Why Jews don't believe in Jesus

[Sephardic-male]

I'LL TELL YOU WHY?!... (I)

IT JUST MIGHT HELP YOU!


I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for the sins of mankind. According to Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh". Now, this was BEFORE the "trinity" was invented by the council of Nicaea (325 "A.D."), and the author means that Jesus was "God in the flesh", not just "part" of God, but all of God! Since God is the father of mankind, when He died for His children's sins, He was violating and contradicting His very own words as recorded in Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall NOT be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers! Everyone shall be put to death for his own sin!" I'm 100% certain that this is the word of YHVH God! I'm not sure at all about Timothy 3:16! But you must admit that God cannot violate His own express commands! Some may claim that Timothy 3:16 isn't to be taken literally, but if this isn't literally true, the entire edifice of the "New Testament" collapses, and along with it, Christian doctrine, which claims to be based on the literal truth of the "divine" Gospel!

Since I'm at it, I'll tell you why it's impossible for "God" to become "man". "To become" means just that! It doesn't mean "to pose as", or "to come disguised as". To say God became man means that He stopped being the perfect, all-wise, almighty Creator and became an imperfect, simple weak creature! The Church calls this "a mystery", but had it ever happened, it would be a tragedy! Having once become finite, limited in power and wisdom, frail and human, God would have been doomed to remain that way, for lack of ability to change back into the perfect, almighty being He once was. Just as imperfect foolish man can never, never become Almighty God (though so many have tried throughout the ages!), God will never, become man, and never has.

All this leads me to the inevitable statement: God cannot die! YHVH swears to it Himself: "For I lift up my hand to heaven and say, as I live forever!" Deuteronomy 32:40. "Have you not known? Have you not heard that the EVERLASTING GOD YHVH, the Creator of the ends of the earth, faints not nor is He weary!?" Isaiah 40:25. Now maybe the "god manifested in the flesh" of the New Testament died, but the true only Creator YHVH, never dies! He lives forever, He's everlasting! According to the New Testament, God was dead and buried for over a day! Now if the only God had really died, He would have had to stay that way! There just wasn't any other God around to "resurrect" Him! He was the ONLY God! And who was ruling and managing the universe while He was dead? Existence, all existence would have ceased immediately, had God been killed on Calvary, since everything exists by His Will alone!

All of this PROVES that the "God in the flesh" of the New Testament was NOT the True Almighty Creator, YHVH, AT ALL, but only another god of that category of gods described so strikingly by Jeremiah (chap. 10:11):

Thus shall you say to them: the gods that have NOT made the heavens and the earth, THESE shall PERISH from the earth and from under the heavens!" - "Shall a man make himself gods that are really no-gods?" (ibid 16:20).

OH YHVH, my strength and my stronghold, and my refuge in the day of trouble, UNTO YOU shall the nations come from the ends of the earth and shall say: 'Our fathers have inherited nothing but LIES, vanity and things wherein there is NO benefit!' (Jeremiah 16:19). "For I am God, and NOT MAN!" Hosea 11:9. So, dear friend, leave those other gods, the three headed ones, the man- gods who die and perish. Come to YHVH, the ONE and ONLY, the EVERLASTING, the ONLY SAVIOUR, TODAY, AND LIVE, YOU AND YOUR SEED!


I'LL TELL YOU WHY!! (II)

I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for my sins! First of all, human beings were not acceptable sin-offerings, according to the Mosaic Law. In order to have an acceptable sacrifice, "god the son", (the second person of Christianity's triune deity!) would have had to be "incarnated" into the body of a goat, calf or bull! He would have to have his throat cut by the priest; his blood sprinkled on the temple altar; and his kidneys, fat, and part of his liver burnt on that same altar etc., as designated by Moses' Law! Moreover, the animal to be sacrificed had to be physically perfect and without blemish! An animal whose penis was defective, as the result of having its tip peeled off (as was the case with Jesus, and every other circumcised mali) would be blemished and unacceptable, according to the Law! Since, according to Christian mythology, Jesus came specifically to fulfill the Law's demands for a perfect sin-offering, he was obviously a complete failure! Not ONE of the Law's conditions was met by Jesus! He was an unacceptable sacrifice, and his followers are still sin-laden, miserable creatures!


Another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that, according to Hebrew Scriptures, NOBODY can die for someone else's sins! Moses, the greatest Israelite that ever lived, offered himself to YHVH as a sin- offering after Israel had sinned by making a golden calf. He asked YHVH to take his life, and forgive the sin of Israel. YHVH'S reply was a FLAT REFUSAL, followed by a statement of DIVINE POLICY; "Whoever sins against Me, him (only) will I blot out of my book!" Exodus 32;33. The sinner himself is guilty! NOBODY can take the rap for him! (Not even "god the son"!). This says THE LAW! And Jesus supposedly cam to "fulfill" the Law, not destroy the Law! (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that he was guilty of death HIMSELF, according to THE LAW! "When a prophet speaks in the name of YHVH, if the thing follows not, nor comes to pass, that is the thing which YHVH has NOT spoken! The prophet has spoken it presumptuously! You shall NOT FEAR HIM! DEUTERONOMY 18:20-22. Jesus prophesied: "For the son of man shall come in the glory of his "father", with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily, I say to you, THERE ARE SOME STANDING HERE (Jesus' listeners!) which shall NOT TASTE OF DEATH till they see the son of man (Jesus) coming in his kingdom!" Matthew 16:27-28. Jesus prophesied his immediate, triumphant return over 1900 years ago! The prophecy never materialized, NEVER came to pass!! Thus, Jesus was a FALSE PROPHET, and GUILTY OF DEATH, according to the law! (Deuteronomy 18:20). He died for HIS sins, NOT OURS!

According to Christian mythology, Jesus was really Almighty Creator become flesh. (Timothy 3:16). However, YHVH the Creator plainly states: "I, YHVH, CHANGE NOT!!" (Malachi 2:6). Now, when an almighty, all knowing, all powerful being CHANGES into a frail, putrid man, that certainly is a RADICAL CHANGE! YHVH, the True Creator plainly states "I live FOREVER!" (Deuteronomy, 32:40). YHVH is EVERLASTING! (Isaiah 40:28.) Yet, according to the New Testament legend, the Christian god died, and was buried for over a day! (from Friday afternoon through Saturday night.)

Christianity claims that its god died for you and me. YHVH, the ONLY TRUE DEITY, CREATOR of HEAVEN and EARTH, states that He dies NOT, HE LIVES FOREVER, and that each individual is responsible for, and must pay for his own sins. However, the way of repentance is open to all:

"Again, when the wicked man turns away from his wickedness that he committed and DOES that which is LAWFUL and RIGHT, (GOOD WORKS!), HE SHALL SAVE HIS SOUL ALIVE!..... He shall SURELY LIVE, HE SHALL NOT DIE!!" Ezekiel 18:27-28.

Yes, dear reader, NO NEED for dying god-men! NO NEED for a god to be murdered on a pagan Roman cross!! The Way of YHVH is open to ALL! Come to YHVH, TODAY! Submitted by: Mordecai Alfandari


http://www.light-of-israel.org/

[Sephardic-male]

rules of sacrifice in Judaism

1. Requires that a sacrificial ritual be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7). According to the accounts in the New Testament (NT), Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18, 23).

2. Requires that the blood of the (sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Leviticus 4: 5-6). New Testament evidence clearly shows this was not done.

3. Requires that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defect or blemish (e.g., Leviticus 4:3). According to the various accounts in the NT, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mark 14: 65, 15:15-20; Luke 22: 63; John 18:22, 19:1, 3). Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar ("sign of the covenant"). According to the NT, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Philippians 3:2, Galatians 5:12).

4. Requires that the Passover (sin) sacrifice, a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Numbers 28:22), not as a communal offering. According to the NT, Jesus’ death (termed a “sin sacrifice”) expiated the sins of mankind (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 9:12, 10:10, 10:18).

5. Directs that the Paschal Lamb was NOT to be offered for the removal of sins. It was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under items 4 above and 6 below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Numbers 29:11 [individual sin-offering―male goat]; Leviticus16:15 [communal sin-offering―male goat]).

6. Requires sacrificed Paschal Lamb to be roasted and eaten, and it’s blood used to place markings on the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exodus 12: 7-8). There is no record in the NT that this was done (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).

7. States that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for UNINTENTIONAL sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Leviticus 5:1-6, 20-26 [Leviticus6:1-7 in Christian Bibles]; [e.g., Num 15:27-31] .

8. Teaches that sacrifices can only atone for sins committed PRIOR to the offering of the sacrifice. No sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed AFTER the sacrifice was offered. Thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered.

9. Strictly FORBIDS human vicarious atonement (e.g., Exodus 32:31-33; Numbers 35:33; Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:29 [30 in a Christian Bible]; Ezekiel 18:4,20; Psalms 49:7).

10. Strictly PROHIBITS human sacrifices (e.g., Leviticus18:21, 24-25; Deuteronomy 18:10; Jeremiah 7:31, 19: 5; Ezekiel 23:37, 39).

[Sephardic-male]

REASONS WHY NO HONEST JEW CAN BECOME A CHRISTIAN 1


Michael Boaz Israel ben-Abraham



There are nine positive commands that a Jew must break and deny, before ever he can become a Christian.

1st. He must deny the Unity of God, and support a Trinity of Persons, which is Idolatry, (see Deuteronomy 4:16,) and take the name of a man (a "male") as a God, into his mouth.

2d. He must deny the Seventh Day Sabbath, which is the Seventh "Spirit of God," or the Seventh Spirit of his Existence, which is Rest, and keep the ROMAN SUNDAY.

3d. He must deny C i r c u m c i s i o n, which is a positive command of God, never to be abrogated or gainsaid by any inferior testimony: Excision is the penalty. See Genesis. 17:10, 13, and 14.

4th. He must deny and cease to keep the Four Annual Feasts, which were to be "kept forever throughout their generations."

5th. He must deny the whole Law 2 of God, as being "Abrogated," "dead," and "Married to another," (see Romans 7:4,) and "Finished," and not merely succeeded, but superseded by a Gospel (so called,) and thus destroy all that preserves the existence 3 of the moral character of God, or his Attributes, which is the same thing. And who cannot see, if we destroy the Law, the Gospel (so called) has no foundation whatever?

6th."He must lose sight and deny the Supremacy and Pre-Eminence of Israel as a Nation, and "Kingdom of Priests," (Exodus 19:6,) over the whole world, also Esau's selling his "Birthright" to Jacob, which included also his "Blessing," of being "Lord over him" and the whole visible creation. Genesis 27:29.

7th. He must deny God's positive command, "That Israel shall dwell alone," (Deuteronomy 33:28, and Numbers 23:9,) "and not be reckoned among the nations;" and by mingling himself amongst the Gentiles, loses his own Identity, and if he have any children, they must be neither Jew nor Ashdod. Nehemiah 13:24.

8th. He must deny any difference between "Clean and Unclean," "Sacred and Profane," which God positively commands in his Law. See Leviticus 11.

9th. He uses "Blood," "Things Strangled" and "Offered to Idols," even to Three 4 DISTINCT PERSONALITIES, which is Spiritual "Fornication and Idolatry," (see Deuteronomy 4:16,) and whenever he eats anything blessed in any other name than the "name of the only one God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," he sacrifices unto a "Strange God;" besides he denies and destroys, as far as he can go, the design God has in keeping the distinctness and Identity of that People upon whom alone "he has named" and placed his Great Incommunicable and Ineffable NAME, as the alone medium of Blessing the whole world.



Footnote:

1. The Key of David, Michael Boaz Israel ben-Abraham (Warder Cresson 1799-1860), Philadelphia, 1852

2 God exists morally or Spiritually, and the strength of his Existence depends alone upon the Law of his Constitution.

3 Man exists physically, and the strength of his Existence depends alone upon the Laws of his Constitution.

4 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

[HuckFinn]

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/02-09/angel.htm

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/03-10/yshua.htm

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/05-07/atonement.htm

[feministhippy]

I think we're having the discussion about Jews for Jesus and why an organization owned and paid for by a Christian group is not Jewish in another thread.

And I don't follow the teachings of Jesus for a very simple reason: Jesus has nothing to do with my religion. Christianity might have started as Judaism, but it is no longer. They are two separate religions.

[Sephardic-male]

[http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...02-09/angel.htm (http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...02-09/angel.htm)]


an angel is an angel, G-d is G-d, Man is Man


G-d has no form

G-d is not a man. Missionaries say that the “son” aspect of their tri-partite god was the person Jesus. (Sometimes they even seem to say the other two aspects were also human, but that's another story.) They emphasize that they believe G-d became man, not that a man became G-d. Mormons go so far as to claim that G-d was once a man! The Tanakh makes no such distinction. The Tanakh says simply that G-d is not a man.

o Numbers 23:19, King James Version (KJV),1 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? .

o Missionaries claim the verse should read "G-d is not a man who lies..." This is not what the Hebrew texts says, or even how the KJV translates it.

o Hosea 11:9 ...I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee….

o I Samuel 15:29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent. .

o Psalm 146:2-3 While I live will I praise the LORD: I will sing praises unto my God while I have any being. Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. .

Jesus is frequently referred to as the "son of man.” .

o The Hebrew phrase "ben adam" (literally "son of man") in a poetic way of saying "person.”

o Job 9:32-33 For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment. Neither is there any daysman ("mediator" in the New KJV) betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.

o Note that Job 9:3 also contradicts the missionary idea that someone must mediate between people and G-d.

o The same idea is expressed in a different way in Deuteronomy Chapter 4. The text is explicit ― you saw no image at Horeb, ― so don't try to make a representation of G-d.

o Deut 4: 15-19 Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

o Note that Deut 4:19 also contradicts the missionary idea that G-d will condemn those who worship incorrectly.

o Missionaries sometimes say that G-d has changed since those words were written. They assert that now G-d is indeed human, and if Jews don't believe it, we will be consumed in the fires of hell. However, the Bible says that G-d does not change and we will not be consumed.

o Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.




[http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...03-10/yshua.htm (http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...03-10/yshua.htm)]

Yeshua is aramiac form of Joshua


[http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...7/atonement.htm (http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library...7/atonement.htm)]


· Exodus 30.12 - Charity can provide atonement for the soul.

· Exodus 30.15-16 - Money can make atonement for the soul.

· Leviticus 5.11-13 - Flour can make atonement for the soul.

· Numbers 14.19-20 - Prayer can make atonement for the soul.

· Numbers 31.50 - Jewelry can make atonement for the soul.

· Isaiah 27.9 - Breaking alters to idolatry can make atonement.

· Jeremiah 36.3 - Turning from evil can make atonement for the soul.

· Hosea 6.6 - Obedience can make atonement for the soul.



rules of sacrifice

1. Requires that a sacrificial ritual be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7). According to the accounts in the New Testament (NT), Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18, 23).

2. Requires that the blood of the (sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Leviticus 4: 5-6). New Testament evidence clearly shows this was not done.

3. Requires that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defect or blemish (e.g., Leviticus 4:3). According to the various accounts in the NT, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mark 14: 65, 15:15-20; Luke 22: 63; John 18:22, 19:1, 3). Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar ("sign of the covenant"). According to the NT, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Philippians 3:2, Galatians 5:12).

4. Requires that the Passover (sin) sacrifice, a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Numbers 28:22), not as a communal offering. According to the NT, Jesus’ death (termed a “sin sacrifice”) expiated the sins of mankind (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 9:12, 10:10, 10:18).

5. Directs that the Paschal Lamb was NOT to be offered for the removal of sins. It was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under items 4 above and 6 below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Numbers 29:11 [individual sin-offering―male goat]; Leviticus16:15 [communal sin-offering―male goat]).

6. Requires sacrificed Paschal Lamb to be roasted and eaten, and it’s blood used to place markings on the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exodus 12: 7-8). There is no record in the NT that this was done (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).

7. States that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for UNINTENTIONAL sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Leviticus 5:1-6, 20-26 [Leviticus6:1-7 in Christian Bibles]; [e.g., Num 15:27-31] .

8. Teaches that sacrifices can only atone for sins committed PRIOR to the offering of the sacrifice. No sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed AFTER the sacrifice was offered. Thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered.

9. Strictly FORBIDS human vicarious atonement (e.g., Exodus 32:31-33; Numbers 35:33; Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:29 [30 in a Christian Bible]; Ezekiel 18:4,20; Psalms 49:7).

10. Strictly PROHIBITS human sacrifices (e.g., Leviticus18:21, 24-25; Deuteronomy 18:10; Jeremiah 7:31, 19: 5; Ezekiel 23:37, 39).



BLOOD SACRIFICE IS NOT ESSENTIAL FOR FORGIVENESS

Zvi Zaks




Missionaries say that G-d must have blood in order to forgive sins. I have even heard them make the blasphemous sounding statement that G-d is incapable, does not have the ability, to forgive without bloodshed. Such an idea is primitive and barbaric, but that is not the point. The point is that the Tanakh does not agree. According to Tanakh, there are several acceptable means for repentance.

· Leviticus 5 11 (KJV) But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon: for it is a sin offering.

· Isaiah Chapter 1:11 (KJV) To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

Micah Chapter 6 is particularly explicit as to what G-d wants:

· (KJV) 6 Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? 7 Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? 8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

o Missionaries sometimes say this means Jesus. But that it not what the text says.

Hosea Chapter 14 waxes poetic and describes words (of repentance) as if they were the animal sacrifices ("calves of our lips"):

· (KJV) 1 O Israel, return unto the LORD thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. 2 Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips.

The Psalmist expresses the same idea.

· Psalms 40 (KJV) 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

· Psalms 50 (KJV) 7 Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God. 8 I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt offerings, to have been continually before me. 9 I will take no bullock out of thy house, nor he goats out of thy folds. 10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. 11 I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine. 12 If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof. 13 Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? 14 Offer unto God thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the most High: 15 And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.

Money (Exodus 30:15-16), jewelry (Numbers 31:50) or putting fire from the altar in a censure (Numbers 17:11) are also listed as means to forgiveness.

Hosea is specific that animal sacrifices will stop for a temporary period (as opposed to being stopped forever and replaced by something else.)

· Hosea Chapter 3: 4 (KJV). For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: 5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

Here is the list of the verses for easy copy and paste in chatrooms:

· Lev 5:11; Is 1:11; Micah 6:6-8; Hosea 3:4-5; Hosea 14:2; Ps 40:6; Ps 50:7-15; Ex 30:15-16; Num 17:11; Num 31:50



SOURCE:



Zvika Zaks, Copyright 2001: fiddlerzvi@att.net { http://home.att.net/~fiddlerzvi/ (http://home.att.net/~fiddlerzvi/) ]

[somethingwitty]

Just to interject something as a neutral obsever---


1) You are assuming you can comprehend G-d's actions and will
2) You are assuming you can comprehend G-d's form/forms
3) There is a difference between the flesh dying
and the spirit dying.

