mosque. Wow, Temple construction could begin today. Yes, I know, you’d still have that monstrosity on the mount – I kinda agree with you. No worries, we both agree Messiah will fix that.
An example of a question being skirted is the Lunar Sabbath. I suspect you know your answers thus far have been inadequate. I know I’m ignorant of much, but passing off Yom Kippur as an answer, really? I would still like to know if here are any recorded weekly Sabbaths that don’t occur on the 8th, 15th, 22nd, 29th, of the month. Why we don’t keep new moon days. And why we are allowed the names of pagan gods on our lips using week and month pagan names? I know you don’t owe me any answers, I appreciate what you do give – thank you.
Yourphariseefriend, you say to me;
“Shema What you are doing here is pretty serious – you are making false allegations and telling the audience that I know that your allegations are true but deceptively hide the “information.””
Don’t be offended, correct me if I’m wrong. We have discussed the historical presence of a corrupted Sanhedrin and priesthood. If I remember correctly there was one time you agreed they have existed at different times past. Yet the majority of the time you choose to skirt the issue. This is why I said;
“Yourphariseefriend has them. But I doubt he will be forth coming with anything incriminating. He knows at the end of the second Temple period there were a small group of corrupt Roman/Greek sympathizers mixed among the religious leaders who ran the show.”
Now would be a good time to correct the record if I remembered incorrectly.
Yourphariseefriend, you say;
“It is clear to all who are reading these exchanges that you follow your bias telling the world that you are using your brain. You fool no one but yourself.”
I would like to respond to this.
Yes, I often fool myself according to my bias. Knowing this, and in an effort to overcome it, I continue to study and ask questions primarily from those who disagree with my bias. Honestly, I look around and see very few doing this. Most are sheep following some self proclaimed masters or historical dogmas. NT Scriptures exort us to “test all things” and that Gods’ ‘spirit will us guide into all truth’. I do my miserable best using what God has given me to know the truth.
Shema You didn’t ask a question about the Temple you stated a “fact” – it was a lie that you had bought and didn’t express any doubt.
As it relates to the Talmud – if you would be here to study you would ask – does the Talmud speak of persecuting other groups. You didn’t – you stated it as a fact and said that I would deny it but that I would be lying – that doesn’t sound like someone who is asking questions. Does it sound like that to you?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Yourphariseefriend, you correctly say;
“Shema You didn’t ask a question about the Temple you stated a “fact” – it was a lie that you had bought and didn’t express any doubt.”
> Okay, I admit I was doing a bit of trolling with that, I wanted some real discussion from others who believe oppositely. You are the only one to step up and give me a good Scripture reference – thank you. I will actively repent by trying to post in a less sensational fashion.
Yourphariseefriend, you say;
“As it relates to the Talmud – if you would be here to study you would ask – does the Talmud speak of persecuting other groups. You didn’t – you stated it as a fact…..”
I only have access to an online translation of the Talmud. You are free to correct me – but it is fact the students of Hillel were put to the sword by students of Shamai. This is why I didn’t ask. I know you are going to say the Orthodox view makes the “sword” a metaphor.
“……and said that I would deny it but that I would be lying – that doesn’t sound like someone who is asking questions. Does it sound like that to you?”
> Wow, I don’t know what to say here. If this a example of how information has been passed on it totally invalidates the oral tradition.
(excuse the caps, I save them for special occasions)
I NEVER said you would DENY or you would be LYING.
To quote what I said accurately:
“If you want Talmudic details, Yourphariseefriend has them. But I doubt he will be forth coming with anything incriminating.”
Yourphariseefriend, this the proper context of the above statement:
From past interactions with you; In my opinion, you are great giving answers that fit your theology. But answers that point to a possible conflict with your theology are hard to get.
(It is infuriating when people put words in others mouths, it shows the are not really hearing, but listening with prejudicial bias)
Shema That one statement in the Jerusalem Talmud (less authoritative) needs to be read in context of all the other statements in the Talmud about this subject – and it doesn’t paint the picture you want. You obviously are reading work of people who have no regard for the truth
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
How about the Tanach? (which is more authoritative)
Here is my point: I assert at the end of the second Temple period the Sanhedrin was controlled by a nucleus of evil wicked men. They are the ones who schemed to murder God’s messiah.
The knee jerk reaction here is; Never it cannot be! We are God’s chosen, His witnesses, our leaders would never do such a thing and we always listen to our leaders.
The cannon was closed by the end of the second Temple period, but here is what Nehemiah says at the beginning of the second Temple period about your ancestral leaders;
“Nehemiah 9:34 Our kings, our leaders, our cohanim and ancestors did not keep your Torah, pay attention to your mitzvot or heed the warnings you gave them.
As you well know this is not an isolated incident, if it were we’d still be on the land today with a Temple and priesthood.