[Sephardic-male]

no i am talking about the laws of Judaism

[atropine]

Just to interject something as a neutral obsever---


1) You are assuming you can comprehend G-d's actions and will
2) You are assuming you can comprehend G-d's form/forms
3) There is a difference between the flesh dying
and the spirit dying.
It's not comprehending who g-d is, or what g-d does, it's just that there is positive proof of g-d not being certain things, and there is certain proof, should you read the texts and accept them, that g-d cannot be man..I would agree with you that we can't understand some things, but we do have guides..

-DISARM not atropine...too lazy to sign in..sorry.

[somethingwitty]

That's just it, believing G-d is omni-potent automatically implies there is no "cannot", regardless of what language or logic says; bit of a mindfuck, but that's the way it is. You can't be all powerful and have restrictions, just doesn't make sense.

[the dauer]

That's just it, believing G-d is omni-potent automatically implies there is no "cannot", regardless of what language or logic says; bit of a mindfuck, but that's the way it is. You can't be all powerful and have restrictions, just doesn't make sense.

Becoming limited to time or space is a limitation. Therefore God cannot be limited to time and space. God does not need to be raised as a baby and have his mommy wipe his bum after he soils himself, or to be taught the aleph-bet. There are limitations. They're just two ways of looking at the issue.

Dauer

[HuckFinn]

Here's some light reading: http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/ath-inc.htm!

[the dauer]

Huck,

I just skimmed over it. Shabbos is soon and so I don't have time to look at the whole thing. Basically, it looks like a very biased and one-sided interpretation of texts and History. To each their own I guess.

Dauer

[Sephardic-male]

Huck you man/god is dead he never gather the exiles, establish world peace and he encourage people to abandon the Torah

[swimminthefish]

It applaud how well you have thought through
your faith particularly in regards to Christianity.

I did have a few problems with your posts..
To say that the Trinity was invented at the Council
of Nicaea is simply false. That is like saying that
modern Western Science invented gravity, which
is obviously not the case; it has always existed but simply
lacked a clear simplified definition.

But I understand that because you do not believe in the Trinity
you thus cannot believe in Christianity.

Secondly, you seem to discredit Christianity by listing rules;
the two cannot coincide and thus Christianity must be false. In doing so you are missing the point. Jesus came to bring the New Covenant; God never intended our life to revolve around endless traditions, customs, and
rules. We as humans chose the wrong path and thus it became that
way. When Jesus came, many Jews did the same thing you are
doing now: "How dare you heal on the sabbath", Why do you eat
with blatant sinners", "Why do you not wash your hands before your
eat". Increasingly, their religion centered on countless rules, and the
self, and not on God.

If you truly want to understand Chrsitianity, I urge you to read "Mere
Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. I hope that I have been respectful to your beliefs.

One last thought, this really applies to any situation in life: Don't let
yourself be defined by your context, your upbringing, your neighborhood,
your schooling. I hate how we are defined by outside sources.

Take Care

[the dauer]

I did have a few problems with your posts..
To say that the Trinity was invented at the Council
of Nicaea is simply false. That is like saying that
modern Western Science invented gravity, which
is obviously not the case; it has always existed but simply
lacked a clear simplified definition.

Then can you show us the complicated definition that did exist?

But I understand that because you do not believe in the Trinity
you thus cannot believe in Christianity.

These postings have really been in response to Huck Finn, who has claimed that it is Jewish to believe in Jesus and a Jew who believes in Jesus is a "completed Jew." At least I personally have nothing against Christianity, unless it is trying to force itself onto other people.

Secondly, you seem to discredit Christianity by listing rules;
the two cannot coincide and thus Christianity must be false. In doing so you are missing the point. Jesus came to bring the New Covenant;

No. You are missing the point. The Torah makes it clear that anyone who comes and says such as he does is a false prophet, a dreamer of dreams, and has been sent by God to tempt the people of Israel.

He also never fulfilled any of the requirements for the messiah. So on whose authority is he starting this "new covenant?" I would not come to you and ask these questions, but this issue has been brought here.


God never intended our life to revolve around endless traditions, customs, and
rules.

This is part of the Christian teachings about Judaism which says it is the religion of strict law, when in reality the mitzvot serve to extend holiness into all aspects of our lives, redirecting our minds back to God. In addition to that, some of the mitzvot have very special purposes, like those surrounding Shabbat, which is said to be a taste of the world-to-come.

Increasingly, their religion centered on countless rules, and the
self, and not on God.

According to who? You? Ask a religious Jew. The mitzvot bring God into all of life. You make it sound like Judaism is such a bad thing. I don't come to the Christian board and criticize Christianity for worshipping an image or in some places making small laws, like those about homosexuality, their greatest concern. Tell me, if all those laws are so unimportant why are they part of your bible?


If you truly want to understand Chrsitianity, I urge you to read "Mere
Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. I hope that I have been respectful to your beliefs.

I do understand Christianity. I understand how it views itself and I understand Christianity in contrast with the other world religions, including my own. Huck Finn did not understand the role of Christianity in the Jewish world, or the Jewish view of Judaism, which is a rich spiritual tradition. I can see that you also have a little difficulty with that last issue as well, but it seems like it's more about what you've been taught. You seem like a very reasonable person so far who understands there are always many sides to a story.

One last thought, this really applies to any situation in life: Don't let
yourself be defined by your context, your upbringing, your neighborhood,
your schooling. I hate how we are defined by outside sources.

I agree with you. I hope you also take this teaching to heart. Take care.

Dauer

[BlackGuardXIII]

Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva....

way older.


Osiris, Isis, and the miracle child, Horus,

Of course that is more like the nativity, even the depictions of them look the same.

[the dauer]

Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva....

way older.


Osiris, Isis, and the miracle child, Horus,

Of course that is more like the nativity, even the depictions of them look the same.

That's true. Or Dionysus, Zeus, and Semele. But that doesn't show that there was a trinity implicated in any of the NT writings which is what I am really asking for. And I'm not so sure she'd be willing to include those "pagan" gods as a statement on the origins of the trinity in Christianity. But I really don't know anything about her. Still, it would only support the arguement that it is a complete break from Jewish beliefs about God, which is what this thread is really about.

Dauer

[mysweetisrael]

It's like Jews are the object of Christianity's unrequited love.

It's always tormented the Christians that Jews could shrug off their evangelism so easily. But it really is easy when they say shit that makes no sense and shows complete ignorance of the very lines from the Old Testament which they use to support their claims.

[swimminthefish]

I apologize for my last post; it was rather careless and sporadic. You

Are right I have no background in Judaism, nor have I studied it. Shamefully, the vast

majority of my ideas come from a cursory reading of the OT and

The Chosen by Chaim Potok. So correct me if I make any false assumptions.



I will start with the Doctrine of the Trinity, the essential core of Christianity. Is

your conspiracy theory concerning the Council of Nicaea a standard Jewish teaching

or your own conclusion? I know this theory has been recently propagated by the Da

Vinci Code, but remember, it is a work of fiction.



The Council of Nicaea convened to establish an already accepted idea of the Trinity, to,

in essence, hammer out the details. At that time the platonic influence on the Greek

Christians caused them to believe that Christ was in fact ontologically subordinate

to the Father because he became flesh. They saw all flesh as inherently evil and thus

failed to see how God could become man. The concept of the Trinity

was never in question, merely how the persons related. At the Council of Nicaea they

established that all three persons all equal merely functionally subordinate as

stated in Philippians 2.



You asked for examples in the NT. I think Matthew 3:16-17 would be the best

example, because one sees all three persons interacting at the same time. But I also

urge you to search out the OT scripture for indications: during creation, the spirit of God moving over the dark water, the angel of the Lord wrestling with Jacob....etc.



What does Jews believe concerning the nature of God? In my opinion God is love, and

love by nature must be freely given and reciprocal. Now, if God is eternal, which he must be, and existed before the dawn of man then how could this be true if he was a singular being?

One cannot love themselves. Supposing one ignores the eternal aspect of his nature, God could have a loving relationship with humanity but again that cannot be. For if God

Needed us for fulfillment than that would make him dependant on mankind.



In the Trinity God exists in a perfect loving relationship with himself, called Koinania.

He had no need for mankind but chose to create them for their own joy and his.



Secondly, I was wrong to say that your strict adherence to code and tradition

cause you to drift from God. In reality, they very likely do the opposite by keeping

you mindful of who you serve. My intent was to demonstrate the futility

of such laws and codes. Despite character, upbringing, or good intentions

we will inevitably fail in such attempts at goodness, because we are human.

It does not matter if you sin once or one thousand times, you are still

a sinner and worthy of death.



I have many things to add, but I am going to wait...

Take Care

[the dauer]

I'm deleting some of the spaces in your post so they're easier to follow and take up less space. If this bothers you just let me know.

You Are right I have no background in Judaism, nor have I studied it. Shamefully, the vast majority of my ideas come from a cursory reading of the OT and The Chosen by Chaim Potok. So correct me if I make any false assumptions.

While The Chosen is a good book(imho), it's not really a good introduction to Judaism. And the Tanakh, the Jewish scriptures, isn't such a great introduction to Judaism either because it is only the written and not the oral torah. It also discounts all of the commentators and theologians who help to explain Judaism.

Is your conspiracy theory concerning the Council of Nicaea a standard Jewish teaching or your own conclusion? I know this theory has been recently propagated by the Da Vinci Code, but remember, it is a work of fiction.

Careful. "Conspiracy theory" is a value judgement that's hardly useful in this conversation. I also have almost no respect for the "scholarship" of the Da Vinci Code. I think in general any Jew would look to the objective scholars and Historians to get their answers about what happened, if they care at all. I also never made that conclusion. I simply asked for examples that would prove otherwise.



The Council of Nicaea convened to establish an already accepted idea of the Trinity, to, in essence, hammer out the details. At that time the platonic influence on the Greek Christians caused them to believe that Christ was in fact ontologically subordinate to the Father because he became flesh. They saw all flesh as inherently evil and thus failed to see how God could become man. The concept of the Trinity was never in question, merely how the persons related. At the Council of Nicaea they established that all three persons all equal merely functionally subordinate as stated in Philippians 2.

This is all according to Church History, and since I consider all one-sided Histories, including those of my own people, possibly biased, you can understand why I approach this the way I do. I don't see any evidence in Philippians 2 for a trinity god.

You asked for examples in the NT. I think Matthew 3:16-17 would be the best example, because one sees all three persons interacting at the same time.

That's not evidence of a trinity god. The spirit of God descends on many people and in addition to that, being called the son of God is not a title reserved only for Jesus.

ÒMy son, My firstborn is Israel..." (Exodus 4:22)

ÒThus says HaShem. Israel is My son, My firstbornÓ (Deuteronomy 4:22)

ÒWhen Israel was I child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My sonÓ (Hosea 11:1)

ÓHe (Solomon) shall be a son to Me [G-d], and I a Father to himÓ (1 Chr 22:10)

He has said to me "You (David) are My son. Today I have begotten you. (Psalm 2:7)

And God repeated ÒI, too, will make him (David) a firstborn, supreme over the earthÕs kingsÓ (Psalms 89:27-28)



But I also urge you to search out the OT scripture for indications: during creation, the spirit of God moving over the dark water, the angel of the Lord wrestling with Jacob....etc.

A) God does not wrestle with Jacob. A celestial being wrestles with Jacob. B) What does the story of creation have to do with a trinity god?

What does Jews believe concerning the nature of God?

In general beliefs about God remain vague and very varied. Maimonides' first few articles of faith give a general idea:

1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, be He Blessed, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.

2. The belief in G-d's absolute and unparalleled unity.

3. The belief in G-d's noncorporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.

4. The belief in G-d's eternity.

5. The imperative to worship Him exclusively and no foreign false gods.

There are some more, but those are the least disputed in all of the movements and the ones specifically related to the nature of God. Maimonides also suggested that when we attribute one of God's positive qualities to Him, given at Sinai, we're actually saying He is not the opposite.

But as I said there is a lot of room for variation in belief. I am a panentheist and I believe God only acts through the laws of physics, not to say there isn't some other level of the world we are less aware of. I believe there is.

In my opinion God is love, and love by nature must be freely given and reciprocal. Now, if God is eternal, which he must be, and existed before the dawn of man then how could this be true if he was a singular being? One cannot love themselves.

But if God is not a duality, then there is no need for an other to love. If God is entirely lacking in duality, God can be pure love. But again, this all rests on your definition that God is love, which I think is lacking, and on your definition of what love is and what love needs. I can love myself. I don't even think I can begin to love someone else until I love myself. We say "love your neighbor as yourself" and this implies that loving oneself is natural for us. So too it must be for God, if love is your definition of God.

Supposing one ignores the eternal aspect of his nature, God could have a loving relationship with humanity but again that cannot be. For if God Needed us for fulfillment than that would make him dependant on mankind.

Who says God needs anything? A need is a human characteristic. Are you applying human characteristics to the Divine and claiming that this is the only true way to approach the Divine? Human terms are inadequate.

In the Trinity God exists in a perfect loving relationship with himself, called Koinania.

I love myself and I am not a trinity. Does that make me better than your definition of God?

He had no need for mankind but chose to create them for their own joy and his.

His joy or his need; all semantics. You define what makes it just for joy. You define what makes it need. What if I said that joy is a need? We're just playing with words.


Secondly, I was wrong to say that your strict adherence to code and tradition cause you to drift from God. In reality, they very likely do the opposite by keeping you mindful of who you serve. My intent was to demonstrate the futility of such laws and codes. Despite character, upbringing, or good intentions we will inevitably fail in such attempts at goodness, because we are human. It does not matter if you sin once or one thousand times, you are still a sinner and worthy of death.

That label of sinner is a Christian one. There is no such thing in Judaism. It's okay to make mistakes. Where do you get this idea that any sin is so horrible? If sins are so horrible, why did God create us to sin? It's all a great big learning experience. We're growing as people and our sins helps us to do that.

Dauer

[swimminthefish]

While The Chosen is a good book(imho), it's not really a good introduction to Judaism. And the Tanakh, the Jewish scriptures, isn't such a great introduction to Judaism either because it is only the written and not the oral torah. It also discounts all of the commentators and theologians who help to explain Judaism.


-No doubt



Histories, including those of my own people, possibly biased,



-Then where do you hope to get any accurate information if you
cannot trust the accounts of your own people? Intuition?
I guess you did mention other "objective accounts"; does that
mean accounts not affiliated with any religion. In that case,
it is very likely that they contain an even stronger bias because
undoubetedly everyone has an agenda. There's being to discredit
the Christian Faith.


I don't see any evidence in Philippians 2 for a trinity god.

-Philippians 2 starting at 16-17 I believe ( I don't have a Bible around)
is called the Kenotic Hymn. It describes Christ's decision to
give up his functional equality with God to die on the cross and
redeem his people.



That's not evidence of a trinity god. The spirit of God descends on many people and in addition to that, being called the son of God is not a title reserved only for Jesus.

ÒMy son, My firstborn is Israel..." (Exodus 4:22)


I do not know Hebrew or Greek so again I feel inadequate
discussing the etymology of the word son, but I do feel
comfortable discussing this in a general sense. God
called Christians in the NT sons of God; now, does this mean
that he lied to us, because, clearly his already has a son: Israel,
Christ, the collective group of modern day believers. The term
son is mearly a feeble attempt at describing in our terms what
the Trinity is. Obviously Christ did not simply come into
existence after being born to his heavenly father. He has always
existed in the Trinity, and has always been ontologically equal
to God the Father. He chose, as described in Philippians 2:6-11,
to become functionally subordinate in order to redeem his people.



1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, be He Blessed, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.
2. The belief in G-d's absolute and unparalleled unity.
3. The belief in G-d's noncorporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.
4. The belief in G-d's eternity.
5. The imperative to worship Him exclusively and no foreign false gods.


--I agree with these, except for number 3 of course.


I am a panentheist

---Is that a common trait among Jews?


I can love myself. I don't even think I can begin to love someone else until I love myself.

--Quite true, you cannot love others until you love yourself, but the
question is do you truly love yourself. It is easy to confuse true
feelings of love with simple desire or power lust. I think you will
admit that human beings are naturally selfish and obsessed with
little more than themselves. I would hardly call narcissism love or
equate the love God has for his children with the feelings we
have for ourselves. But at the risk of semantics, how do you define
love? In my opinion love must be freely given and reciprocal.


Are you applying human characteristics to the Divine and claiming that this is the only true way to approach the Divine?

--I am doing just that. The only things we know about God come through
revelation, a revelation that sinks to our level as human beings. In
other words, God comes down to our level in order that we might
understand him. Clearly if he did not do so our feeble intellects would
not be able to comprehend him. That is why the scripture is
written in human thought form and in language we can understand.


His joy or his need; all semantics. You define what makes it just for joy. You define what makes it need. What if I said that joy is a need? We're just playing with words.


--I think that is a cop out. Joy and need are very distinct words with
distinct definitions: I need oxygen because I will die if I do not
have it. Joy is something I seek or desire. And as I said before, how can one not seek to understand God by human definitions. It appears to me
to be our only option.



why did God create us to sin?

--He did not create us to sin. He gave us free will in order to have
a loving relationship with him, because, as I said before, true love must be freely given. We chose sin. He chose to redeem us through our choice, by
death on the cross-the ultimate revelation of the true nature of
God.


---I have a couple question. How do you, or other Jews, interpret the amazingly accurate predictions of Christ death found in Isaiah and Psalms.
Secondly how will you know when your Messiah has arrived?
What are you looking for?

[the dauer]

Histories, including those of my own people, possibly biased,

-Then where do you hope to get any accurate information if you
cannot trust the accounts of your own people? Intuition?
I guess you did mention other "objective accounts"; does that
mean accounts not affiliated with any religion. In that case,
it is very likely that they contain an even stronger bias because
undoubetedly everyone has an agenda. There's being to discredit
the Christian Faith.

Well, I think in general we need to come up with our own answers, but I trust a logical scholarly analysis more than some fanciful myths.


I don't see any evidence in Philippians 2 for a trinity god.

-Philippians 2 starting at 16-17 I believe ( I don't have a Bible around)
is called the Kenotic Hymn. It describes Christ's decision to
give up his functional equality with God to die on the cross and
redeem his people.