So what’s going on? If you ask me; In 70 God purified Israel, separating her from her evil leadership scattering her to the wind as one separates wheat from chaff, For 70 years she has been home trying hard. Yet there is still a growing evil in the land and fear she will again be purged. As God often does; He gives us what we ask for, showing we have focused on the wrong thing. You will get the Messiah you desire not realizing it is God who gives the desires of men’s hearts.
How do you know that your opening statement is true? It is you who needs to bring evidence to this accusation. I am not denying it – but you are saying that the Sanhedrin is guilty until proven innocent. On what basis are you saying this?
And who do you think Nehemiah was if not our “leader”?
I started this discussion with you to highlight the following:
a.Jesus is not a mere guru or prophet . He sees himself as being more than that.
He sees himself as “one with” (to me it is a literal meaning) and “equal with” (to you based on what his antagonists say) G-d.
Are you comfortable with his ethical teachings while ignoring this ?
b.To highlight your own double standards –you distance yourself from the atrocities committed by the Church , claiming that they do not represent the true followers of Jesus yet you asked Dina to be accountable for the Sanhedrin’s role in Jesus’s arrest.
What I have learnt from this discussion is as follows:
a.You believe Christian Scriptures (CS) is a faithful record for the most part, “not to the literal errant level that alleged pagan overtones can be considered as fact” . However , you seem to be upset when I suggest the Sanhedrin act in the Gospels may be untrue.
b.You stated that I missed the point on “on the “son of man is lord of the Sabbath”. Yes, I’m afraid I have missed the word “paraphrase” in your previous reply . I would interpret it by 1) Messiah is the master of the Sabbath (literal interpretation). Either ways its either the Messiah or rabbinical Judaism dictating how you practice the Sabbath. You cannot decide on this matter anyways.
c.I have suggested various possibilities in interpreting the actions of the Sanhedrin/Pharisees/religious authorities . They may not be very bad. Your replies indicate that you are not open to these alternative views and are bent to see them as the bad guys.
d.Yet , you declared Jesus as the messiah son of Joseph , who taught that G-d should be our center. That the claim that Jesus demanded to be the center of the universe as “pure rubbish and absolute falsehood”. You want me to accept Jesus on the basis of this “alternative view” and not willing to consider my “alternative view”? Absolute rubbish!
e.On the CS –you ask me to use my brain when I said one should accept it as a faithful record either in its entirety or none at all. Are you suggesting cherry picking verses to fit the picture of the Jesus , the Messiah ben Joseph who contrary to popular belief did not demand worship? The central message of the CS is about Jesus . I have tried reading the Gospels and explaining away verses that suggests his claim to divinity but it is useless . You are ignoring the overall message of the CS-and that is not using your brain.
As to the double standards accusation:
a.You stated “The difference is I condemn the actions of the church while Dinah supports the actions of the Sanhedrin.”
b.I responded that Dina’s statement should not be taken as supporting the actions of the Sanhedrin. I also pointed out that the Church also comprised of individuals who are devoted to Jesus . They bring Jesus’s Torah teachings to the ends of the earth , yet they also persecute the Jews . Why acknowledge the good and distance yourself from their atrocities?
c.You replied “Good or evil coming from a group of people does not validate homogeneous holiness or wickedness of the entire group”-I asked if you then agree that the church , who brings the gospel to the masses , is responsible for the persecution of the Jewish people.
d.You then ask me is every muslim a terrorist. My answer is no .
You should not equate the Islam and the Church . To my understanding Islam does not have a hierarchy unlike the church .The decisions of the Church ,including its policies on Jews comes from Church councils and its papal bulls . I once come across a statement “ if the masses came to think the Jews poisoners of wells and sorcerers –the leaders of the church and the aristocracy were responsible”.
Most muslims are peace loving people . Terrorists usually act in isolation without the knowledge of family and friends . Most ISIS volunteers join the movement without the knowledge of family members or their local community.
One thing I noticed -whenever an act of terror occur , there is swift condemnation and distance from the act by the Muslim community . “This is not Islam” is the standard tagline –or pointing out acts of violence or verses of violence in other scriptures . Perhaps this is to counter Islamophobia in Western countries . There is no introspection, no soul searching or attempt to find out the root cause within the Islamic tradition by practicing Muslims (if there is please highlight). I used to find fault with muslim apologists on these matters.
Little do I know that the same disease happened or is happening within Christianity . That Christian institutions are perpetrators instead of victims . What do I do? Do I say that true followers of Jesus do not do these acts? I read about these atrocities (by secular & catholic writers) and even visited the actual places where some of these atrocities took place to confirm its truth. Now you tell me if I have the cart before the horse. Shouldn’t believers of Jesus and those who have Christian backgrounds like you and me do some soul searching and find out its root cause? Why the distance?
Now you have most facts from our conversations in front of you . Which of us is guilty of bias?
“We have our rabbis who “[cut] through all the bs and [get] right to the heart of the matter” and their followers didn’t persecute other peoples and commit mass murder.”
>oh really? I disagree, history disagrees, your own Talmud disagrees.