I read it. That's not evidence for the trinity. I want you to show me a passage where God is represented as three different entities that are one.


chose, [/i]as described in Philippians 2:6-11,
to become functionally subordinate in order to redeem his people.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it. It was a common enough phrase. This is the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_god



I am a panentheist

---Is that a common trait among Jews?

Some Jews are panentheists. Some are not. It is understood anyway that God is everywhere, just not in physical space or in time. Panentheism is an acceptable variation of monotheism in Judaism.


--Quite true, you cannot love others until you love yourself, but the
question is do you truly love yourself.

One of the mitzvot says we should love our neighbors as we love ourselves. This implies that it is possible to love ourselves, and that we should love others just as much. Actually in Judaism there are two mitzvot. This one applies to other Jews. The mitzvah to love the stranger applies to non-Jews.

It is easy to confuse true
feelings of love with simple desire or power lust.

I don't lust after myself.

I think you will
admit that human beings are naturally selfish and obsessed with
little more than themselves.

That's one of the things the mitzvot help to deal with. It helps us grow in concern for the people around us, and act on their behalf in any event.


But at the risk of semantics, how do you define
love? In my opinion love must be freely given and reciprocal.

You didn't really give a definition for love. You just said under what conditions it should be given. I will do the same since I think defining love would belong on the general board in its own thread. First, I don't think it's possible for love not to be freely given. It goes without saying. It cannot be taken against someone's will. But it does happen without being reciprocal. I can show love to someone who does not love me. It may become reciprocal but it does not have to.


Are you applying human characteristics to the Divine and claiming that this is the only true way to approach the Divine?

--I am doing just that. The only things we know about God come through
revelation, a revelation that sinks to our level as human beings. In
other words, God comes down to our level in order that we might
understand him.

Well, I would disagree with you about the nature of revelation. To me it is just an experience of God that leads to human answers.

Clearly if he did not do so our feeble intellects would
not be able to comprehend him.

Do you comprehend him any better than a non-Christian? What about people who claim revelation that have contradictory answers?

That is why the scripture is
written in human thought form and in language we can understand.

Or the Talmud is correct. It says "The Torah speaks in the language of man." And in this it means that concepts entirely beyond words are being conveyed in human terms, but God does not walk, or have hands, or become angry. Any anthropomorphism does not imply a humanlike God, but just that what is really going on could not be intellectually understood by us.



--I think that is a cop out. Joy and need are very distinct words with
distinct definitions: I need oxygen because I will die if I do not
have it. Joy is something I seek or desire. And as I said before, how can one not seek to understand God by human definitions. It appears to me
to be our only option.

We could also accept that God is beyond mere human definition, and that if we ever use this language by saying Father or such it is only for our sake.



why did God create us to sin?

--He did not create us to sin. He gave us free will in order to have
a loving relationship with him, because, as I said before, true love must be freely given. We chose sin. He chose to redeem us through our choice, by
death on the cross-the ultimate revelation of the true nature of
God.

If we choose sin it is because God created a system in which we would choose it. I would think that sin must be far more helpful than all that, not to support hedonism. But that it serves a very important role in the world Hashem created.


---I have a couple question. How do you, or other Jews, interpret the amazingly accurate predictions of Christ death found in Isaiah and Psalms.
Secondly how will you know when your Messiah has arrived?
What are you looking for?

There has been a lot of answering of these types of questions on this board over the past week. Please browse the other threads related to Christianity or J4J and then either post there or here if you have any questions.

I have no problem answering you, but I've answered all of your questions in the past week.

Dauer

[Sephardic-male]

bump

[ryupower]

I've got some questions here:

Who's the son of God?

And will the Messiah be sacrificed for the World's sins?

And the Trinity was not made up after Timothy, it's in the Bible:

1 John 5:7-8
7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
NKJV

:p

[Sephardic-male]

[Who's the son of God?]


God says the Jews are His son.

“My son, My firstborn is Israel..." (Exodus 4:22)

“Thus says HaShem. Israel is My son, My firstborn” (Deuteronomy 4:22)

“When Israel was I child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son” (Hosea 11:1)

”He (Solomon) shall be a son to Me [G-d], and I a Father to him” (1 Chr 22:10)

He has said to me "You (David) are My son. Today I have begotten you. (Psalm 2:7)

And God repeated “I, too, will make him (David) a firstborn, supreme over the earth’s kings” (Psalms 89:27-28)

[And will the Messiah be sacrificed for the World's sins?]


[no one can die for the sins of another!
Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. Exodus 32:32-33 (KJV)

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deuteronomy 24:16 (KJV)

Every man will die for his own sin!

In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge. Jeremiah 31:29-30 (KJV)

Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezekiel 18:4 (KJV)

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV) Repeats Verse 4 in Ezekiel 18. (above)

Then Ezekiel sums it up:

Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Ezekiel 18:27-28 (KJV)]



And the Trinity was not made up after Timothy, it's in the Bible:

1 John 5:7-8
7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
NKJV


[The G-d of the Jews is not a Trinity


And besides me there is no G-d (Isaiah 44:6)
Here O Israel the L-rd is our G-d the L-rd is One (Deuteronomy 6:4)

The L-rd alone is G-d, The L-rd alone is G-d. (I Kings 19:39)

I, the L-rd, who was the first and will be the last as well. (Isaiah 41:4)

Know this day and lay it to thy heart that the L-rd, He is G-d in heaven above and the earth below there is none else. (Deuteronomy 3:39)

Unto you it was shown, that you might know, that the L-rd is G-d there is none else beside Him. Out of the heavens He made you, hear His voice, that He might instruct you. (Deuteronomy 4:35)

I am the L-rd your G-d . . . you shall have no other gods before me. (Exodus 20:2-3)

Before me no god was formed, and after me none shall exist. None but Me, the L-rd, besides Me none can grant triumph. I alone foretold the triumph . . (Isaiah 43:10-12)

O L-rd of hosts, enthroned on the cherubim! You alone are G-d of all the kingdom of the earth. (Isaiah 37:16)

Did not one G-d create us? (Malachi 2:10)

Do I not fill the heavens and the earth, says G-d (Jeremiah 254:24)



Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear O'Israel, the Lord is Our G-d, the Lord is one.

Job 6:10 Then should I yet have comfort; yea, I would harden myself in sorrow: let him not spare; for I have not concealed the words of the Holy One.

Psalms 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Psalms 71:22 I will also praise thee with the psaltery, even thy truth, O my God: unto thee will I sing with the harp, O thou Holy One of Israel.

Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

Psalms 89:18 For the LORD is our defense; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.

Isaiah 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.

Isaiah 1:24 Therefore saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts, the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies:

Isaiah 5:19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!

Isaiah 5:24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 10:17 And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day;

Isaiah 10:20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth.

Isaiah 12:6 Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.

Isaiah 17:7 At that day shall a man look to his Maker, and his eyes shall have respect to the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 29:19 The meek also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 29:23 But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel.

Isaiah 30:11 Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.

Isaiah 30:12 Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon:

Isaiah 30:15 For thus saith the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel; In returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength: and ye would not.

Isaiah 30:29 Ye shall have a song, as in the night when a holy solemnity is kept; and gladness of heart, as when one goeth with a pipe to come into the mountain of the LORD, to the mighty One of Israel.

Isaiah 31:1 Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!

Isaiah 37:23 Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed? and against whom hast thou exalted thy voice, and lifted up thine eyes on high? even against the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 40:25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.

Isaiah 41:14 Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and ye men of Israel; I will help thee, saith the LORD, and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 41:16 Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the LORD, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 41:20 That they may see, and know, and consider, and understand together, that the hand of the LORD hath done this, and the Holy One of Israel hath created it.

Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.

Isaiah 43:14 Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; For your sake I have sent to Babylon, and have brought down all their nobles, and the Chaldeans, whose cry is in the ships.

Isaiah 43:15 I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.

Isaiah 45:11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.

Isaiah 47:4 As for our redeemer, the LORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 48:17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.

Isaiah 49:7 Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.

Isaiah 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

Isaiah 55:5 Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the LORD thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.

Isaiah 57:15 For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

Isaiah 60:9 Surely the isles shall wait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from far, their silver and their gold with them, unto the name of the LORD thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee.

Isaiah 60:14 The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Jeremiah 50:29 Call together the archers against Babylon: all ye that bend the bow, camp against it round about; let none thereof escape: recompense her according to her work; according to all that she hath done, do unto her: for she hath been proud against the LORD, against the Holy One of Israel.

Jeremiah 51:5 For Israel hath not been forsaken, nor Judah of his God, of the LORD of hosts; though their land was filled with sin against the Holy One of Israel.

Ezekiel 39:7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

Dan 4:13 I saw in the visions of my head upon my bed, and, behold, a watcher and an holy one came down from heaven;

Dan 4:23 And whereas the king saw a watcher and an holy one coming down from heaven, and saying, Hew the tree down, and destroy it; yet leave the stump of the roots thereof in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven times pass over him;

Hosea 11:9 I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers? ]

[ryupower]

God says the Jews are His son.

“My son, My firstborn is Israel..." (Exodus 4:22)

“Thus says HaShem. Israel is My son, My firstborn” (Deuteronomy 4:22)

“When Israel was I child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son” (Hosea 11:1)

”He (Solomon) shall be a son to Me [G-d], and I a Father to him” (1 Chr 22:10)

He has said to me "You (David) are My son. Today I have begotten you. (Psalm 2:7)

And God repeated “I, too, will make him (David) a firstborn, supreme over the earth’s kings” (Psalms 89:27-28)
You make some good points. :)

And will the Messiah be sacrificed for the World's sins?]


[no one can die for the sins of another!
Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. Exodus 32:32-33 (KJV)

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deuteronomy 24:16 (KJV)

Every man will die for his own sin!

In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge. Jeremiah 31:29-30 (KJV)

Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezekiel 18:4 (KJV)

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV) Repeats Verse 4 in Ezekiel 18. (above)

Then Ezekiel sums it up:

Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Ezekiel 18:27-28 (KJV)]



And the Trinity was not made up after Timothy, it's in the Bible:

1 John 5:7-8
7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
NKJV


[The G-d of the Jews is not a Trinity


And besides me there is no G-d (Isaiah 44:6)
Here O Israel the L-rd is our G-d the L-rd is One (Deuteronomy 6:4)

The L-rd alone is G-d, The L-rd alone is G-d. (I Kings 19:39)

I, the L-rd, who was the first and will be the last as well. (Isaiah 41:4)

Know this day and lay it to thy heart that the L-rd, He is G-d in heaven above and the earth below there is none else. (Deuteronomy 3:39)

Unto you it was shown, that you might know, that the L-rd is G-d there is none else beside Him. Out of the heavens He made you, hear His voice, that He might instruct you. (Deuteronomy 4:35)

I am the L-rd your G-d . . . you shall have no other gods before me. (Exodus 20:2-3)

Before me no god was formed, and after me none shall exist. None but Me, the L-rd, besides Me none can grant triumph. I alone foretold the triumph . . (Isaiah 43:10-12)

O L-rd of hosts, enthroned on the cherubim! You alone are G-d of all the kingdom of the earth. (Isaiah 37:16)

Did not one G-d create us? (Malachi 2:10)

Do I not fill the heavens and the earth, says G-d (Jeremiah 254:24)


Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear O'Israel, the Lord is Our G-d, the Lord is one.

Job 6:10 Then should I yet have comfort; yea, I would harden myself in sorrow: let him not spare; for I have not concealed the words of the Holy One.

Psalms 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Psalms 71:22 I will also praise thee with the psaltery, even thy truth, O my God: unto thee will I sing with the harp, O thou Holy One of Israel.

Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

Psalms 89:18 For the LORD is our defense; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.

Isaiah 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.

Isaiah 1:24 Therefore saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts, the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies:

Isaiah 5:19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!

Isaiah 5:24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 10:17 And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day;

Isaiah 10:20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth.

Isaiah 12:6 Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.

Isaiah 17:7 At that day shall a man look to his Maker, and his eyes shall have respect to the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 29:19 The meek also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 29:23 But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel.

Isaiah 30:11 Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.

Isaiah 30:12 Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon:

Isaiah 30:15 For thus saith the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel; In returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength: and ye would not.

Isaiah 30:29 Ye shall have a song, as in the night when a holy solemnity is kept; and gladness of heart, as when one goeth with a pipe to come into the mountain of the LORD, to the mighty One of Israel.

Isaiah 31:1 Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!

Isaiah 37:23 Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed? and against whom hast thou exalted thy voice, and lifted up thine eyes on high? even against the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 40:25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.

Isaiah 41:14 Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and ye men of Israel; I will help thee, saith the LORD, and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 41:16 Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the LORD, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 41:20 That they may see, and know, and consider, and understand together, that the hand of the LORD hath done this, and the Holy One of Israel hath created it.

Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.

Isaiah 43:14 Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; For your sake I have sent to Babylon, and have brought down all their nobles, and the Chaldeans, whose cry is in the ships.

Isaiah 43:15 I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.

Isaiah 45:11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.

Isaiah 47:4 As for our redeemer, the LORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 48:17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.

Isaiah 49:7 Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.

Isaiah 49:26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

Isaiah 55:5 Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the LORD thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.

Isaiah 57:15 For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

Isaiah 60:9 Surely the isles shall wait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from far, their silver and their gold with them, unto the name of the LORD thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee.

Isaiah 60:14 The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Jeremiah 50:29 Call together the archers against Babylon: all ye that bend the bow, camp against it round about; let none thereof escape: recompense her according to her work; according to all that she hath done, do unto her: for she hath been proud against the LORD, against the Holy One of Israel.

Jeremiah 51:5 For Israel hath not been forsaken, nor Judah of his God, of the LORD of hosts; though their land was filled with sin against the Holy One of Israel.

Ezekiel 39:7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

Dan 4:13 I saw in the visions of my head upon my bed, and, behold, a watcher and an holy one came down from heaven;

Dan 4:23 And whereas the king saw a watcher and an holy one coming down from heaven, and saying, Hew the tree down, and destroy it; yet leave the stump of the roots thereof in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven times pass over him;

Hosea 11:9 I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers? I see you're quoting out alot of Isaiah. So he's concidered valid for you . Than this may interest you :) :

Isaiah 53

53:1 The Sin-Bearing Messiah

Who has believed our report?And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,And as a root out of dry ground.He has no form or comeliness;And when we see Him,There is no beauty that we should desire Him. 3 He is despised and rejected by men,A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows;Yet we esteemed Him stricken,Smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,He was bruised for our iniquities;The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,And by His stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray;We have turned, every one, to his own way;And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,Yet He opened not His mouth;He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,So He opened not His mouth. 8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,And who will declare His generation?For He was cut off from the land of the living;For the transgressions of My people He was stricken. 9 And they made His grave with the wicked — But with the rich at His death,Because He had done no violence,Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;He has put Him to grief.When You make His soul an offering for sin,He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. 11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,For He shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,Because He poured out His soul unto death,And He was numbered with the transgressors,And He bore the sin of many,And made intercession for the transgressors.

And I never said there were any other gods...

[Sephardic-male]

http://www.jdstone.org/cr/files/polemicsthesufferingservant.html



REFUTATION
Following are 12 questions to put to those who insist that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus:

1) When was Jesus sick?

In Isaiah 53.3, it reads in Hebrew, “Ish machavot,” which refers to a man who is habitually or permanently sick. The New Testament portrays Jesus as one who is without spot or blemish; therefore, he must have been a healthy man. The only pain he bore was his crucifixion, which lasted several hours and was made lighter by the knowledge that his resurrection would take place three days later.

2) When was Jesus a leper?

Verse 4 reads: “He was “nagua,” meaning “stricken.” Yet, whenever the word nagua is used in the Hebrew Bible, it always refers to one who is stricken with leprosy, as seen in 2 Kings 15.5; Leviticus 13.3, 9, 20.

3) When was Jesus without form or comeliness and undesired, so that everyone despised and rejected him? (v. 3)

On the contrary ― the gospels insist that Jesus was greatly admired by large segments from every level of society. It is said: “He began teaching in the synagogues and was glorified by all.” (Luke 4.14―15); “and the news about him went out into all Syria” (Matt. 4.24); “and as his fame grew, a great crowd came together with those that went with him from various cities” (Luke 8.4); “and great crowds followed him from Galilee, Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judea and from the other side of the Jordan” (Matt. 4.25).

Can such a person be described as being “despised and rejected of men” or one from whom “men hid their faces and esteemed him not”? If the fundamentalist replies by saying that Jesus was despised and rejected by those men who ordered his crucifixion, we point out the difference between the words “anashim,” the “rulers” and “ishim,” the “common people”. In verse 2 in the Hebrew Bible, it clearly states that “he was despised and rejected by the ishim, the general populace.” Yet, according to the gospels, “As he went to be crucified, large crowds wept for him.” (Luke 23.27)

4) Why wasn’t Jesus humble? (v. 7)

The gospel records haughty words coming from his lips. For example, “Bring those who would not have me rule over them and slay them before my face” (Luke 19.27); “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life” (John 6.47); “He that has seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14.9).

All these verses and many more, especially in John’s gospel, show that Jesus was not a humble man but one who thought very highly of himself.

5) Why didn’t Jesus remain silent, as the servant of this chapter was supposed to?

V. 7: “He was oppressed but he humbled himself and opened not his mouth: as a lamb which is brought to the slaughter and as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so he did not open his mouth.”

However, in the gospel accounts of the trial and crucifixion, Jesus says a number of things:

John 18.19―23: “The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him: ‘I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the Temple, whither the Jews always resort and in secret have I said nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them who heard me what I said unto them; behold, they know what I said.’ and when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, ‘Answereth thou the high priest so?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil but if well, why smitest thou me?’“

Luke 23.3: “and Pilate asked him, saying, ‘Art thou the king of the Jews?’ and he answered him and said, ‘Thou sayest it.’“

John 18.33―37: “Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again and called Jesus and said unto him, ‘Art thou the king of the Jews?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Sayest thou this thing of thyself or did others tell thee of me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me. What hast thou done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews ― but now is my kingdom not from hence.’ Pilate therefore said unto him, ‘Art thou a king then?’ Jesus answered, ‘Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.’“

Matt. 26.63: “and the high priest answered and said unto him, ‘I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the son of God.’ Jesus said unto him, ‘Thou hast said it: Nevertheless, I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven.’“

He also said, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me but weep for yourselves’, etc. (Luke 23.28) and besides these, there were a number of well―known sayings on the cross.