> Just love how you pick and choose verses out of context. You post only Jesus’ response after your Rabbis publicly called him a demon possessed bastard.
CP asks if rabbinic Jews are allowed to love their rabbis. He obviously knows nothing about rabbinic Judaism if he can even conceive of such a question (even if asked tongue in cheek, which I hope is the case).
Jews are commanded to love their fellows as they love themselves. There is no disclaimer here that says “except for rabbis.” Furthermore, Jews are supposed to hold their teachers in reverence. But reverence is different from basing your whole religion on an individual and judging everyone according to whether they love this individual or not.
Dina, correct me if I’m wrong (lol – as if I need to really ask that of you), in Jewish style one often asks questions not because they don’t know the answer, but rather as a form of polite communication.
Who a person revers tells you something about that person. For example if a person loves Charles Manson, Stalin and Hitler, I doubt you’d go on vacation with them. Judgements are often more benign; Hillary/Obama or Trump? Or a little less benign; Mahmoud Abbas or Benjamin Netanyahu? Or a little more malignant; Hassan Rouhaniyou?
This why Jews today say Jesus is irrelevant, because when you read his Torah teachings, what’s not to love. Most of you never being christian probably don’t know this. Things are not as they ought to be. Because of that I don’t judge another by whether or not they say they love Jesus or profess Christianity. Rather I look at their actions. I’m not the judge of their soul, but I’ve got to know how much to watch my back.
The historical Jesus is not hard to find. Just study history. Letting go of preconceived ideas and religious doctrines – that’s hard.
The Historical Jesus
1) He was a Rabbi sent by God right before the great diaspora, who sacrificed his life calling us to repentance, teaching the right way to keep Torah.
(John 20:16 John 3:34 John 10:14-18 Matthew 4:17 Matthew 11:30)
2) No one knows him except the Father
3) He is the Messiah of this age.
(John 4:25-26, Matthew 16:15-17 Luke 4:18-21 Matthew 28:20)
>That’s all you need to know<
>That’s all you need to know<
Similar to “settled science” or “Jesus said it, I believe it, that settles it”. What an enigma!
Please note that the books of the Christian bible are not reliable. Trying to prove the historical Jesus from these books is simply begging the question.
Shema, the only thing that historians can say about Jesus for sure is that he was killed by Roman Crucifixion under Pilate.
We can otherwise make no secular judgements about his religious standing as a messianic person.
He appears to have been an itinerant preacher with Pharisaic leanings, who in spite of those leanings, disagreed with the leadership.
If you take narrative out of the New Testament, and you look only at the ethics, (dos and dont’s ) all that is left is a book of ethics that are tailored to teaching the expected behavioral norms of god fearing non Jews.
If in following Jesus you demand that he be prayed to, or you demand acceptance of his blood for forgiveness, etc. You are well beyond the pale of proper practice as defined by the Torah.
Torah discredits the idea of human sacrifice, and it clearly states not to worship the whole host of heaven. (If God has a son, a daughter, a consort, or an entourage, Torah tells us not to worship them.) Worshiping the host breeds corruption because it draws artificial barriers between human beings.
Remember Baal and Asherah? In Canaanite theology, Ball is the son of El (the head of the Pantheon,) and Asherah was the consort of El.
So, when Elijah asked “how long will you waver between two opinions?” Its clear that Israelites thought it was cool to partener up ba’al and God. The Prophet said it wasn’t ok.
Your posts are always a joy to read. You are an out of the box thinking man refusing to be self defined by religious dogma. Kudos to you.
Focusing on one thing in your you post:
“Torah discredits the idea of human sacrifice”
The misunderstanding comes when the sacrifice of Jesus becomes a magical incantation. This is similar to the Jewish incantation; ‘My ancestors heard Gods’ voice at Sinai, we are His witnesses, therefore whatever we say is right’.
Paul in explaining his personal religious paradigm shift spiritualized the sacrifice of Jesus. As often happens in Orthodox traditions; over time the ritual becomes more important than the reality. Things take on magical qualities divorced from reason.
If God said he didn’t like animal sacrifices, (which didn’t take away sin) how much more would he disapprove of a human sacrifice. Instead of focusing on some magical quality of Jesus’ sacrifice, let’s look at the reality of it.
In the military there are historical examples of those who voluntarily took suicide missions for the greater good. In “reality” they sacrificed their lives for the greater good. These people are often honored, venerated and immortalized as heros. Jesus said he was sent by God to do a job. It was indeed a suicide mission. The job was to preach repentance to people who for the most part would reject his message, resulting in his death.
No doubt the magic is in exemplified selfless unconditional love leading us to repentance. Taken to far from reality results in ridiculous assertions and counter assertions concerning ritual human sacrifice.
” The job was to preach repentance to people who for the most part would reject his message, resulting in his death.”
so you bring out a violin and play sad music , but then you are reminded of the joy of mary madgalene and rejoice . i don’t get it. poor jesus preached repentance and was killed (sad music from violin ), then a massive shift, mary madgalene is full of joy. have you seen the way protestants celebrate the resurrection ? something has clearly gone wrong in the transmission of your religion, two contradictory ideas fused together .
“he died for us….but mary ran from the tomb full of joy”
how do you make shift in your thought? are you full of joy like mary m? do you feel sad and then full of joy because of the resurrection stories?
Tony, you ask;
“how do you make shift in your thought? are you full of joy like mary m? do you feel sad and then full of joy because of the resurrection stories?”
>Your last question answered your previous questions. I would like to add:
It is sad to see a good person die. But when a good person dies a horrible death it often shocks people into thoughts about the righteousness of God, self reflection and questioning. Having this same person overcome death is the perfect ending validating the desire to make sense out of the world.
The even happier ending is yet to come; when Y’shua comes back in the clouds ruling and reigning as king. No doubt this will shock many who have spent their life countering the idea this would ever happen. Gods’ true chosen will repent, the prideful will not. Many are called, called and called. How can God chose you if you don’t come when He calls?
” But when a good person dies a horrible death it often shocks people into thoughts about the righteousness of God, self reflection and questioning.”
can you explain what do you mean by “horrible death” ?
jesus’ death was a controlled suicide knowing full well that his god would make him die under 6 hours. jesus did not have it bad than the ones who would stay hanging on the cross and suffer on it , till death takes them.
when? they didn’t know. could be two days plus. we should respect the death of those who did not plan out their deaths. we should not put jesus in the same boat of those who did not know when, where and how their suffering will end, please have some respect.
do you use the deaths of other good people in your repentance?
“Having this same person overcome death is the perfect ending validating the desire to make sense out of the world.”
so no more sad violin ? full celebration ?
“The even happier ending is yet to come; when Y’shua comes back in the clouds ruling and reigning as king.”
this was said to the chief priest and the chief priest didn’t see “son of man” return on clouds .
Tony, you ask;
“can you explain what do you mean by “horrible death” ?
>Some things are self evident. But I’ll explain you even more.
By the end of the second Temple period the leadership of Judaism became sufficiently corrupted to murder those calling them to repentance. Why do you think the Essenes moved away from the Temple and lived in the desert?Some here will cry; “Never would our religious leaders do such a thing!” I suggest they read the Tanach applying the adage; “History repeats itself”.
Before the destruction of the Temple, these corrupt leaders are complicit in the murder of John, Jesus, James, Stephen, the attempted murder of other innocents and alliances with Rome.
For two thousand years, generation after generation the same three lies are repeated parent to child; the name of Jesus is profane; Jesus and all his followers desvered what they got. Our ancestors, elders and rabbis are always right.
Not recognizing the time of their visitation they shift the blame for their troubles to Jesus. This is like shifting the blame to God for you breaking His law. It was decided to hand over the special one sent by God to be killed. The commonwealth of Israel continues to suffer for that decision. If you choose to cast your lot in with the 2000 year old corrupt Sanhedrin, do think God will judge you differently?
You can always think for yourself, ask God yourself, this usually leads to repentance, then forgiveness, then joy.
okay, so jesus didn’t want to die, he was FORCED to die because , in your words ” sufficiently corrupted to murder those calling them to repentance”
I need to clear up something that CP wrote that is patently untrue.
He wrote that every generation of Jews passes down three lies about Jesus. One is that the name of Jesus is profane. Only this part is true. But only because the names of all idols are profane. According to Judaism, Jesus is an idol. It has nothing to do with personal animosity to Jesus.
The second two items on the list are not true at all.
Number two is that Jesus and his followers got what they deserved. I was raised an Orthodox Jew, and I can tell you from my own personal experience that Jesus is simply not discussed. Jews are as completely indifferent to Jesus as they are to Mohammed and to Hare Krishna and to Buddha and all the other leaders of the world religions. Most Orthodox Jews of my personal acquaintance cannot define the words “trinity” and “gospel.” They vaguely know Jesus as the man on the cross whom the Christians believe is the messiah. They don’t even know the story in Christian scripture about the Jews handing Jesus over to Pontius Pilate, a name they wouldn’t recognize. I don’t discuss this blog with my friends because they do not share my interest at all.
I have never heard, neither in school, nor at home, the concept that Jesus and his followers deserved what they got. Because no one really knew what happened to them or cared! (However, CP does like to say that the Jews deserved what they got.)
The only reason I know any of this is that a Christian friend challenged me to read the “New Testament.”
The third lie Jews pass on to their children is that the rabbis and elders are always right. This is shocking in its brazenness. Jews believe that only God is infallible. The Torah instructs us to go to our leaders to resolve matters of halacha and that we must follow their instruction, but never teaches that they are always right. Jews are famous for disagreeing with each other and with their leaders; that is where the term “machloket l’shem shamayim” comes from (it’s a common expression in Orthodox parlance and means a dispute for the sake of heaven). A famous joke has it that if you listen to two Jews talking you will hear three opinions!