All these scriptures clearly show that whilst being questioned about his messianic pretensions, far from being humble and silent, as Isaiah describes the servant in verse 7, Jesus said much. We find that the encounter between the high priest, the elders and Jesus is highlighted by a vigorous verbal exchange. Also with Pilate, Jesus is depicted as skillfully defending himself.

In his last moments, he railed in the face of the Holy God: “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” Besides this, there is the implicit blasphemy of John 19.11. Jesus answered, “Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above: therefore, He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” Thus God, the “power from above”, must have sinned.

6) Why did Jesus use violence and speak violence when verse 9 states: “This servant had done no violence”?

We read in the New Testament how Jesus, whip in hand, overturned tables in the Temple (John 2.15). He caused the death of a herd of swine (Mark 5.12―13). He cursed a poor fig tree because it did not bear figs out of season (Matt. 21.19―20) and he used verbal violence (Luke 19.27). He said, “Think not that I come to send peace but a sword.” (Matthew 10.34)

7) Why did Jesus deceive people?

Verse 9 says that deceit was not found in his mouth. It is clear that Jesus was a false prophet. He deceived his disciples into believing he would return in their lifetime:

“Many standing here shall not taste of death until they have seen the Kingdom of God come with power.” (Mark 9.1); “I come quickly and my reward is with me.” (Rev. 22.7, 12, 20)

He promised a hundredfold in this life to all who left everything to follow him (Mark 10.28―29) (Imagine a hundred houses, a hundred fields, a hundred wives, etc...) Yet, those who had left all to follow him died in poverty.

8) Why was Jesus not buried with the wicked, as according to verse 9?

The gospels state that Jesus was buried in the tomb of a righteous man, who was one of his disciples (Matt. 27.57―60).

Are we to presume this man was a wicked disciple?

9) Why were there no rich people crucified with him?

Verse 9 says that “his death was with the rich” but the gospels say that he died between two thieves (Mark 15.27).

Maybe they were rich thieves?

10) When did Jesus have children?

Verse 10 says: “He shall see his offspring (zerah).”

When God promised Avraham “zerah”, along came Yitzhak, a real, physical offspring, as the Hebrew word “zerah” implies ― but where was Jesus’s offspring? Are we to assume that he had illegitimate children?

11) When were Jesus’s days lengthened?

Why did he die so young? Verse 10 says: “That is days shall be lengthened.”

12) If Jesus is God, as the missionaries claim, then how can one who is eternal have his days prolonged?

Another objection to the fundamentalists’ claim that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus is that they have been misled by the compilers of their Christian bibles. It is necessary to point out that the passage begins not with Isaiah 53, v. 1 ― but v. 13 of the previous chapter. In Hebrew, the scripture portions are divided by stumas. A space of several letters can be found at the closing of a passage before the next passage begins. This can only be seen in a Hebrew Bible. A Torah scribe has strictly to follow these rules.

By reading the passage in its entirety, we learn that God is speaking to His servant and that the servant shall prosper and be exalted and be very high. (Isaiah 52.13)

The next thing we find is the name of the servant. To do that, we need only refer to several verses also found in the Book of Isaiah, such as Isaiah 41.8, Isaiah 44.1―2 and Isaiah 45.4, which all state that the name of the servant is Israel ― but was Israel “nagua” ― stricken with leprosy?

In the New International Commentary of the Old Testament, Edward J. Young, Professor of the Old Testament at the Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, elaborates: “Nagua (stricken) has been interpreted by many to refer to smiting with leprosy. In 2 Kings 15.5, we read: ‘and the Lord afflicted the king and he became leprous’.” Duhm also maintained that the servant was a leper, who died from the disease. Peter R. Ackroyd, Professor of Old Testament Studies at the University of London, in his study of Isaiah 53, found in the Interpreters’ One―Volume Commentary on the Bible, notes that “‘stricken’ is an appropriate word for continuing the leprosy metaphor” found in this chapter. He comments that “a man involved in pain and humiliation by sickness, hiding his face from us; we despised him and did not esteem him” are words found in the chapter and, he says, “it is difficult to imagine a more appropriate way to suggest the language to (describe) such a disease.”

If the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is Israel, how then is it possible for this servant to be described as being a leper? The link is clear and plainly stated in Isaiah 1.1, where we read: “The vision of Isaiah... the days of Uzziah... Isaiah was contemporary with King Uzziah and lived through to the time of the king’s death. Isaiah was well acquainted with Uzziah’s experience (chap. 6.1)

King Uzziah, although he was a good king towards his people during his long reign of 52 years, failed in his first duty under God by allowing the worship of strange gods within the land. Added to this fault, he ambitiously took it upon himself to enter the Temple and, assuming the priestly office, went on to burn the sacred incense before the Holy One of Israel. For this intrusion into holy orders, he was smitten of God with the dreaded disease of leprosy and so remained a leper, isolated from his people unto the day of his death. (2 Kings 15.5)

It seems the lesson Isaiah is putting before the people is: “Here is your leprous king, who is in type suffering under God’s Hand for you, the backsliding servant nation of Israel.” (Isaiah 53.6)

A commentary in the light of this historical background would point to such verses as 53.2: “He shot up as a sapling.” Due to his father’s death in battle, Uzziah had to take the throne at the early age of 16 years. Again, in 53.8: “He was taken away.” Due to his affliction as a leper, he was taken away from the royal palace, his court and people, to spend his life in a house of isolation unto the day of his death. “He was cut off out of the land of the living.” “For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due.” ― and so, the comparisons between the experience of the historical King Uzziah are so numerous that one can conclude that Isaiah is describing here this king and not an illusory suffering savior on a cross.

Israel is portrayed as a suffering servant on account of its anointed leader being stricken with leprosy. Israel, like the leper, is a suffering servant of God. Both have suffered humiliation at the hands of their fellowmen ― the leper because of his unsightly appearance and Israel, through its defeat at the hands of the Babylonians.

The gist of the message is that Israel, like the leper, has suffered but nevertheless will retain its identity in the form of the exiled Jewish People and that they will prosper in this form. The Jewish People in fact continued to grow and prosper until the 4th century CE (AD), when Christianity became the sole state religion of the Roman world and the forcible suppression of non–Christian religions began.

[ryupower]

REFUTATION
Following are 12 questions to put to those who insist that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus:

1) When was Jesus sick?

In Isaiah 53.3, it reads in Hebrew, “Ish machavot,” which refers to a man who is habitually or permanently sick. The New Testament portrays Jesus as one who is without spot or blemish; therefore, he must have been a healthy man. The only pain he bore was his crucifixion, which lasted several hours and was made lighter by the knowledge that his resurrection would take place three days later. This verse should explain it:

Through His stripes, we are healed.

Basicly, when he was on the cross, He took all our sickness upon Himself.


2) When was Jesus a leper?

Verse 4 reads: “He was “nagua,” meaning “stricken.” Yet, whenever the word nagua is used in the Hebrew Bible, it always refers to one who is stricken with leprosy, as seen in 2 Kings 15.5; Leviticus 13.3, 9, 20.
Ditto my previous sentence.

3) When was Jesus without form or comeliness and undesired, so that everyone despised and rejected him? (v. 3)

On the contrary ― the gospels insist that Jesus was greatly admired by large segments from every level of society. It is said: “He began teaching in the synagogues and was glorified by all.” (Luke 4.14―15); “and the news about him went out into all Syria” (Matt. 4.24); “and as his fame grew, a great crowd came together with those that went with him from various cities” (Luke 8.4); “and great crowds followed him from Galilee, Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judea and from the other side of the Jordan” (Matt. 4.25).

Can such a person be described as being “despised and rejected of men” or one from whom “men hid their faces and esteemed him not”? If the fundamentalist replies by saying that Jesus was despised and rejected by those men who ordered his crucifixion, we point out the difference between the words “anashim,” the “rulers” and “ishim,” the “common people”. In verse 2 in the Hebrew Bible, it clearly states that “he was despised and rejected by the ishim, the general populace.” Yet, according to the gospels, “As he went to be crucified, large crowds wept for him.” (Luke 23.27)
Yes, that's true, but He was, on the same time, despised:

John 15:18-25

"If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you,'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things they will do to you for My name's sake, because they do not know Him who sent Me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates Me hates My Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. 25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, 'They hated Me without a cause.'
NKJV

And yes, we Christians have a tough time with the society. Since they concider Christianity to be 'uncool' ( you do too, because you're Jews. :P ).

Besides, He was severely rejected by the Jewish people. When He was standing next to pontious pilot all the Jewish people said : Crucify Him, crucidy Him!!
That's rejection, they didn't like Him, they despised Him.

He was also rejected by His Father:

Mark 15:34-37
34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" which is translated, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

35 Some of those who stood by, when they heard that, said, "Look, He is calling for Elijah!" 36 Then someone ran and filled a sponge full of sour wine, put it on a reed, and offered it to Him to drink, saying, "Let Him alone; let us see if Elijah will come to take Him down."

37 And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last.
NKJV


4) Why wasn’t Jesus humble? (v. 7)

The gospel records haughty words coming from his lips. For example, “Bring those who would not have me rule over them and slay them before my face” (Luke 19.27); “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life” (John 6.47); “He that has seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14.9).

All these verses and many more, especially in John’s gospel, show that Jesus was not a humble man but one who thought very highly of himself.
He was really humble, but G-d on the same time.(sorry for that)
He really disliked pride. And He never struck back. That's a reason why Christians basicly 'kill'
themselves ( not lit.) not to be prideful.

I don't see how those verses make Him not humble, if He didn't say who He was, He'da be lying...

5) Why didn’t Jesus remain silent, as the servant of this chapter was supposed to?

V. 7: “He was oppressed but he humbled himself and opened not his mouth: as a lamb which is brought to the slaughter and as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so he did not open his mouth.”

However, in the gospel accounts of the trial and crucifixion, Jesus says a number of things:

John 18.19―23: “The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him: ‘I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the Temple, whither the Jews always resort and in secret have I said nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them who heard me what I said unto them; behold, they know what I said.’ and when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, ‘Answereth thou the high priest so?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil but if well, why smitest thou me?’“

Luke 23.3: “and Pilate asked him, saying, ‘Art thou the king of the Jews?’ and he answered him and said, ‘Thou sayest it.’“

John 18.33―37: “Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again and called Jesus and said unto him, ‘Art thou the king of the Jews?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Sayest thou this thing of thyself or did others tell thee of me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me. What hast thou done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews ― but now is my kingdom not from hence.’ Pilate therefore said unto him, ‘Art thou a king then?’ Jesus answered, ‘Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.’“

Matt. 26.63: “and the high priest answered and said unto him, ‘I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the son of God.’ Jesus said unto him, ‘Thou hast said it: Nevertheless, I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven.’“

He also said, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me but weep for yourselves’, etc. (Luke 23.28) and besides these, there were a number of well―known sayings on the cross.

All these scriptures clearly show that whilst being questioned about his messianic pretensions, far from being humble and silent, as Isaiah describes the servant in verse 7, Jesus said much. We find that the encounter between the high priest, the elders and Jesus is highlighted by a vigorous verbal exchange. Also with Pilate, Jesus is depicted as skillfully defending himself.

In his last moments, he railed in the face of the Holy God: “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” Besides this, there is the implicit blasphemy of John 19.11. Jesus answered, “Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above: therefore, He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” Thus God, the “power from above”, must have sinned.


I believed it referred to Him not cursing anyone. And He didn't talk when He was ' led to the slaughter'... but that's me. There are probably other interpretations.
Also, when they beat Him up, He never opened His mouth.

6) Why did Jesus use violence and speak violence when verse 9 states: “This servant had done no violence”?

We read in the New Testament how Jesus, whip in hand, overturned tables in the Temple (John 2.15). He caused the death of a herd of swine (Mark 5.12―13). He cursed a poor fig tree because it did not bear figs out of season (Matt. 21.19―20) and he used verbal violence (Luke 19.27). He said, “Think not that I come to send peace but a sword.” (Matthew 10.34) Wouldn't you have done the same if you loved G-d as much as He did? Jesus had zeal for G-d's house. it's even prophecied:

Psalms 69:9
9 Because zeal for Your house has eaten me up,
And the reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on me.
NKJV

The swine thing wasn't necessarily violance, it was more like sacrifice. The sword thing was a parabble! I can't believe the guy took it Literally...


And the fig tree was put as an example:
The fig tree looked pleasing to the eye, and healthy, ( People claiming that they're Christians ), but when He looked, there were no fruits ( These people, claim they're Christians, but they truely aren't. They don't follow a word in the Bible)
7) Why did Jesus deceive people?

Verse 9 says that deceit was not found in his mouth. It is clear that Jesus was a false prophet. He deceived his disciples into believing he would return in their lifetime:

“Many standing here shall not taste of death until they have seen the Kingdom of God come with power.” (Mark 9.1); “I come quickly and my reward is with me.” (Rev. 22.7, 12, 20)

He promised a hundredfold in this life to all who left everything to follow him (Mark 10.28―29) (Imagine a hundred houses, a hundred fields, a hundred wives, etc...) Yet, those who had left all to follow him died in poverty. Oh, so now all of a suddon you care what Revelation says, no?

I don't see that as deception. And Jesus was refering to heaven I believe, not the world.

8) Why was Jesus not buried with the wicked, as according to verse 9?

The gospels state that Jesus was buried in the tomb of a righteous man, who was one of his disciples (Matt. 27.57―60).

Are we to presume this man was a wicked disciple?
He was buried in his place, not with him.

9) Why were there no rich people crucified with him?

Verse 9 says that “his death was with the rich” but the gospels say that he died between two thieves (Mark 15.27).

Maybe they were rich thieves? It doesn't necessarily mean it had to be wealth. It could have been spiritual.
So one could interpret " Died With ( along with, probably another way to say 'as'), the rich ( He was a rich man at heart, he died because He loved you enough to lay His life down.)

Also, He was buried in a rich man's tomb.

10) When did Jesus have children?

Verse 10 says: “He shall see his offspring (zerah).”

When God promised Avraham “zerah”, along came Yitzhak, a real, physical offspring, as the Hebrew word “zerah” implies ― but where was Jesus’s offspring? Are we to assume that he had illegitimate children? What? O.o;
Almost sounds like the Da Vinci code. :P

No, he didn't have Children. Sure this couldn't imply spiritual? ( Come to think of it, was Adam G-d's physical offspring? If so, since we all came from Adam and Eve, and since Jesus was G-d in the flesh, it could mean physical....)

1 1) When were Jesus’s days lengthened?

Why did he die so young? Verse 10 says: “That is days shall be lengthened.” I never thought of that verse. But it probably referred to the fact that He resurected, and walked around on Earth, AFTER His Earthly death.

[Sephardic-male]

JESUS, LAMB OR GOAT?


Hugh Fogelman





Christians maintain Jesus was the Passover Lamb, a “HUMAN” sacrifice for the sins of all. But what does God say about this? Two points must be addressed.

ONE: Christians claim Jesus was a sacrifice for the sins of all, meaning all people for all sins for all times. Chapter 4 of Leviticus lists offerings that are “required” to atone for sins, in contrast to other offerings. These “sin” offerings cannot atone for sins that were committed INTENTIONALLY. No offerings is sufficient to remove the stain of such sinfulness; that can be done only through repentance and a change of the attitudes that made it possible for the transgressor to flout God’s will.

That is right; no sacrifice can be offered or accepted by one who sins intentionally. Since the Christian sacrifice aka Jesus, is supposed to be the one great sacrifice for the sins of all," then it cannot be “for all sinners, and all sins, for all time.” In other words, sin-offerings were never meant for ALL.

On the other hand, Sin-offerings are needed to atone for deeds that were committed “INADVERTENTLY,” as a result of carelessness, accident and without intent, (Leviticus 4:2 and Leviticus 4:22).

TWO: Leviticus 4:21: And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he burned the first bullock: is a sin offering for the congregation. "Bullock"? I thought we were meant to believe that Jesus was a lamb?

Leviticus 4:23: “Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish” "Jesus, a Kid of the goats"?

And all these years Christians were taught that Jesus was a lamb?

Leviticus 4:27-28: And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty; Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.

A "kid of the goats, a female without blemish?" Were not Christians taught that Jesus was to be a sacrificial lamb? Was not Jesus a male? So, the more we examine this sacrificial lamb thing, it just shows that the Christian sacrifice was not a real sacrifice for the common people after all. But wait, it seems one can bring a lamb, after all.

Leviticus 4:32: And if he bring a lamb for a sin offering, he shall bring it a female without blemish. The key word here is “without.” The Christian Bible clearly says Jesus was whipped bloody, blood ran down his forehead from the Crown of Thorns and he was circumcised. These alone would disqualify him, for he was NOT without blemish. Oops, I about forgot, Jesus was not a female either―just one more little detail that slips through Christian minds.

Leviticus 4:12: Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn him on the wood with fire: where the ashes are poured out shall he be burnt.

Leviticus 4:18 And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the Lord, that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out all the blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

When was the "sacrifice" of Jesus burnt? How can Jesus be a "perfect" sacrifice, if his death does not conform to God's Laws concerning sacrifice? Only if you change the rules set forth by God. Now, who would change the unmitigated gall to G-d’s rules? Do you have the authority to change G-d’s laws, rules and/or procedures? Does your preacher have this authority? Or perhaps Paul? In one word, NO!

Leviticus 4:13-14 And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty; When the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the congregation shall offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the congregation.

"Bullock"? I thought we were meant to believe that Jesus was a lamb? How is Jesus supposed to be a sacrifice for sin, as according to Leviticus Chapter 4, if these sacrifices all speak of "unintentional sins?"

Leviticus 4:35 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat of the lamb is taken away from the sacrifice of the peace offerings; and the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: and the priest shall make an atonement for his sin that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.

Jesus, unless the rules had been changed, was not an acceptable sacrifice! One small detail that Christians apparently forget, the fact that God does not accept human blood sacrifices. But, overlooking that “small” detail, Christians should at least now realize that Jesus was not:

perfect, as his flesh was torn;

a bullock;

a kid of the goats,

a female lamb; and

burnt on the altar.

Even if Jesus had conformed to these criteria, he could not have been a sacrifice for “intentional” sins.

The only place in the Christian Bible that makes the claim that Jesus took away the sin of the world is found in John 1:29. Here, John the Baptist, upon seeing Jesus, makes this claim; “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world!”

Christians took those two phases and made them world renowned:

(1) Lamb of God; and

(2) taketh away the sin of the world.

Anyone who knows Torah would certainly know that associating lamb to sin must follow the rules established by God.

For the “Outer chatas/sin offerings,” for personal sin/variable chatas the lamb MUST be female. For Nazir Tahor and Metzora, the lamb MUST also be female.

For burnt offerings (Olah) the male lambs are used. HOWEVER, there is no mentioned of any sin and the male offerings once died MUST be burnt.

For guilt offerings (asham) the male lamb was used.

For peace offerings (shelamim) the male lamb was used

For Pesach (Passover) the male lamb WITHOUT blemish was used. Two important rules must be followed: (1) the lamb MUST be without blemish (2) there is no association of any sin involved.

For Yom Kippur, the male goat (kid) was indeed used to take away our sins.

Answer these questions for yourself!

Which “offerings” would you apply to Jesus?

Was Jesus a symbol of a lamb or a goat?

These are very important questions! Your life may very well ride on your answers. Answer honestly, answer accurately and then you will be right.

Truth is in Torah, not in the Christian bible.



© 2001-2004 Christianity Revealed.

The content on this page is produced by Christianity Revealed, and is copyrighted by the author, publisher and/or Christianity Revealed.

If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with our copyright policy.


http://jdstone.org/cr/files/jesuslamborgoat_2.html

[heron]

The truth lies in neither one of those books Shepardic.

Just because the book of your god, and the other
gods of your past, still survived is testement only
to the fact that it was written down.

It doesnt make it the truth, only a well written
book of a tribal god who convienced a people
to be his children.

You have to claim all of these things in your gods
name, and try to prove them. All these things he
proclaimed. My gods proclaimed none of these things.

Does saying your cool make you cool? nope, being cool
goes without saying.

Its like that, whoever proclaims it most usually isnt it.

[myrtje]

One last thought, this really applies to any situation in life: Don't let
yourself be defined by your context, your upbringing, your neighborhood,
your schooling. I hate how we are defined by outside sources.

Take Care
But if youre Gods creation, and He knew you before you were born etc. then he placed you in those surroundings. He planned for you to be born there.

[Sephardic-male]

The truth lies in neither one of those books Shepardic.

Just because the book of your god, and the other
gods of your past, still survived is testement only
to the fact that it was written down.

It doesnt make it the truth, only a well written
book of a tribal god who convienced a people
to be his children.

You have to claim all of these things in your gods
name, and try to prove them. All these things he
proclaimed. My gods proclaimed none of these things.

Does saying your cool make you cool? nope, being cool
goes without saying.

Its like that, whoever proclaims it most usually isnt it.
what are you talking about heron. I am refuting the lies of a missionary who claims Judaism is some kind of "looking foward to Jesus" religion and twisting up and taking the jewish bible out of context and since you a neo pagan based on the website in your signature you would do the same thing against christians who think you are following satan saying neopaganisn and wicca is satanism

[ryupower]

what are you talking about heron. I am refuting the lies of a missionary who claims Judaism is some kind of "looking foward to Jesus" religion and twisting up and taking the jewish bible out of context and since you a neo pagan based on the website in your signature you would do the same thing against christians who think you are following satan saying neopaganisn and wicca is satanism
Witchcraft and satanism are two completely different things.

There are so many scripture passages reflecting Jesus, so many prophecies he fulfilled...listing them would take ages. And I'm not going to deal with you, because I'm not too much into arguing...unless you'd actually take in account some of the things that I tell you, or even listen to some of the stuff. *sigh* it's just like Moses said...

Nevertheless, I do love you! I'll be praying for you, and ask Yahweh to teach you about His New Covenant, which allowes you to have a personal relationship with Him, and be His son. :)
And I don't want you to go to sheol either...it's not a very pretty place. :(

love ya'! ;)

[heron]

Shepard, maybe i was mistaken in my interpretation of what you meant.
Appologies. I must have been in a mood.

I am neither wiccan nor "neopagan", i am not the first title,
and despise the second.

I still dont get your pagan/satanist and jewish/christian analogy.

Christian is based on Judaism, Satanism is based on Christianity,
and paganism predates them all.

Before Moses, and a little after, the Jews themselves were as pagan as my ancestors.

[the dauer]

I think what he's saying is that you and he both have to fend off Christians who think your religion is somehow invalid or wrong. The Judaism that worries about such things sees a distinction between modern day paganism and ancient paganism so it's not an issue whether or not someone practices it. It's just a religion like any other. But Christianity often doesn't have such clear guidelines for defining things, and so it will use the bible to label modern day paganism as wrong, and sometimes will also confuse it with satanism.

[heron]

Thanks for that dauer. I appreciate it.

But I didnt know that Christians were that way
towards Judaism, as to it being wrong.

I know they seem to think that they are
gods new favorite, and that Jews missed
their messiah, but I didnt know to what
extent.

Well, he is right, we both have defending to do.

[Libertine]

I think it is so hilariously funny for modern Christians to tell Jews "what's what" about their Deity, their Holy Book and their history!! :D

These johnny-come-lately "apologists" (usually some girl under 18 or some male under 30) don't have a fucking clue about Jews, their history, their culture, or their religion and are just quoting what some televangelist or Christian feel-good author has spouted. The arrogance is NAUSEATING.:mad:

What makes it even funnier is that it is ridiculous. I think I'll invent some off-shoot sect of Islam (like Christianity is to Judaism) and begin to tell Muslims what their history REALLY is, what the Koran REALLY means, etc. And maybe in a few hundred years from now, it'll be one of the largest religions in the world. Especially if I use my "psychic powers" and then get myself martyred and have a few propagandists invent some "I saw him rise from the grave, walk through a wall and buy a pack of smokes at the 7-11" story... HA HA HA....

[heron]

LOL well said libertine.

I know what you mean about Christians and their "what they know"

I had fun in my World Religions class the other night.
We are on Christianity right now. Watched a video about
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. It covered the Christian
persicution of Jews, and even covered the Holocost as
such. The teacher, a Baptist minister made quick to say
that Christians had nothing to do with that. BUT anyway,
he started talking about how Christians say that Muslims
worship a different god then they do.

SO, i said "If Muslims worship a different god than Christians,
and that god is El, god of Abraham, then by christians theological
dogma, they worship a false god right? And if that is true, then
the first half of the OT is false as well correct?"

He stumbled and stammered for a second, and said that
christians just dont understand, they think Muslims worship
mohammed, who was just a prophet.

SO i say "So since Christians worship their prophet, they
assume that Muslims do the same?"

He was forced to say yes.

Then I got him on "Abrahams Bosom" where he said that "believers"
go, so i asked him if that is the same as the "heaven" that the war
was in, where El is, he said he couldnt answer it. SO i asked if
believers only go to Abrahams Bosom, then it is only the Hebrew
people that go there. SO i asked where do the others go?

My answer is to their own gods house, his answer was "I dunno"

[the dauer]

The most difficult aspect of this right now is Jews for Jesus. Because these are really baptists. Could you imagine a bunch of baptists doing pagan rituals and saying, "You're really not a complete pagan. If you give up your gods and get baptized and just pray to Jesus, then you can do it the way you're used to and that way you'll be complete." It's so offensive and demeaning. They target Jews intentionally for conversion, especially in ways a cult would operate, like working on college campuses, looking for lonely people, disconnected people. For them, a Jew is like the finest cut of meat when it comes to attaining a convert. I think it has to do with a prophecy about the second coming.

[heron]

Christians doing pagan rituals = Catholic and they used the same technique of
converting Europe. Keep your holidays and customs, just worship this man.

I have met Jews for Jesus in New Orleans once. I watched a debate between
them and some Apostle type christians, complete with robes and sandles.
These guys refused to call god anything other than Elohim, made them
more "authentic" i guess. Anyway, they tried to convince me to only read
the bible and no other books. Crazy!

Would either of you be willing to answer an interview for me?
I have to do a paper for my World Religions class, and I
wanted to do Judaism. I want to go to temple one saturday,
but not sure if i can find a rabbi or anyone else for that matter,
to answer questions.

If so, i can pm you some questions, fill out in your own time.

Thanks

[the dauer]

You know, I forgot about the Catholics. Yeah, with all the saints and such. And I think it's the spanish catholics will have our lady of this or our lady of that and you go to a different our lady for a different thing, and that survives to this day, even though they're all called Mary. According to my biblical criticism teacher, this is how it used to be at one point in Israel, before the various cultic centers besides Jerusalem were destroyed when I think it was Hezekiah who brought everyone into the cities and stopped paying what he had to as a vassal because he wanted to break free from that system.

You can PM me some questions. I may not be able to answer everything, but then again I'm sure I can answer a bit. If you are looking for a website for research, a good place to begin that's interdenominational is www.myjewishlearning.com.

[ryupower]

The most difficult aspect of this right now is Jews for Jesus. Because these are really baptists. Could you imagine a bunch of baptists doing pagan rituals and saying, "You're really not a complete pagan. If you give up your gods and get baptized and just pray to Jesus, then you can do it the way you're used to and that way you'll be complete." It's so offensive and demeaning. They target Jews intentionally for conversion, especially in ways a cult would operate, like working on college campuses, looking for lonely people, disconnected people. For them, a Jew is like the finest cut of meat when it comes to attaining a convert. I think it has to do with a prophecy about the second coming. Will, it says in the New Testament: Let the Children eat first ( referring to the Jews)

The Jews are G-d's Holy people, He wants them to be saved first.
And yes, there's also a prophecy having to do with the end days. ( that all of Israel will be saved.Romans 11:28-31. And Revelation also has a listing of how many from each tribe of Israel will be converted. )

I don't see how paganism has anything to do with Baptism ( or Baptistism. :P)...


I despise that praying to saints thing. It's disgusting.
Do you know what is done with deciesed(SP!) popes? :eek:

[NaykidApe]

[QUOTE=swimminthefish]


-Then where do you hope to get any accurate information if you
cannot trust the accounts of your own people? Intuition?
I guess you did mention other "objective accounts"; does that
mean accounts not affiliated with any religion. In that case,
it is very likely that they contain an even stronger bias because
undoubetedly everyone has an agenda. There's being to discredit
the Christian Faith.

QUOTE]

Am I reading this right? are you saying that all of secular history is a plot to discredit christianity?

And aren't you the one who accused another poster of being a conspiracy theorist a cpl posts back?

[drumminmama]

Will, it says in the New Testament: Let the Children eat first ( referring to the Jews)

The Jews are G-d's Holy people, He wants them to be saved first.
And yes, there's also a prophecy having to do with the end days. ( that all of Israel will be saved.Romans 11:28-31. And Revelation also has a listing of how many from each tribe of Israel will be converted. )

I don't see how paganism has anything to do with Baptism ( or Baptistism. :P)...


I despise that praying to saints thing. It's disgusting.
Do you know what is done with deciesed(SP!) popes? :eek:
The point dauer was making is anything-for -Jesus walking up to a practitioner of, say, satanism or oh, Hare Krishnas and saying, oh, you will be a complete satanist/ Krishna devotee if you simply believe that this dude died for you.

It is a case of either-or. One cannot be Jewish and Xtian.
Mutually exclusive.

and baptism as an act was stolen from us. the mikveh.

[the dauer]

I don't think baptism was stolen from us. First of all, the first Christians really were Jewish. Second of all, iirc there were other groups, non-Jewish, who also used water for initiation. Third, baptism is different from mikveh because baptism is a spiritual cleansing. Mikveh was only to take something tamei and make it tahor, or at least to have a lower level of tumah like a gentile becoming a Jew. Baptism differed from this because it was a spiritual matter.

I don't think it's fair to get into a "you stole this from us" accusation because then we can get to talking about all the things we "stole" like circumcision since I just saw that one on the page before I clicked here. There's no use in getting mad at a fundamentalist, or anybody.

Dauer

[ryupower]

The point dauer was making is anything-for -Jesus walking up to a practitioner of, say, satanism or oh, Hare Krishnas and saying, oh, you will be a complete satanist/ Krishna devotee if you simply believe that this dude died for you.

It is a case of either-or. One cannot be Jewish and Xtian.
Mutually exclusive.

and baptism as an act was stolen from us. the mikveh.
It wouldn't surprise me if it was 'stolen' from Jews.
- Christianity's a continuation of classic Judaism.

Many Jews believe in Jesus. I know of one.

And that satanist/ HAre Krshna thing...that's horrible. What a total lie. >.>

[I have leprosy]

That Jesus thing... what a total lie.

[Sera Michele]

It wouldn't surprise me if it was 'stolen' from Jews.
- Christianity's a continuation of classic Judaism.

Many Jews believe in Jesus. I know of one.

And that satanist/ HAre Krshna thing...that's horrible. What a total lie. >.> There is a difference in believing in Jesus, and believing that Jesus is the literal son of god.

And a person can be Jewish by heritage, but that doesn't mean they are by religion.

If someone is Jewish by religion then they can't believe that christ is the son of god who died for their sins, and christ is their only way to heaven. The jewish religion doesn't hold that doctrine.

This isn't the best analogy, but it would be like me saying I'm a christian (because I was born into a christian family) but I believe that the prophet mohammad, not christ, is my way to god. Could I claim to be christian and hold that belief? No. (well I could, but people are just gonna think I'm dumb)

[ryupower]

There is a difference in believing in Jesus, and believing that Jesus is the literal son of god.

And a person can be Jewish by heritage, but that doesn't mean they are by religion.

If someone is Jewish by religion then they can't believe that christ is the son of god who died for their sins, and christ is their only way to heaven. The jewish religion doesn't hold that doctrine.

This isn't the best analogy, but it would be like me saying I'm a christian (because I was born into a christian family) but I believe that the prophet mohammad, not christ, is my way to god. Could I claim to be christian and hold that belief? No. (well I could, but people are just gonna think I'm dumb)
Well, the OT prophecies of the Messiah DO say that He will be sacrificed for sins, crucified, and all that...
It also says in Jeremiah that a VIRGIN will receive Birth, the Child's name will be Immanuel ( God with us).

Also in another passage it says that He'll be called Mighty Counselor, Prince of Peace, Mighty God, and all that....:)


I see what you mean, and yeah, I was actually referring to the race. :)
But converts to Judaism aren't allowed to have the title 'Jewish' either, they get to be called 'pyrolites' (SP!!!!!!!!!!!)

[ryupower]

That Jesus thing... what a total lie.
thnx.

[the dauer]

ryu,

without getting into anything else you said, because we've been there, a convert to Judaism is called a Jew, and not a proselyte. Once a person has made conversion, they are a Jew. In fact, it would be wrong for a Jew to refer to a person's conversion, because they are really just a Jew, just like any other Jew.

Dauer

[drumminmama]

It wouldn't surprise me if it was 'stolen' from Jews.
- Christianity's a continuation of classic Judaism.

Many Jews believe in Jesus. I know of one.

And that satanist/ HAre Krshna thing...that's horrible. What a total lie. >.>
many=one. wow can I use that for my next 2 am wingnut theory? I do have those ;)
In the eyes of most Jews, the "completed Hare Krishna" analogy would be correct.
One cannot call an opinion or view point a lie: only what it is based on.
J4J claim that adopting belief X will make us "whole Jews."
Last time I checked, I wasn't missing any parts.
I'm a complete Jew.
you and I will not agree in here, but you needn't call me a liar.

[ryupower]

many=one. wow can I use that for my next 2 am wingnut theory? I do have those
In the eyes of most Jews, the "completed Hare Krishna" analogy would be correct.
One cannot call an opinion or view point a lie: only what it is based on.
J4J claim that adopting belief X will make us "whole Jews."
Last time I checked, I wasn't missing any parts.
I'm a complete Jew.
you and I will not agree in here, but you needn't call me a liar. To be honest...I don't understand a thing you're saying. :eek:
Are you talkin' 'bout the Kabala or something? :eek: :eek:
( if that's it, yes, I disagree with the Kabala, no offense )

BTW: Oh yeah, now get it. Nevermind the rest of the post! ^^;;

* Brain is broken this evening...I need some Omega 3....:p
So sorry for my horrible comments.^^;;;;

[ryupower]

ryu,

without getting into anything else you said, because we've been there, a convert to Judaism is called a Jew, and not a proselyte. Once a person has made conversion, they are a Jew. In fact, it would be wrong for a Jew to refer to a person's conversion, because they are really just a Jew, just like any other Jew.

Dauer Well yeah, now that you mention it.
One is legally a Jew after sighning out a bunch of papers, a believer that's not filled out all those papers is a proselyte, right?

( correct me if I'm wrong )

[the dauer]

Ryu,

I'm not sure. I just know that once a person converts, they're as much as Jew as anyone else. The only difference is that they don't have a tribe.

Dauer

[ryupower]

Ryu,

I'm not sure. I just know that once a person converts, they're as much as Jew as anyone else. The only difference is that they don't have a tribe.

Dauer
I heard the paper thing in a book about the " 7 main religions of the world". They also photographed or scanned one of those papers, it's headed " Member of the tribe of Isreal" or something like that...

But they could be talking ethnicly/political. I don't know. :(
but thanks anyways! :)

[the dauer]

You know what you saw could still be inaccurate. You've got a real Jew telling you otherwise, based on what other real Jews have told him. proselyte is simply a term for someone freshly converted to a religion. It doesn't mean that a Christian proselyte is not a Christian or a Jewish proselyte is not a Jew to the same degree as every other.

Dauer

[Varuna]

Like it or not, for billions of people, Jesus is the first (and sadly, sometimes the only) introduction to any form of Judaism, to Jewish consciousness, to the unique Jewish understanding of, and relationship to, the divine.

For these people, he presents a respectable, and fully human, personification of that unique relationship between humanity and the divine.

Of course, there are far too many who would misunderstand one's humanization of the divine as an exclusive deification of a single human.

Sadly, there are far too many who have grossly misunderstood my favorite Rabbi, but with all humility and hope I would ask you to name for me one person, one idea, one thing, anything, that has never been misunderstood.

Peace and Love

[the dauer]

Varuna, I don't know if you're addressing me but I was speaking specifically about the fact that a person who converts to Judaism is a Jew to the same extent as any other, and ryupower seems to be saying that this is not the case. Unless I misunderstood him/her. My statement only had to do with the very subject of conversation.

Dauer

[Varuna]

Dear Dauer,

Sorry about the confusion, I think it was just a matter of coincidence. My post was merely the next one after yours.

I was addressing this entire thread, actually.

I think we may all agree on this simple fact - Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and so on, all too often misunderstand, mistrust and mistreat one another. Maybe it has always been that way, but it seems that the consequences of our misunderstanding have become far more destructive as of late. There seems to be an increasing lack of respect, a loveless, truthless, unwise narrowing of consciousness that suggests an illusion of disunity among the faithful of all traditions which is actually antithetical to all religions, to all relationships between humanity and the divine.