So I just wanted to set the record straight, Tony. I hope that this is clear!
Just one more point, Tony. CP would like you to believe that all our suffering at Christian hands (though he denies the hands belonged to Christians) befell us because of our rejection of Jesus. And now that we are free of that, Israel suffers for that rejection as well.
The one thing God is not punishing us for is committing spiritual adultery by turning our hearts to an idol named Jesus. Yes, we are in exile and being punished for our sins. Our tradition teaches that the Temple was destroyed because of the sin of gratuitous hatred among Jews, and that the messiah will come when all Jews learn to love each other despite our differences. Nowhere does the Bible teach that the messianic promises depend on acceptance of the messiah or that punishment and exile will follow rejection of the messiah. Belief in any particular person as the messiah is simply not a Biblical nor a rabbinic requirement.
And while we are, yes, being punished for our sins, the Bible promises that God will punish our oppressors for carrying out our punishment with much greater enthusiasm than was required.
The three lies;
1) we agree Jewish parents teach their children Jesus is profane.
2) I concede I should of said ‘some’ parents teach Jesus deserved what he got, rather than ‘all’ parents.
3) I concede I used the wrong word. It is taught rabbis always have to be listened to, not that they are always right.
>A rock is not an idol unless you make it one. A piece of wood is not an idol unless you make it one. An animal is not an idol unless you make it one. The sun, moon and stars are not idols unless you make them idols. A man is not an idol unless you make him one. An angel is not an idol unless you make him one. A bronze serpent on a pole is not a idol unless you make it one. The messiah is not an idol unless you make him one. Jesus is not an idol unless you make him an idol.
Yes, we are in exile and being punished for our sins. Our tradition teaches that the Temple was destroyed because of the sin of gratuitous hatred among Jews, especially towards the Jews Y’shua and Jacob, that the messiah will come back when all Jews learn to love the Jew Y’shua. (You will not see me again until you say; “blessed is he who comes in the name of Hashem”).
That is wacky!
Sabbath in the middle of the week?
You first have to ask; Whose week? The Jewish week or the Gregorian week based on the Roman calendar? Its only the middle of the week on the Roman calendar. It’s the 7th day on Gods’ calendar. If you choose to remain ignorant and follow your conquers I understand. Ignorance is bliss. It’s understandable the Sanhedrin made a compromise to help protect against annihilation or assimilation. But those days are over and what’s true, is true. They say they await the Messiah to put this right. Okay I get it. Might want to read Daniel about the one who changes times and seasons.
Do you really think Moses had Caesars calendar from the local deli hanging on his tent wall?
Shema You could go one believing those whose lives are dedicated to undermining God’s testimony or you can believe God’s appointed witnesses. The article you linked has it all backward. The week, never changed – the Sabbath is actually the sign that God promised to preserve in our midst. And the reason we went to a fixed calendar was not to satisfy a popular request but because the lovely followers of Jesus did everything they could to take away every but of authority we had. The records of the Council of Nicea show how the Christian leadership couldn’t stomach the authority of the Jews and the popularity that the Jewish authorities had in establishing the living calendar. It was Christian persecution that forced us to move to a fixed calendar and when the true Messiah comes we will go back to the living calendar. What money did the Sanhedrin gain out of making a fixed calendar? What was the benefit?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
The Sanhedrins’ last meeting around 350 changing to a fixed calendar made no money from the decision. Changing back now, being out of sync with the worlds weekly calendar would have huge economic ramifications.
I have no love for the Council of Nicea. It wasn’t followers of Jesus or christian persecution, but the Roman government who changed the calendar. Anyone thinking Constantine was a christian ought to think again.
“Be careful to do everything I have said to you. Do not invoke the names of other gods; do not let them be heard on your lips.”
Yet every time we mention a day of the week, the names of pagan gods are heard on our lips.
You have to notice Leviticus 23 lays out the Sabbath and all the feasts yet has no rules of postponement. This is only possible when using a Sabbath tied to the moon just as the rest of the feasts.
“Shema You could go one believing those whose lives are dedicated to undermining God’s testimony or you can believe God’s appointed witnesses.”
You don’t seem to realize it. But there you go again claiming ‘appointed witness infallibility’. This is easy to settle. All you have to do is find a Sabbath in Torah that doesn’t fall on the 8th, 15th, 22nd, or 29th of the month (moon). I’m guessing being a Rabbi this would be quite easy for you.
Shema What makes teh Council of Nicea and Constantine “not Christian”? Who are you to define “Christian” ? They thought that they were Christian – who are you to argue with them? I never claimed infallibility – but we are witnesses – you are dismissing their testimony altogether. And the 10th of the 7th month is a Sabbath and besides – no one ever claimed that the weekly calendar was changed
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Rabbi B., my personal opinion is that we are entering nutty fruitcake territory and should not even be dignifying this with a response. But that is just my opinion.