In a perfect world, no one would ever feel so alienated from their own faith that they would feel any need to abandon their faith in favor of another, no one would ever have to convert, but everyone would be free to embrace all faiths, if moved to do so. Toward that end, I meant only to clarify the vital relationship that actually does bind together Judaism and Christianity in a way that is healthy, realistic and absolutely respectful of both traditions.

I hope this helps.

Peace and Love

[campbell34]

I'LL TELL YOU WHY?!... (I)

IT JUST MIGHT HELP YOU!


I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for the sins of mankind. According to Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh". Now, this was BEFORE the "trinity" was invented by the council of Nicaea (325 "A.D."), and the author means that Jesus was "God in the flesh", not just "part" of God, but all of God! Since God is the father of mankind, when He died for His children's sins, He was violating and contradicting His very own words as recorded in Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall NOT be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers! Everyone shall be put to death for his own sin!" I'm 100% certain that this is the word of YHVH God! I'm not sure at all about Timothy 3:16! But you must admit that God cannot violate His own express commands! Some may claim that Timothy 3:16 isn't to be taken literally, but if this isn't literally true, the entire edifice of the "New Testament" collapses, and along with it, Christian doctrine, which claims to be based on the literal truth of the "divine" Gospel!

Since I'm at it, I'll tell you why it's impossible for "God" to become "man". "To become" means just that! It doesn't mean "to pose as", or "to come disguised as". To say God became man means that He stopped being the perfect, all-wise, almighty Creator and became an imperfect, simple weak creature! The Church calls this "a mystery", but had it ever happened, it would be a tragedy! Having once become finite, limited in power and wisdom, frail and human, God would have been doomed to remain that way, for lack of ability to change back into the perfect, almighty being He once was. Just as imperfect foolish man can never, never become Almighty God (though so many have tried throughout the ages!), God will never, become man, and never has.

All this leads me to the inevitable statement: God cannot die! YHVH swears to it Himself: "For I lift up my hand to heaven and say, as I live forever!" Deuteronomy 32:40. "Have you not known? Have you not heard that the EVERLASTING GOD YHVH, the Creator of the ends of the earth, faints not nor is He weary!?" Isaiah 40:25. Now maybe the "god manifested in the flesh" of the New Testament died, but the true only Creator YHVH, never dies! He lives forever, He's everlasting! According to the New Testament, God was dead and buried for over a day! Now if the only God had really died, He would have had to stay that way! There just wasn't any other God around to "resurrect" Him! He was the ONLY God! And who was ruling and managing the universe while He was dead? Existence, all existence would have ceased immediately, had God been killed on Calvary, since everything exists by His Will alone!

All of this PROVES that the "God in the flesh" of the New Testament was NOT the True Almighty Creator, YHVH, AT ALL, but only another god of that category of gods described so strikingly by Jeremiah (chap. 10:11):

Thus shall you say to them: the gods that have NOT made the heavens and the earth, THESE shall PERISH from the earth and from under the heavens!" - "Shall a man make himself gods that are really no-gods?" (ibid 16:20).

OH YHVH, my strength and my stronghold, and my refuge in the day of trouble, UNTO YOU shall the nations come from the ends of the earth and shall say: 'Our fathers have inherited nothing but LIES, vanity and things wherein there is NO benefit!' (Jeremiah 16:19). "For I am God, and NOT MAN!" Hosea 11:9. So, dear friend, leave those other gods, the three headed ones, the man- gods who die and perish. Come to YHVH, the ONE and ONLY, the EVERLASTING, the ONLY SAVIOUR, TODAY, AND LIVE, YOU AND YOUR SEED!


I'LL TELL YOU WHY!! (II)

I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for my sins! First of all, human beings were not acceptable sin-offerings, according to the Mosaic Law. In order to have an acceptable sacrifice, "god the son", (the second person of Christianity's triune deity!) would have had to be "incarnated" into the body of a goat, calf or bull! He would have to have his throat cut by the priest; his blood sprinkled on the temple altar; and his kidneys, fat, and part of his liver burnt on that same altar etc., as designated by Moses' Law! Moreover, the animal to be sacrificed had to be physically perfect and without blemish! An animal whose penis was defective, as the result of having its tip peeled off (as was the case with Jesus, and every other circumcised mali) would be blemished and unacceptable, according to the Law! Since, according to Christian mythology, Jesus came specifically to fulfill the Law's demands for a perfect sin-offering, he was obviously a complete failure! Not ONE of the Law's conditions was met by Jesus! He was an unacceptable sacrifice, and his followers are still sin-laden, miserable creatures!


Another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that, according to Hebrew Scriptures, NOBODY can die for someone else's sins! Moses, the greatest Israelite that ever lived, offered himself to YHVH as a sin- offering after Israel had sinned by making a golden calf. He asked YHVH to take his life, and forgive the sin of Israel. YHVH'S reply was a FLAT REFUSAL, followed by a statement of DIVINE POLICY; "Whoever sins against Me, him (only) will I blot out of my book!" Exodus 32;33. The sinner himself is guilty! NOBODY can take the rap for him! (Not even "god the son"!). This says THE LAW! And Jesus supposedly cam to "fulfill" the Law, not destroy the Law! (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that he was guilty of death HIMSELF, according to THE LAW! "When a prophet speaks in the name of YHVH, if the thing follows not, nor comes to pass, that is the thing which YHVH has NOT spoken! The prophet has spoken it presumptuously! You shall NOT FEAR HIM! DEUTERONOMY 18:20-22. Jesus prophesied: "For the son of man shall come in the glory of his "father", with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily, I say to you, THERE ARE SOME STANDING HERE (Jesus' listeners!) which shall NOT TASTE OF DEATH till they see the son of man (Jesus) coming in his kingdom!" Matthew 16:27-28. Jesus prophesied his immediate, triumphant return over 1900 years ago! The prophecy never materialized, NEVER came to pass!! Thus, Jesus was a FALSE PROPHET, and GUILTY OF DEATH, according to the law! (Deuteronomy 18:20). He died for HIS sins, NOT OURS!

According to Christian mythology, Jesus was really Almighty Creator become flesh. (Timothy 3:16). However, YHVH the Creator plainly states: "I, YHVH, CHANGE NOT!!" (Malachi 2:6). Now, when an almighty, all knowing, all powerful being CHANGES into a frail, putrid man, that certainly is a RADICAL CHANGE! YHVH, the True Creator plainly states "I live FOREVER!" (Deuteronomy, 32:40). YHVH is EVERLASTING! (Isaiah 40:28.) Yet, according to the New Testament legend, the Christian god died, and was buried for over a day! (from Friday afternoon through Saturday night.)

Christianity claims that its god died for you and me. YHVH, the ONLY TRUE DEITY, CREATOR of HEAVEN and EARTH, states that He dies NOT, HE LIVES FOREVER, and that each individual is responsible for, and must pay for his own sins. However, the way of repentance is open to all:

"Again, when the wicked man turns away from his wickedness that he committed and DOES that which is LAWFUL and RIGHT, (GOOD WORKS!), HE SHALL SAVE HIS SOUL ALIVE!..... He shall SURELY LIVE, HE SHALL NOT DIE!!" Ezekiel 18:27-28.

Yes, dear reader, NO NEED for dying god-men! NO NEED for a god to be murdered on a pagan Roman cross!! The Way of YHVH is open to ALL! Come to YHVH, TODAY! Submitted by: Mordecai Alfandari


http://www.light-of-israel.org/
IF GOD IS ONLY ONE PERSON, WHY DID GOD SAY LET (US) MAKE MAN IN (OUR) IMAGE AND IN (OUR) LIKNESS. WHO WAS (US) AND (OUR)?

AND SOMEDAY WHEN GOD SAVES ISRAEL FROM AN INVADEING ARMY, WHY WILL THEY LOOK ON THE ONE THEY PERIECED? AND WHY WILL THE JEWS ASK HIM WHERE DID HE RECEIVE THOSE WOUNDS IN HIS HANDS? AND WHY WILL THE JEWS BE SO UPSET WHEN THEY FINALLY SEE WHO HE IS?

AND WHEN JESUS SAID THERE WILL BE SOME STANDING THERE THAT WILL NOT TASTE OF DEATH TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM, THAT STATEMENT WAS TRUE. FOR IF YOU READ A LITTLE FURTHER, SOME OF THEM DID SEE THIS IN A VISION ON THE MOUNT OF TRANSFIGURATION.

WHEN JESUS DIED, IT WAS HIS HUMAN BODY THAT PASSED ON, HIS SPIRIT NEVER DIED.

[Varuna]

Dear Campbell,

What do you hope to accomplish with your argument?

Peace and Love

[campbell34]

Dear Campbell,

What do you hope to accomplish with your argument?

Peace and Love
I'm here to speak the truth. That alone is enought for me.

[drumminmama]

Campbell, you speak no truth but actually aposty to us, don't you see that? or do you and you believe you will get some brownie points in your heaven by irritating us so?

the followers of Jesus are the ONLY group of false messiah followers who persist and that is only ecause they built their group from non-Jews after the first 100 years.

should you persist in shouting (only those losing an agrument shout in my experience) I will put you in time out.
be courteous. you have come to OUR home. We would be likewise courteous in your home of teh Xtainity forum.

[campbell34]

I'LL TELL YOU WHY?!... (I)

IT JUST MIGHT HELP YOU!


I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for the sins of mankind. According to Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh". Now, this was BEFORE the "trinity" was invented by the council of Nicaea (325 "A.D."), and the author means that Jesus was "God in the flesh", not just "part" of God, but all of God! Since God is the father of mankind, when He died for His children's sins, He was violating and contradicting His very own words as recorded in Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall NOT be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers! Everyone shall be put to death for his own sin!" I'm 100% certain that this is the word of YHVH God! I'm not sure at all about Timothy 3:16! But you must admit that God cannot violate His own express commands! Some may claim that Timothy 3:16 isn't to be taken literally, but if this isn't literally true, the entire edifice of the "New Testament" collapses, and along with it, Christian doctrine, which claims to be based on the literal truth of the "divine" Gospel!

Since I'm at it, I'll tell you why it's impossible for "God" to become "man". "To become" means just that! It doesn't mean "to pose as", or "to come disguised as". To say God became man means that He stopped being the perfect, all-wise, almighty Creator and became an imperfect, simple weak creature! The Church calls this "a mystery", but had it ever happened, it would be a tragedy! Having once become finite, limited in power and wisdom, frail and human, God would have been doomed to remain that way, for lack of ability to change back into the perfect, almighty being He once was. Just as imperfect foolish man can never, never become Almighty God (though so many have tried throughout the ages!), God will never, become man, and never has.

All this leads me to the inevitable statement: God cannot die! YHVH swears to it Himself: "For I lift up my hand to heaven and say, as I live forever!" Deuteronomy 32:40. "Have you not known? Have you not heard that the EVERLASTING GOD YHVH, the Creator of the ends of the earth, faints not nor is He weary!?" Isaiah 40:25. Now maybe the "god manifested in the flesh" of the New Testament died, but the true only Creator YHVH, never dies! He lives forever, He's everlasting! According to the New Testament, God was dead and buried for over a day! Now if the only God had really died, He would have had to stay that way! There just wasn't any other God around to "resurrect" Him! He was the ONLY God! And who was ruling and managing the universe while He was dead? Existence, all existence would have ceased immediately, had God been killed on Calvary, since everything exists by His Will alone!

All of this PROVES that the "God in the flesh" of the New Testament was NOT the True Almighty Creator, YHVH, AT ALL, but only another god of that category of gods described so strikingly by Jeremiah (chap. 10:11):

Thus shall you say to them: the gods that have NOT made the heavens and the earth, THESE shall PERISH from the earth and from under the heavens!" - "Shall a man make himself gods that are really no-gods?" (ibid 16:20).

OH YHVH, my strength and my stronghold, and my refuge in the day of trouble, UNTO YOU shall the nations come from the ends of the earth and shall say: 'Our fathers have inherited nothing but LIES, vanity and things wherein there is NO benefit!' (Jeremiah 16:19). "For I am God, and NOT MAN!" Hosea 11:9. So, dear friend, leave those other gods, the three headed ones, the man- gods who die and perish. Come to YHVH, the ONE and ONLY, the EVERLASTING, the ONLY SAVIOUR, TODAY, AND LIVE, YOU AND YOUR SEED!


I'LL TELL YOU WHY!! (II)

I'll tell you why I do not believe Jesus died for my sins! First of all, human beings were not acceptable sin-offerings, according to the Mosaic Law. In order to have an acceptable sacrifice, "god the son", (the second person of Christianity's triune deity!) would have had to be "incarnated" into the body of a goat, calf or bull! He would have to have his throat cut by the priest; his blood sprinkled on the temple altar; and his kidneys, fat, and part of his liver burnt on that same altar etc., as designated by Moses' Law! Moreover, the animal to be sacrificed had to be physically perfect and without blemish! An animal whose penis was defective, as the result of having its tip peeled off (as was the case with Jesus, and every other circumcised mali) would be blemished and unacceptable, according to the Law! Since, according to Christian mythology, Jesus came specifically to fulfill the Law's demands for a perfect sin-offering, he was obviously a complete failure! Not ONE of the Law's conditions was met by Jesus! He was an unacceptable sacrifice, and his followers are still sin-laden, miserable creatures!


Another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that, according to Hebrew Scriptures, NOBODY can die for someone else's sins! Moses, the greatest Israelite that ever lived, offered himself to YHVH as a sin- offering after Israel had sinned by making a golden calf. He asked YHVH to take his life, and forgive the sin of Israel. YHVH'S reply was a FLAT REFUSAL, followed by a statement of DIVINE POLICY; "Whoever sins against Me, him (only) will I blot out of my book!" Exodus 32;33. The sinner himself is guilty! NOBODY can take the rap for him! (Not even "god the son"!). This says THE LAW! And Jesus supposedly cam to "fulfill" the Law, not destroy the Law! (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet another reason I do not believe Jesus died for me is, that he was guilty of death HIMSELF, according to THE LAW! "When a prophet speaks in the name of YHVH, if the thing follows not, nor comes to pass, that is the thing which YHVH has NOT spoken! The prophet has spoken it presumptuously! You shall NOT FEAR HIM! DEUTERONOMY 18:20-22. Jesus prophesied: "For the son of man shall come in the glory of his "father", with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily, I say to you, THERE ARE SOME STANDING HERE (Jesus' listeners!) which shall NOT TASTE OF DEATH till they see the son of man (Jesus) coming in his kingdom!" Matthew 16:27-28. Jesus prophesied his immediate, triumphant return over 1900 years ago! The prophecy never materialized, NEVER came to pass!! Thus, Jesus was a FALSE PROPHET, and GUILTY OF DEATH, according to the law! (Deuteronomy 18:20). He died for HIS sins, NOT OURS!

According to Christian mythology, Jesus was really Almighty Creator become flesh. (Timothy 3:16). However, YHVH the Creator plainly states: "I, YHVH, CHANGE NOT!!" (Malachi 2:6). Now, when an almighty, all knowing, all powerful being CHANGES into a frail, putrid man, that certainly is a RADICAL CHANGE! YHVH, the True Creator plainly states "I live FOREVER!" (Deuteronomy, 32:40). YHVH is EVERLASTING! (Isaiah 40:28.) Yet, according to the New Testament legend, the Christian god died, and was buried for over a day! (from Friday afternoon through Saturday night.)

Christianity claims that its god died for you and me. YHVH, the ONLY TRUE DEITY, CREATOR of HEAVEN and EARTH, states that He dies NOT, HE LIVES FOREVER, and that each individual is responsible for, and must pay for his own sins. However, the way of repentance is open to all:

"Again, when the wicked man turns away from his wickedness that he committed and DOES that which is LAWFUL and RIGHT, (GOOD WORKS!), HE SHALL SAVE HIS SOUL ALIVE!..... He shall SURELY LIVE, HE SHALL NOT DIE!!" Ezekiel 18:27-28.

Yes, dear reader, NO NEED for dying god-men! NO NEED for a god to be murdered on a pagan Roman cross!! The Way of YHVH is open to ALL! Come to YHVH, TODAY! Submitted by: Mordecai Alfandari


http://www.light-of-israel.org/

The first indication of the Trinity is found in Genesis 1:26 the Old Testament.

Let US make man in OUR image in OUR likeness.

WHO DO YOU THINK GOD WAS TALKING WITH HERE?

[campbell34]

I think we're having the discussion about Jews for Jesus and why an organization owned and paid for by a Christian group is not Jewish in another thread.

And I don't follow the teachings of Jesus for a very simple reason: Jesus has nothing to do with my religion. Christianity might have started as Judaism, but it is no longer. They are two separate religions.
Jesus fulfill the 300 prophecies of the Old Testament. Jesus is the light to the gentiles. 2 billion and growing. Or is there another Jew to come that will out shine Jesus? And what of Zec. 12 When God saves Israel from destruction in the endtimes. When the Jews look upon Him, why does God say they will look upon me the one whom they have peirced? And why are the Jews of that time so upset, when they see their God? All through Scripture the Jewish people have sinned against God, and now we are to believe you finally got it right.
Even the prophecies that tell of how God will return the Jews to Israel in the latter days, clearly tell us, that God is not doing this for the sake of Jews. God tells us, wherever His people wandered, they polluted His name. No, God tells us that when He allows the Jews to return to the land of Israel, He is doing this for His names sake. God is allowing the Jews to return to Israel to anger the nations that hate the Jews. God is going to use the Jews in Israel as bait. When the Islamic nations together try and drive the Jews out of their land, God will act. God is just repeating history. God used the Jews in Egypt to destroy Pharoahs Army. God is going to repeat this on a much larger scale. When the dust clears, Israel will remain intact, but the invading army will be destroyed, and then the Bible tells us that after this event, God will be known in the eyes of many nations, and that includes Israel.

[campbell34]

Campbell, you speak no truth but actually aposty to us, don't you see that? or do you and you believe you will get some brownie points in your heaven by irritating us so?

the followers of Jesus are the ONLY group of false messiah followers who persist and that is only ecause they built their group from non-Jews after the first 100 years.

should you persist in shouting (only those losing an agrument shout in my experience) I will put you in time out.
be courteous. you have come to OUR home. We would be likewise courteous in your home of teh Xtainity forum.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I know Jesus Christ, He is not a religion to me. I have experienced His power, and we are friends. I cannot deny who He is because I know Him so well. He spoke to me years ago and told me when my wife was going to have a child even before my wife knew, He spoke to me one night and told me He loved me. Once I needed a job very badly, and He told me to go and pary about it. I did what He said, and just as I said the A of Amen the phone next to me began to ring, and the man on the other end asked if I could start work for him monday morning. Once I was on a beach and I ask Him if He would send someone to talk to me about Him. As soon as I finished my prayer, I was approached by two men who ask if I knew Jesus Christ. I'm telling you He is the living God, and He is powerful. I'm not here to get points, my salvation is sealed. I'm here because I love you, and I love the God who made us all.