I mean, this conversation is starting to feel surreal, like the Twilight Zone.
I appreciate I’ve asked you some difficult questions. I understand your reluctance to engage on the topic. But thank for responding.
“And the 10th of the 7th month is a Sabbath”
> Because its Yom Kippur (a feast day Sabbath). We are discussing the weekly Sabbath. I can see from your answer that you are not closely looking into this. I assumed you already knew. Or maybe it’s secret knowledge not for the masses?
*** I’d very much like to hear if you can find a weekly Sabbath not on the 8th, 15th, 22nd or 29th.
“I never claimed infallibility – but we are witnesses – you are dismissing their testimony altogether.”
> I agree you never claimed infallibility. Yet the infallibility of the Council of my Nation is repeated frequently as proof for anything that is questioned. I am in no way saying the witnesses are wrong on everything. I’d even say they are much more right than wrong. Yet they are not right about everything all the time. For example; believing a Saturday Sabbath can be traced clear back to Moses.
Although not the topic at hand. I’ve noticed it seems to be a core belief here is that a Christian is a Christian is a Christian. And since Christians are bad, Jesus must be bad. You take issue with those who judge all Jews by an small group of alleged corrupt Jews represented in the NT. These then reject the instructions of Moses.
Can you see people are people? They believe what they want so they can believe what they want. Speaking bluntly; As a rabbi I expect you to be above that. I expect all holy men to be above that.
Breaking down the the Christian Council of Nicea:
Rebbe Y’shua Talmudim strove to be like him as any Jewish student strives to be like their teacher. Followers of Jesus still strive to be like him. Those not like Jesus are not following the example of their teacher. By definition they are – not -“followers” of Jesus.
The Council of Nicaea was called by the pagan Emperor Constantine to unite his nation under one religion. This resulted in an amalgamation of Christianity, Mithraism, Sun worship and Apollo – they called it Christianity or Catholicism – the universal religion. This obviously put the Jew as odd man out. Odd man out typically gets persecuted. Especially when going against a government.
Rabbi B., here CP repeats for the umpteenth time that Christians who behave badly are not true followers of Jesus because they are not following his example.
I wonder why we can’t use the same get-out-of-jail-free card. The word “Jew” means “acknowledge” as in “to acknowledge God.” Any Jew who murders, betrays another to death, or whatever CP wants to accuse Jews of is not acknowledging God in his actions; ergo, he can’t be a true Jew by definition.
Of course I don’t agree with this argument. I just find despicable the judging of Jews by different standards.
Christians who murdered Jews were still Christians. In fact, history shows us that the more pious the Christian, the greater his love for Jesus, the more fierce his hatred of the Jew. This has changed only in the latter half of the twentieth century.
Jews who commit evil are Jews just as well.
Everyone must stop defending his group by pretending that evil cannot be committed by its members.
That said, if we compare the behavior of Christians with the behavior of Jews during the same period, Jews win hands down. Since the ascendancy of Christianity, Rabbi B., has there been a Jewish equivalent of Torqeumada or Chmielnicki or Peter the Hermit?
Shema This is ridiculous for so many reasons but let us do this one at a time – do you believe that teh Jews were observing a moon based sabbath in Second temple times?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Shema What happens on the first of the month according to you? 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Genesis 17:25 Abraham circumcises Ishmael. Since he is a circumcised descendent of Abraham, does this make him a Jew?
The answer is found in Genesis 17:18–19. Who does God say is the real Jew, Issac or Ishmael?
Genesis 25:23 Rebecca gives birth to twins, who is the real Jew, Jacob or Esau?
Leviticus 26:41–42 A Jew can become not a Jew. If he humbles himself he can be a Jew again.
Deuteronomy 10:16-17, Jeremiah 4:4 Jeremiah 9:25–26 Circumcision of the heart counts more than circumcision of the flesh.
Therefore a “true Jew” is a Jew with a circumcised heart.
Just as I expected, he missed the point for the third time in a row. Which is fine, as long as you folks get it.
“Shema What happens on the first of the month according to you?”
> The first of the month is called by the Sanhedrin. First they need two reputable witnesses who have sighted the first appearance/crescent of the moon in the west at sunset. Most times there is one day new moon day. Sometimes there are two new moon days at the beginning of the month. We have a witness to a two moon day event in 1 Samuel 20:27
“do you believe that teh Jews were observing a moon based sabbath in Second temple times?”
>I believe this was a transitional time where both a Jewish religious and Roman civil calendar were employed depending on who you were. We know the official decision to switch to a mathematical calendar occurred when Rome outlawed the Sanhedrin. More to the point; For the weekly Sabbath, there may not be an official date, rather a process of assimilation. The switch was probably made during the end of the Second Temple period up to 300 years after. I’m thinking after. If there was an official decision before the diaspora, you think there’d be be some discussion of it in the Talmud.
Shema My question was – is the first of the month Sabbath? My next question to you is – which Sabbath did Jesus observe? the weekly one or the one that you believe exists on the basis of the moon?