[the dauer]

The first indication of the Trinity is found in Genesis 1:26 the Old Testament.

Let US make man in OUR image in OUR likeness.

WHO DO YOU THINK GOD WAS TALKING WITH HERE?

Why couldn't he have been talking to the angels?

Jesus fulfill the 300 prophecies of the Old Testament

Saying something does not make it true.

2 billion and growing.

There are other religions in the world that are also growing.

Or is there another Jew to come that will out shine Jesus?

I wouldn't say that Jesus shined so much as the pagan myth that was created around him and then backed by the Holy Roman Empire.

When God saves Israel from destruction in the endtimes. When the Jews look upon Him, why does God say they will look upon me the one whom they have peirced?

I don't see the word pierced. Are you sure you're not reading a translation of a translation?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=16216&showrashi=true

btw the messiah ben joseph referenced is not Jesus, but rather a Jewish figure, one of the two messiahs, who is supposed to be an actual military leader, a warrior.

All through Scripture the Jewish people have sinned against God, and now we are to believe you finally got it right.

That's right, unlike most of the rest of the world's scriptures, Judaism's scriptures don't hide when its people do wrong. I'd say that rather than a source of shame, that's something to see as an example. The people of the Tanach are humans we can relate to, with all their faults just like us. We don't need a mangod.

When the Islamic nations together try and drive the Jews out of their land, God will act.

Funny, I see no mention of Islam in the Tanach.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I know Jesus Christ, He is not a religion to me. I have experienced His power, and we are friends. I cannot deny who He is because I know Him so well. He spoke to me years ago and told me when my wife was going to have a child even before my wife knew, He spoke to me one night and told me He loved me.

Let me translate what you said into language more people can agree on: "I have had subjective experiences in my life. People in other religions have had comparative experiences but because these are the ones I have had, I know they must be universally true for everyone, and everyone else's experiences are wrong, even heresy."

I'm here because I love you, and I love the God who made us all.

Then recognize the difference between that which is consensual and that which is not. When you missionize after being told off it is equivalent to rape. Go away.

[campbell34]

Why couldn't he have been talking to the angels?



Saying something does not make it true.



There are other religions in the world that are also growing.



I wouldn't say that Jesus shined so much as the pagan myth that was created around him and then backed by the Holy Roman Empire.



I don't see the word pierced. Are you sure you're not reading a translation of a translation?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=16216&showrashi=true

btw the messiah ben joseph referenced is not Jesus, but rather a Jewish figure, one of the two messiahs, who is supposed to be an actual military leader, a warrior.



That's right, unlike most of the rest of the world's scriptures, Judaism's scriptures don't hide when its people do wrong. I'd say that rather than a source of shame, that's something to see as an example. The people of the Tanach are humans we can relate to, with all their faults just like us. We don't need a mangod.



Funny, I see no mention of Islam in the Tanach.



Let me translate what you said into language more people can agree on: "I have had subjective experiences in my life. People in other religions have had comparative experiences but because these are the ones I have had, I know they must be universally true for everyone, and everyone else's experiences are wrong, even heresy."



Then recognize the difference between that which is consensual and that which is not. When you missionize after being told off it is equivalent to rape. Go away.
The reason God was not talking to the angles is because the Bible makes it clear that God ALONE was involved in Creation. God did not have any little helpers aiding in this.
Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord THAT MAKETH ALL THINGS; that stretcheth forth the heavens ALONE; that spreadeth abroad the earth BY MYSELF.

When God said Let US MAKE. He was not speaking with angles. And if He was, and the angels were really helping Him in Creation, then God would be a LIAR.
Yet we both know, God is not a liar.

Saying something does not make it true? Yet there are at least 300 Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament points to all of them, and claims that Jesus fulfilled them. And if Jesus did not fulfill them, who did?

In Isaiah 52:10 We read, "The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of of the earth shall see the salvation of our God." In two thousands years, there has only been one man who has come out of the Jewish people, and has been recognized through out the world bring salvation, and that man is Jesus Christ. When Jesus Christ returns He will be both the King and the military leader that the prophecies speak of.

I spoke of Islam, because most of the nations the Bible speaks of that will attack Israel in the last days, are Islamic nations today.

[the dauer]

The reason God was not talking to the angles is because the Bible makes it clear that God ALONE was involved in Creation. God did not have any little helpers aiding in this.

Firstly, in Judaism, angels have no free will. Therefore any action an angel makes is simply an extension of God's actions. They are not then, helpers, as it were. It's more like a high electrical tower that carries power down by means of wire relays and smaller towers. In Judaism, the idea that the angels were around and a part of creation would not disagree with Isaiah at all. That would be like saying that because your thought told your arm to lift, that you didn't really tell your arm to lift. Secondly, if you actually look at the whole passage instead of omitted a significant piece we find:

"26. And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...

27. And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

At first it is plural, but in the end it is singular. There is a midrash that fills in this gap in the text, saying that God consulted the angels about the creation of man, and pretty much they all had negative things to say. Truth says this. Justice says that. And while they're arguing God creates man. Thus it was plural when God first said it, and not plural when the action actually took place. This is more indicative of an assemblage like a court, and then the action of a single authority, not of a Trinitarian or Triune godhead.

Saying something does not make it true? Yet there are at least 300 Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament points to all of them, and claims that Jesus fulfilled them.

Again, you're just making an unvalidated claim. Making the claim does not in and of itself support the claim. As I said, saying something does not make it true. And whatever the Greek Testament says I could really care less from you. You're not interested in respectful, ecumenical, interfaith dialogue, just pushing yourself upon those who've already told you off.

And if Jesus did not fulfill them, who did?

Firstly, why do you assume that everything you see as a prophecy is considered a prophecy by Judaism? Second, why must any given prophecy already be fulfilled? Does God have to go according to your schedule? I can think of much more important Jews than Jesus: Freud, Einstein, Spinoza, Luria, the Baal Shem Tov, Maimonides. Nothing Jesus said was particularly original that's worth repeating. Can the same be said for Einstein?

In Isaiah 52:10 We read, "The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of of the earth shall see the salvation of our God." In two thousands years, there has only been one man who has come out of the Jewish people, and has been recognized through out the world bring salvation, and that man is Jesus Christ.

Where does it say that this will be accomplished through one individual? And what hard evidence do you have that anyone has actually achieved salvation through Jesus? You have none. It's based on faith. If you continue to read you see that this passage is all in reference to a servant, a servant who is repeatedly referenced in the book of Isaiah as the Jewish people.

When Jesus Christ returns He will be both the King and the military leader that the prophecies speak of.

Now you're just misappropriating someone else's prophecies because you think it serves your purposes without knowing anything about where they come from. The messiah (which literally means annointed one and merely refers to a leader who, as used to be done, was annointed with oil as part of coronation like moses or david or Cyrus) ben Joseph is a military leader who will die in battle before the coming of the messiah ben David. He will not be "the" messiah, as it were, that is he won't be the more important of the two, but rather a more minor character. But of course the Jewish concept of the messiah ben david is much different from the christian one anyway.

I spoke of Islam, because most of the nations the Bible speaks of that will attack Israel in the last days, are Islamic nations today.

I see no mention of Muslim countries attacking Israel in the Tanach. Do you mean the modern state of Israel? Because I don't see any mention of the modern state of Israel in the Tanach either.

[campbell34]

Firstly, in Judaism, angels have no free will. Therefore any action an angel makes is simply an extension of God's actions. They are not then, helpers, as it were. It's more like a high electrical tower that carries power down by means of wire relays and smaller towers. In Judaism, the idea that the angels were around and a part of creation would not disagree with Isaiah at all. That would be like saying that because your thought told your arm to lift, that you didn't really tell your arm to lift. Secondly, if you actually look at the whole passage instead of omitted a significant piece we find:

"26. And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...

27. And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

At first it is plural, but in the end it is singular. There is a midrash that fills in this gap in the text, saying that God consulted the angels about the creation of man, and pretty much they all had negative things to say. Truth says this. Justice says that. And while they're arguing God creates man. Thus it was plural when God first said it, and not plural when the action actually took place. This is more indicative of an assemblage like a court, and then the action of a single authority, not of a Trinitarian or Triune godhead.



Again, you're just making an unvalidated claim. Making the claim does not in and of itself support the claim. As I said, saying something does not make it true. And whatever the Greek Testament says I could really care less from you. You're not interested in respectful, ecumenical, interfaith dialogue, just pushing yourself upon those who've already told you off.



Firstly, why do you assume that everything you see as a prophecy is considered a prophecy by Judaism? Second, why must any given prophecy already be fulfilled? Does God have to go according to your schedule? I can think of much more important Jews than Jesus: Freud, Einstein, Spinoza, Luria, the Baal Shem Tov, Maimonides. Nothing Jesus said was particularly original that's worth repeating. Can the same be said for Einstein?



Where does it say that this will be accomplished through one individual? And what hard evidence do you have that anyone has actually achieved salvation through Jesus? You have none. It's based on faith. If you continue to read you see that this passage is all in reference to a servant, a servant who is repeatedly referenced in the book of Isaiah as the Jewish people.



Now you're just misappropriating someone else's prophecies because you think it serves your purposes without knowing anything about where they come from. The messiah (which literally means annointed one and merely refers to a leader who, as used to be done, was annointed with oil as part of coronation like moses or david or Cyrus) ben Joseph is a military leader who will die in battle before the coming of the messiah ben David. He will not be "the" messiah, as it were, that is he won't be the more important of the two, but rather a more minor character. But of course the Jewish concept of the messiah ben david is much different from the christian one anyway.



I see no mention of Muslim countries attacking Israel in the Tanach. Do you mean the modern state of Israel? Because I don't see any mention of the modern state of Israel in the Tanach either.
If angles do not have free will, how is it that Lucifer is fallen from heaven as spoken in Isaiah 14: 9-16?

If I seem over zealous please forgive me, it is because I have had an encounter with Jesus Christ. I really can relate to those in the Bible who were non believers only to stand in His presence seeing His reality, and then do a full 360 deg. God has actually spoke to me, and I am pretty much a nobody. God has done such wonders in my sight, forgive me. I don't even go to church, my job keeps me from doing that. Yet Jesus I know very well, He is not some distant historical figure to me.

What was orginal about Jesus was the fact that he told the world that none of us can earn eternal life by are own efforts. Not one of us will ever enter heaven because we deserve to be there. Without the sheeding of blood, there is no forgivness for sin. Christians believe, that Jesus is the blood sacrifice for the world.

In the Book of Ezekiel God states that in the latter years God would bring the Jewish people back to their own land Israel. Israel today is believe by many American Christians to be the fulfillment of that prophecy. The Bible also states that when they would return they would take southern Israel first. They did this in 1948. The Bible then tells us that second they would retake Jerusalem. They did in 1967. The Bible tells us that the ancient cities would be rebuilt and at the same time Israel would be surrounded by enemies. They are. The Bible tells us that Jerusalems East Gate would be sealed and no one would enter that Gate until the Prince to come would open it. The Gate is sealed. The Bible tells us that all attempts to open the gate would fail. They have.

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, I never thought of the Jewish people as the mighty God.

[the dauer]

If angles do not have free will, how is it that Lucifer is fallen from heaven as spoken in Isaiah 14: 9-16?

Are you using a translation of a translation again? There is no such character as Lucifer in the Tanach. This passage refers to Nebuchadnezzar.

If I seem over zealous please forgive me, it is because I have had an encounter with Jesus Christ

If I seem to strongly oppose your snakelike missionizing activity please forgive me. It is because my own subjective experiences have taught me that absolutism, especially the kind you exhibit which insists all who do not believe as you do are condemned, is extremely dangerous. I don't need to hear your stories about your subjective experiences if all you're interested is bending me over and giving it to me. Learn to get outside your own head once in a while and see the larger picture. There are more ways to view the world than through the lens you use and wish to force upon the rest of us.

Do you mistakenly think I experience God as far from me, or that I don't have intense Godly experiences? When your spirituality blinds you as yours has to the experiences of others, it's reduced to nothing more than a drug. If all you strive to be is an addict, fine, but please find another alley to push your favorite pills in. We're not buying.

What was orginal about Jesus was the fact that he told the world that none of us can earn eternal life by are own efforts. Not one of us will ever enter heaven because we deserve to be there. Without the sheeding of blood, there is no forgivness for sin. Christians believe, that Jesus is the blood sacrifice for the world.

So the one original thing you could come up with that Jesus taught is that, despite what the Tanach says, we're all sinners incapable of repairing the damage we've done and the only way to fix it is human sacrifice? Well imo that's not exactly the best message to be spreading. But if it's what works for you.

Israel today is believe by many American Christians to be the fulfillment of that prophecy

I'm aware of the beliefs of Conservative Christians. However spreading them here isn't really relevant. You can take that to the Christian forums across the hall. I'm sure they'd love it.


For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, I never thought of the Jewish people as the mighty God.

Translation of a translation again? ". For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace.""

And why do you assume this refers to the servant here? Could this not be speaking of Hezekiah ben Ahaz?

Judaism never puts forth the idea of a godman.

[campbell34]

Are you using a translation of a translation again? There is no such character as Lucifer in the Tanach. This passage refers to Nebuchadnezzar.



If I seem to strongly oppose your snakelike missionizing activity please forgive me. It is because my own subjective experiences have taught me that absolutism, especially the kind you exhibit which insists all who do not believe as you do are condemned, is extremely dangerous. I don't need to hear your stories about your subjective experiences if all you're interested is bending me over and giving it to me. Learn to get outside your own head once in a while and see the larger picture. There are more ways to view the world than through the lens you use and wish to force upon the rest of us.

Do you mistakenly think I experience God as far from me, or that I don't have intense Godly experiences? When your spirituality blinds you as yours has to the experiences of others, it's reduced to nothing more than a drug. If all you strive to be is an addict, fine, but please find another alley to push your favorite pills in. We're not buying.



So the one original thing you could come up with that Jesus taught is that, despite what the Tanach says, we're all sinners incapable of repairing the damage we've done and the only way to fix it is human sacrifice? Well imo that's not exactly the best message to be spreading. But if it's what works for you.



I'm aware of the beliefs of Conservative Christians. However spreading them here isn't really relevant. You can take that to the Christian forums across the hall. I'm sure they'd love it.




Translation of a translation again? ". For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace.""

And why do you assume this refers to the servant here? Could this not be speaking of Hezekiah ben Ahaz?

Judaism never puts forth the idea of a godman.
I believe the orginal question was speaking of Creation and God alone being involved. When I stated that God said "let US make man in OUR image." I tried to point out that God was speaking to others in the Godhead. You stated that he was speaking to angles, and you stated that angles donot have free will. I brought up the name Lucifer, and you stated that the name Lucifer does not appear in the Tanach. And I will agree, you are correct. Yet, the Tanach does speak of Satan, who was an angle, and he was an angle that opposed God. Which if that is the case, then angles do have free will.

Let me ask you this one question. What does a man in your faith have to do to receive eternal life?

The reason the above verse could not be refering to Hezekiah Ben Ahaz, is because he has not become the light to the gentiles. The nations of the world have not embraced him as God, or anything else. The gentile nations have embraced Jesus.

[the dauer]

I believe the orginal question was speaking of Creation and God alone being involved. When I stated that God said "let US make man in OUR image." I tried to point out that God was speaking to others in the Godhead.

But you left out the other significant part of that text, which I added for you and demonstrated why thus it would make more sense to be referring to angels.

You stated that he was speaking to angles, and you stated that angles donot have free will. I brought up the name Lucifer, and you stated that the name Lucifer does not appear in the Tanach. And I will agree, you are correct. Yet, the Tanach does speak of Satan, who was an angle, and he was an angle that opposed God. Which if that is the case, then angles do have free will.

Satan never appears in the Tanach. HaSatan does, but he has no free will and never goes against God. He only does as God wills.

What does a man in your faith have to do to receive eternal life?

That is a very Christian question. The fact is that according to Judaism the righteous of ALL nations have a place in the world-to-come and God's justice is tempered by His mercy. Even if a person was not the nicest person in this life, there is still the possibility they could do more work in another gilgul, or their souls could be transformed in gehenna, which is a temporary place, before going to Gan Eden. Only the souls of the truly wicked are extinguished, because gehenna or a gilgul would not be able to help them, and sending them either of those routes would thus not be mercy, and it is not our place to determine who they are, but God's alone. However as I said it's a very Christian question because all in all Jews are far less concerned about the afterlife than Christians. It is a more this-worldly religion, even when it gets esoteric.

The reason the above verse could not be refering to Hezekiah Ben Ahaz, is because he has not become the light to the gentiles. The nations of the world have not embraced him as God, or anything else.

There's no place in the text saying this individual will be embraced as God (and why would a Jewish text ever suggest that?) by anyone, nor as anything else by the gentiles.

The gentile nations have embraced Jesus.

And Mohammed, and Buddha, and Krishna, and increasingly Baha'u'llah.

[campbell34]

But you left out the other significant part of that text, which I added for you and demonstrated why thus it would make more sense to be referring to angels.



Satan never appears in the Tanach. HaSatan does, but he has no free will and never goes against God. He only does as God wills.



That is a very Christian question. The fact is that according to Judaism the righteous of ALL nations have a place in the world-to-come and God's justice is tempered by His mercy. Even if a person was not the nicest person in this life, there is still the possibility they could do more work in another gilgul, or their souls could be transformed in gehenna, which is a temporary place, before going to Gan Eden. Only the souls of the truly wicked are extinguished, because gehenna or a gilgul would not be able to help them, and sending them either of those routes would thus not be mercy, and it is not our place to determine who they are, but God's alone. However as I said it's a very Christian question because all in all Jews are far less concerned about the afterlife than Christians. It is a more this-worldly religion, even when it gets esoteric.



There's no place in the text saying this individual will be embraced as God (and why would a Jewish text ever suggest that?) by anyone, nor as anything else by the gentiles.