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
I missed no point three times in a row. You assert that I employ a double standard when judging Jews and Christians. I took some time and effort to methodically answer your question, Using Scripture to show that I judge a true Jew and a true Christian by the same standard. The same standard both the Tansch and the NT employ: a “circumcised heart”.
A real Jew, as Torah instructs, loves God with his whole heart mind and soul and loves his neighbor as himself. A real Christian as the Torah & NT instruct, loves God with his whole heart mind and soul and loves his neighbor as himself.
What point am I missing?
If you didn’t get it the first three times, I don’t see what will be accomplished by explaining it a fourth time. I’m not going to bother wasting my breath. If anyone else wants to try feel free.
But I’m done. Bye, bye.
New moons are different from Sabbaths (Numbers 28:10-11, 1Chronicles 23:31, Ezekiel 46:1, Isaiah 66:23, 2Chronicles 2:4, Numbers 10:10, Ezra 3:5 — I can post 3x as many Scriptures, these should be enough to prove 7 day Sabbaths are different than New Moon days.
I believe Jesus along with his fellow Jews kept the original lunar Sabbath. The evidence only implies but doesn’t prove it. If Jesus died in 31 on a Friday the 14th Passover then it proves it 100%, making that Sabbath a high Sabbath but that Jesus died in 31 is open to debate. In Colossians 2:16 Paul addresses Sabbaths and new moons as if some were still keeping them.
To to answer honestly; I don’t know for sure, but it looks that way to me.
Shema We have pretty good records from the Second Temple era – internal (Jewish) and external (non-Jewish). The Jews in Second temple times were observing a weekly Sabbath – no dispute. Your Jesus kept a weekly Sabbath.
1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >
Is there someplace I can look that up?
You haven’t even begun to see “whacky”. I’ll give you something whacky. Let’s see if you have the constitution to actually research it.
Abraham is Brahma and Sarah is Saraswati orginally from India. In Hindu mythology Brahma comes from the city of Ur which is on the road to India
and was married to his sister. In India, two rivers feed the Saraisvati; the Ghaggar and the Hakra. (Hagar was Sarai’s maidservant). The Saraisvati river dried up around 1900 bc, leaving thousands of abandoned towns. People migrated to where it was livable. This is probably when Terah and his family headed west. We know this is when Abraham abandoned the polytheistic religion of his father.
So there you have it: were Abraham and Sarah originally Hindus from India?
– How’s that for whacky?-
If that’s not “whacky” enough for you, then try:
Moses and the Pharaoh Akhenaten
I wonder if you would do me a favor. You have posted under the names CP, 10th Man, and now Shema. Under all these guises you have said quite ugly things about others, particularly Dina. Indeed, your libel that she supports the murder of an innocent man and the earlier libel that she would not hide Christians if they were in a circumstance similar to the Holocaust are among some of the most malignant attacks written by a commenter on this blog. I cannot help but wonder if you would feel as comfortable writing these things in your own name, rather than a pseudonym. I know you called yourself Zack on worthychristian and once named yourself as Zech here. Would you mind using your name here, not your whole name, obviously, but your first name or nickname? You might think differently about writing viciously about others if you signed your actual name to your posts. You might be inclined to write civilly, respectfully, and honestly, if you do not sign as a pseudonym, if you own your words rather than detach them from yourself through a pseudonym.
My real name is a nickname, lol.
I hear your point, I really do. However you should realize these attacks of libel are exaggerations in a character assassination campaign – namely by Dina. This seems to be her preferred method of argumentation. I’d much rather prefer she stick to the topic at hand.
To use your examples:
“Indeed, your libel that she supports the murder of an innocent man and the earlier libel that she would not hide Christians if they were in a circumstance similar to the Holocaust”
1) Do you see how this has been twisted? I fully acknowledge Dina has said she does not support the killing of an innocent man. Yet she refuses to withdraw her support for the Sanhedrin’s’ decision, nor will she admit Jesus got what he deserved. Her latest way out of this corner is to claim it’s all a myth, a tale of fiction, none of it happened.
2) ‘Hiding Christians’ It took hours of my time pouring through her posts to re-acquire the evidence this statement is based on. Granted, she may at the time been writing flippantly, nevertheless she said as much. Sorry, I’m not taking the time to find it again. If she wishes to retract by saying she absolutely would hide Christians if her fellow Jews at the order of the Bet Din were hunting Christians down to be killed. She is and always has been free to make such a statement – I have yet to hear one.
Yeah, worthychristian deemed me not worthy. They banned me for exposing the fallacy of determining who is and is not a Christian using the Nicene Creed. Iirc, it had to with forced adherence to systematic trinity theology.
Your constant attempt to assassinate Dina’s character is ugly, and I am not fooled by your claims that she has misrepresented your words. On the contrary, I have been a part of the conversations between you and her from the beginning, and I know very well how much you have misrepresented her, not the other way around.
Dina never said anything like she would allow Christians to die if they were rounded up in a Holocaust. You have misrepresented her position over and over again. She has frequently praised Christians for the good that they have done. In fact, she has attempted to point this out to you on multiple occasions. She does not believe that Christians are all bad, nor that they deserve to be obliterated.
Dina has pointed out, of course, that Christians have persecuted the Jewish people. This she has primarily done in response to the idea that Jesus has done much good in the world. She has pointed out that the history of those that believe in Jesus has not led them only to do good but often evil. If one is to claim that Jesus brought a huge amount of good into the world, it would only be correct to point out that he similarly brought a huge amount of evil into the world. Whether or not you disagree with you, it would be wrong for you to pretend that Dina believes that Christians are only evil.
Dina has no responsibility to retract a statement that you made up, that she would not hide Christians. Your constant demand that she answer your false charges and retract them or repent of them is despicable, and I cannot help but think that you would be less likely to malign her character if you signed your words with your own name, if you could not distance yourself from your words with a pseudonym.
In any case, I am not fooled by your claim that Dina has launched a campaign to make you appear to be attacking her. I have read the ugly things you have written about her, and I did not need her to contextualize them for me to see exactly how distorted and ugly they were. Nor will your attempt to re-contextualize them make any difference. I read the conversations as they happened, and I know that you are misrepresenting Dina. It is ugly and uncalled for. And I think if you are to write such ugly things about others, you should own your words, signing them with your own name.
I found the following in the Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, p.140:
Equally if not more virulent was Voltaire, whose attitude was also more complex. Personally unfriendly toward the Jews, Voltaire, in his “Dictionnaire Philosophique” (1764), simultaneously attacked their alleged religious fanaticism and argued that Christians ought logically to practice Judaism, “because Jesus was born a Jew, died a Jew, and said expressly that he was fulfilling the Jewish religion.”
…I suspect Christian apologists interpret “fulfill” as “replace”, or “make obsolete”?
Precisely. Fulfill = Abolished because Jesus observed it. In other words, if Jesus kept a law then that law no longer needs to be kept, with the caveat that if the law was repeated in writing by an apostle (reaffirmed) then it was still binding even if Jesus observed [fulfilled] it.Unless of course it is either inconvenient or “too Jewish”, in which case such a law was deemed “fading away” and was to be considered obsolete at a later date.
As I understand it, (correct me if I’m wrong) “fulfilled=abolished” is actually a pretty recent development in the church. It became a necessity when people began to demand consistency from churches that , for example, believed in the 10 Commandments, but could not reconcile rejecting the biblical 7th day in favor of the Roman “Venerable Day of the Sun”, while claiming to be “new Israel” with Israel’s laws and promises passed on to Christians (replacement theology). In other words, the idea of “Christian versions of Jewish laws”, or the church quoting Leviticus to support some doctrines while rejecting the majority of it. That worked for centuries, but then Christian sects, especially 7th day Adventists, noticed the scriptural inconsistencies. This forced mainly Protestant – “sola scriptura” – churches to readjust their interpretations and apologetics regarding kosher and Shabbat. The churches then had to take a new approach to the Torah law since they could no longer say, on one hand “The Bible forbids tattoos” (a law “un-reaffirmed” by the NT), while saying on the other, “we need not observe kosher or Shabbat”.
It was illogical, irrational, nonsense like that which put me on the path out of the church.
And at this point, my most unpopular opinion is this: Christians, who believe they are saved by a human sacrifice and by symbolically drinking human blood and eating human flesh, have no business quoting the Jewish Bible about ANY doctrine.
Brother Eleazar, i think your obervation on Chriatian doctrine is fair. Question: which NT verses make you think fulfill= abolished?
Did you know that the NT teaches us that DOCTRINES can only be based on the Jewish Bible?
“All scripture (the Jewish Bible) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”(2Timothy 3:16)
Gean Guk Jeon,
The NT offers empty praise to Tanach, constantly misrepresenting it. The authors of the Christian Bible wanted to borrow the authority of Tanach but did not want its truth. Their doctrines are not based on Tanach, and Paul, whom you quote, was one of those that most misrepresented Tanach.
Brother Jim, thank you for starting conversation with me. I guess i was not able to reapond your previous thoughtful argument because it needed much time Could you bring example of Paul’s misrepresenting of Tanach?
Gean Guk Jeon,
I have already done so, particularly in regards to Romans.
It isn’t what I think that matters. My point is that the interpretation of Matthew 5:17 was changed by the church when challenged on why the Torah is not observed by Christians. Read my post again. As I have stated previously, if you were to take your beliefs to a Christian doctrine forum or orthodoxy discussion, you would be branded a heretic in 10 minutes. That is why I do not really consider your arguments as representative with regards to what Christians believe or what missionaries teach.Yours is a hybrid Christianity, as is the case with many “Messianics”.
Brother Eleazar, your comment is absolutely right! Thank you bro.
Happy Independence day.