And Mohammed, and Buddha, and Krishna, and increasingly Baha'u'llah.
In the story of Job HaSatan without question is a free Spirit. God asked him where he has been and HaSatan tells God. "going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." I believe God asked that question for our benifit, because God knew where Satan was. I believe God wanted us to know that this angle pretty much did his own thing. And when God told Satan how good a servent Job was, Satan opposed God and told Him, he's only good because you bless him. You see, if HaSatan was an angel in subjection to God, he would of agreed with God, but HaSatan had his own ideas about reality, and they don't agree with Gods.
Then HaSatan tells God, take away his blessings he will curse you to your face. Then God told HaSatan all that he has is in YOUR POWER. And what does HaSatan do? He kills off Jobs sheep, he has his servants killed, he kills his sons and daughters, and then he afflicted Job with loathsome sores. Now God allowed this, but this was HaSatan's doing. HaSatan is false accuser of Godly people, and HaSatan is also a deciever, for He tried to decieve God into believeing that Job would curse Him. HaSatan is not an obedient severent to God, but is a false accuser and one who tries to deceive others. The text clearly points this out.

There is no place in the text that states this person will be embraced as God.
Yet Isaiah 9:5 states that his name will be called wonderful counselor, MIGHTY GOD, ETERNAL FATHER, prince of peace. And those are names that Christians associate with Jesus. Who would call someone the Mighty God unless they thought he was?

And yes, the gentile nations did embrace Christ, yet even Christ asked the question. When I return will there be any faith left on the earth. The New Testament also states that Christ would not return before there would be a great falling away from the faith, so when you point out how these other religions are growing, that would agree with the prophecies of the New Testament. In the New Testament it states that the time will come when men will not endure sound doctrine. And that is why we see the rise of all these other religions.

[the dauer]

In the story of Job HaSatan without question is a free Spirit.

Absolutely not. Throughout the whole thing he answers to God. God even gives him permission to do what he does. The role of HaSatan is one of a prosecutor, something like a sting agent, an undercover man. He has the job of testing. It's not a popular job, but he does it. That's what he was created for. And if there ceased to be a Divine need for this, HaSatan would cease to be, because angels exist only to fulfill the purpose for which they have been created (and absolutely some of those purposes could be quite complex, some quite basic.) God is the Source of all. he has no opposite.

if HaSatan was an angel in subjection to God, he would of agreed with God, but HaSatan had his own ideas about reality,

Two things, first, as Judaism understands it, the Torah speaks in the language of man. So HaSatan conversing with God, we don't know what actually happened. That's in terms that we can relate to. Second, there's a difference between having free will and being able to come up with ideas of one's own. If God willed it, an angel could do that. But an angel could not then act of its own volition because of those thoughts.

Now God allowed this, but this was HaSatan's doing.

You've just defeated your own argument. God allowed it. That's that. HaSatan has no free will. He was doing as God willed by testing Job.

Yet Isaiah 9:5 states that his name will be called wonderful counselor, MIGHTY GOD, ETERNAL FATHER, prince of peace. And those are names that Christians associate with Jesus.

No, you skimmed my post instead of giving it the attention it was due. That may be what your bible says but it is not what the Tanach says. And absolutely it would make sense that Christians would attribute names they believed were related to the messiah to Jesus, however in this case they are off, at least from a Jewish perspective (this is the Jewish board.) The text would more accurately be read as:

". For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace.""

And yes, the gentile nations did embrace Christ

With much help from Holy Roman Empire and many weapons of war.

When I return

What's all this talk of returning? The tanach says nothing of not getting the job done the first time. Rather, you get the job done the first time and thus olam haba is self-evident to everybody.

The New Testament also states that Christ would not return before there would be a great falling away from the faith, so when you point out how these other religions are growing, that would agree with the prophecies of the New Testament.

But generally Judaism would view these people all as Bnai Noach, and so this would not actually be a falling away from faith but quite the opposite. If you're arguing rather that Christianity is shriveling up, then your arguments are rather weak and flat, as first you state that "The gentile nations have embraced Jesus." Are you just using whatever argument suits you for each response? Anyway, the gentile nations didn't all embrace Jesus. Really primarily those the swords of Christian nations reached. The ones the swords of Muslim nations reached more often than not embraced Muhammed's teachings.

In the New Testament it states that the time will come when men will not endure sound doctrine. And that is why we see the rise of all these other religions.

Surely you jest. The rise? But both the Sanatana and Buddha Dharma are older than Christianity.

[the dauer]

Ikdenk,

The fact is that the historical record really doesn't have much mention of Jesus at all outside of the texts of the NT, which were all written later, and Jewish sources of the time don't mention him at all. That alone is ample evidence of how significant he was in the Jewish world. Saying most Jews didn't in the original statement would make it sound like there were a decent number of Jews who followed him, and we don't see evidence of that. What we do see evidence of is a hybridization of Jewish and pagan myth and theology that becomes popular among gentiles, and really no way of figuring out who the actual historical figure of Jesus was behind the myth. So I see absolutely no reason why anyone should need to offer any type of clause to the statement "Jews rejected Jesus as the messiah." Now if you want to talk about a false messiah who is in the historical record, both Jewish and non-Jewish, we can talk about Bar Kokhba, who much of the Jews of the time believed was the messiah. But he died without fulfilling all of the prophecies, and so they let go of their belief. That is how it is. The gospels are filled with inaccuracies and aren't really a good source for understanding "the way things were."


As far as "Jews for Jesus", it is not a Jewish organization. It is a christian evangelical organization that targets the Jewish people for stealth missionizing. A wolf in sheep's clothing, if you will. I think it's the most filthy and disgusting type of activity to come out of any religion next to murder. If you're going to missionize, at least be honest about who you are and what you're doing.

[campbell34]

Absolutely not. Throughout the whole thing he answers to God. God even gives him permission to do what he does. The role of HaSatan is one of a prosecutor, something like a sting agent, an undercover man. He has the job of testing. It's not a popular job, but he does it. That's what he was created for. And if there ceased to be a Divine need for this, HaSatan would cease to be, because angels exist only to fulfill the purpose for which they have been created (and absolutely some of those purposes could be quite complex, some quite basic.) God is the Source of all. he has no opposite.



Two things, first, as Judaism understands it, the Torah speaks in the language of man. So HaSatan conversing with God, we don't know what actually happened. That's in terms that we can relate to. Second, there's a difference between having free will and being able to come up with ideas of one's own. If God willed it, an angel could do that. But an angel could not then act of its own volition because of those thoughts.



You've just defeated your own argument. God allowed it. That's that. HaSatan has no free will. He was doing as God willed by testing Job.



No, you skimmed my post instead of giving it the attention it was due. That may be what your bible says but it is not what the Tanach says. And absolutely it would make sense that Christians would attribute names they believed were related to the messiah to Jesus, however in this case they are off, at least from a Jewish perspective (this is the Jewish board.) The text would more accurately be read as:

". For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace.""



With much help from Holy Roman Empire and many weapons of war.



What's all this talk of returning? The tanach says nothing of not getting the job done the first time. Rather, you get the job done the first time and thus olam haba is self-evident to everybody.



But generally Judaism would view these people all as Bnai Noach, and so this would not actually be a falling away from faith but quite the opposite. If you're arguing rather that Christianity is shriveling up, then your arguments are rather weak and flat, as first you state that "The gentile nations have embraced Jesus." Are you just using whatever argument suits you for each response? Anyway, the gentile nations didn't all embrace Jesus. Really primarily those the swords of Christian nations reached. The ones the swords of Muslim nations reached more often than not embraced Muhammed's teachings.



Surely you jest. The rise? But both the Sanatana and Buddha Dharma are older than Christianity.
What is different about HaSatan from the role of a proscutor is the fact that a proscutor is presented with certain obvious facts, and then acts on those facts to bring about a just verdict. God already knew that Job would bless Him no mater what HaSatan did, so there really was no reason to test Job outside of having a future example we could use today. Job was an innocent man. In this case, HaSatan OPPOSED Gods knowledge, and without any facts accuses Job of having a weak faith. I see nothing in Scripture that would suggest that HaSatan's Job was to run down the Godly, and then test them when God knew Himself they were innocent of any crime. HaSatan did this, because that was a product of his evil nature, and not Gods design. God tolorated this, only because of the unique relationship between God and HaSatan. When God gave Job to HaSatan He told him "Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. The evil that fell on Jobs faimily came about because of God allowing HaSatan to have free will over Job. Yet it was HaSatan who worked such evil, which only reveals HaSatan for what he truly is, and that is a murder, and a false accuser, ect. Also, HaSatan would of naturally had to of gotton permission to harm Job even with his free will, because in the end, God is always in control. Even the evil Hilter praticed, was only accomplished by God giving His permision. Hitler had the free will to do terrible things, yet it was God that allowed that. Free will is not always a blank check. God is always in control, because He is God.

[campbell34]

Ikdenk,

The fact is that the historical record really doesn't have much mention of Jesus at all outside of the texts of the NT, which were all written later, and Jewish sources of the time don't mention him at all. That alone is ample evidence of how significant he was in the Jewish world. Saying most Jews didn't in the original statement would make it sound like there were a decent number of Jews who followed him, and we don't see evidence of that. What we do see evidence of is a hybridization of Jewish and pagan myth and theology that becomes popular among gentiles, and really no way of figuring out who the actual historical figure of Jesus was behind the myth. So I see absolutely no reason why anyone should need to offer any type of clause to the statement "Jews rejected Jesus as the messiah." Now if you want to talk about a false messiah who is in the historical record, both Jewish and non-Jewish, we can talk about Bar Kokhba, who much of the Jews of the time believed was the messiah. But he died without fulfilling all of the prophecies, and so they let go of their belief. That is how it is. The gospels are filled with inaccuracies and aren't really a good source for understanding "the way things were."


As far as "Jews for Jesus", it is not a Jewish organization. It is a christian evangelical organization that targets the Jewish people for stealth missionizing. A wolf in sheep's clothing, if you will. I think it's the most filthy and disgusting type of activity to come out of any religion next to murder. If you're going to missionize, at least be honest about who you are and what you're doing.
Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus recorded information pertaining to jesus, THUS REMOVING THE ONLY SUPPORTING SOURCE FOR HIS EXISTANCE AS BEING IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. It is believed by some scholars that Tactius gained his information about Christ from official records, perhaps actual reports written by Pilate. Tactius also wrote about the burning of the Jerusalem temple by the Romans in 70 A.D. The Christians are mentioned as a group that were connected with these events.
Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, a member of a priestly family and who became a Pharisee at the age of 19, became the court historian for Emperor Vespasian. In the Antiquities, he wrote about many persons and events of first century Palestine. He makes two references to Jesus. The First reference is believed associated with the Apostle James. "...he brother of Jesus, who was called Christ." He also wrote,"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. AND MANY PEOPLE FROM AMONG THE JEWS AND OTHER NATIONS BECAME HIS DISCIPLES. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive, accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." These historical writings predated the Old Testament. Josephus died in 97 A.D.
Before Tacitus, Suetonius or Josephus, Thallus wrote about the crucifixion of Jesus. His writing date to circa 52 A.D. and the passage on Jesus was contained in Thallus" work on the Eastern Mediterrancan world from the Trojan War to 52 A.D. Thallus noted that darkness fell on the land at the time of the crucifixion. He wrote that such a phenomenon was caused by an eclipse. Though Christ was not proclaimed a deity until the fourth century,

[the dauer]

What is different about HaSatan from the role of a proscutor is the fact that a proscutor is presented with certain obvious facts, and then acts on those facts to bring about a just verdict.

I compared HaSatan to a prosecutor and to someone who runs sting operations, as well as someone who tests, but you ignored the full way that I defined him.

God already knew that Job would bless Him no mater what HaSatan did, so there really was no reason to test Job outside of having a future example we could use today.

You've just given a reason to test Job. Thus you've already defeated your argument. But also, if Job never suffered, Job never would have had that experience of being tested and staying with God. Nor would his friends have had the same interactions with him. Being tested gave Job the opportunity for rightousness.

In this case, HaSatan OPPOSED Gods knowledge,

And yet according to the text he's not opposing God. If God really opposed it he would have said, "Sorry, not gonna happen."

I see nothing in Scripture that would suggest that HaSatan's Job was to run down the Godly, and then test them when God knew Himself they were innocent of any crime.

Well I don't think run down is the right term, but test yes, and how about the Book of Job? How can man grow without being tested?

Yet it was HaSatan who worked such evil,

You keep talking like something sinister went down. It all went according to God's will.

Also, HaSatan would of naturally had to of gotton permission to harm Job even with his free will, because in the end, God is always in control.

If something has free will and has to ask permission, then it's not free will. We don't have to ask God permission to act. We can act against God's will. Angels, lacking that ability, act only according to God's will. Now of course God wills that we should be able to act in this way, but being granted with this gift, we can now act in ways that God does not desire.

Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus recorded information pertaining to jesus, THUS REMOVING THE ONLY SUPPORTING SOURCE FOR HIS EXISTANCE AS BEING IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

I would love to know what type of access the Church had to the writings of Cornelius Tacitus, as it is well-known that they tampered with the writings of Josephus, editing in references to Jesus. This is known because another copy of Josephus was found that the Church did not have access to and it did not contain the same references.

Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, a member of a priestly family and who became a Pharisee at the age of 19

Josephus is not much of a Jewish historian, if you're trying to make a connection there, and for that matter not much of a historian. He was very self-serving. Although his writings are valuable, they shouldn't be taken as authoritative.

I would also be suspicious of Thallus for the same reason as stated above.

Ikdenk,

Sorry you are a million miles off on that.
There are no less than four jewish accounts of Jesus life and ministry.

THose are not Jewish sources. Those are the writings of Christian communities at a later time. Please do not confuse one religion with another. That would be like a Muslim claiming Muslim writings are Christian because one of the sources for Islam is Christianity. What are your feelings about LDS?

Christians would not need any Paganism at all in order to come up with what they have from Jewish theologies.
They certainly make a point of going on and on about how everythign they are doing comes (in their mind) from the Old Testament.

Christians read pagan myth and theology, for example that of the dying god, or of a trinity, or of the sinfulness of man, into Jewish sources. But these sources themselves do not mention such things and are best understood in the way the nation that created them does. It is important for them to make a point of going on and on in such a way, but a claim is not a proof.

They are filled with 'accuracies' and in many cases have been a good way of understanding the way things are.
This is demonstrated through archeology which can reliably use them as a source many times.

No, they contain some accuracies because they were written in the context of the time they were written. Yet they are also filled with many, many inaccuracies about the things the authors didn't know much about, like for example the legal practices of the Sanhedrin.


Of course Im pretty concerned that you are using words like 'targeting' Jews and somehow manipulating them into becoming Christian Jews?
Is it because you believe these 'Jews of Jesus' are stupid sorts of people who are not able to think for themselves?
Easily manipulated and not able to understand the truth like you obviously can?
I mean, what exactly is it about these Jews that makes them so vulnerable and weak?

No, it's because Jews for Jesus is an evangelical organization. It is funded by evangelicals. It was started by evangelicals. And its theology is evangelical. There are other christians who practice "messianic judaism" (it's really a misnomer) who do not have the same manipulative practices, who are more about gettting back to their roots, in touch with the historical Jesus, and I have no problem with that. But Jews for Jesus is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

You are confused by a false dichotemy.
Its entirely possible to be a jew and a christian and of course this whole thing depends on what side you view things from.

It is not. If a Jew becomes a Christian, they become kareit. All of the denominations of the Jewish community are in agreement on this. When a Jew becomes a Christian they have cut themselves off.

If a group of Hindus decide to call themselves native americans and start taking on native american practices but holding to mostly the same beliefs, and they declare they really are native americans, that doesn't make them native americans. If they try to convince some disconnected native americans that their hinduism disguised as native american religion is really authentic, and in fact more the right way, and some of them join them, that doesn't make it a native american religion either.

Now, let's stop talking about Jews for Jesus. Let's say a group of Jews actually did get together and start practicing something along the lines of what Jews for Jesus does on their own. That wouldn't make it Jewish either. There is a group of chabadniks who think that their dead rebbe is the messiah, but that does not make it Jewish either, and certainly not more correct.

Dauer

[drumminmama]

proof that we have a long and storied history of FALSE messiahs, and people who follow them.
A Jew who profresses to beleive in the divinity etc etc of J-sus is no more Jewish than Ishmael.
That Jew has choses to leave the community behind for another, and no amount of twisting will ever make it so.

[the dauer]

Yes they certainly are Jewish sources but I see here you have a conspiracy theory instead.
While the text most clearly present themselves as being Jews writing about Judea and other jews - you have decided they are not.
Interesting.
I think at this point it would be up to you to justify that.

Err, no. They are not Jewish sources. They are early Christian sources that in fact incorporate a large amount of pagan myth and theology. As you are the one going against the standard classification of the texts, the burden of proof in fact lies on you. Any text can purport to be whatever it wants. That doesn't make it so. A claim isn't proof.


Meanwhile, the responsible thing to do is take the text for what it is and note where it can be validated as well.
Examples: The authors accurately describe jewish names, places, practices and these square with external sources, archeology, etc.

For inaccuries, errors, etc, start here:

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

It's a personal page, but I cite this particular one because it lists 1001 errors and numbers them.

Catholics also find errors:

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christian_Credibility.htm

Now of course there's the issue of all the pagan myth:

http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa052902a.htm

And there are links there to more on that. That's enough for now.

As for LDS.
Thats what you have just done.
You just made up a story that gentiles from another time wrote as jews from a previous time.
You and Joseph Smith are perfect together its seems.

No, it's not a story I made up. Do a little reading. Scholars make the claim that the gospels are actually pseudepigraphic material written by the early Christian communities. On the other hand, the claims of Christianity are to Judaism much as the claims of LDS are to Christianity. The difference is that LDS actually does hold to more of the fundamental Christian beliefs than Christianity is in line with Jewish beliefs.

The Messiah is straight out of Judaism and you full well know that.

Not the Christian messiah. The person of the Christian messiah and the person of the Jewish messiah are very very different. Now I've had this conversation many many times and I'm getting a bit tired of repeating myself, so I am providing you with this link. It describes the Jewish messiah in detail. Jewish understandings of the messiah can vary a little, generally depending on whether the individual is more rationalist or more mystical, but what you see here is pretty much what you get everywhere else:

http://www.kesser.org/moshiach/rambam.html

Sinfullness of man is so directly out of the OT its not even funny.

Now you're making some sense. Yep, I'll bet you can find it in the OT, which is a christian text, interpreted in a Christian way. But you won't find any such mention in the Tanach.

Again I dont know what to do here because you have a conspiracy theory that apparently you just 'know' somehow.

It's not a conspiracy theory. You're simply one of many who assume that because you know Christianity that you know Judaism, or that what you were taught in Church about Jews and Judaism is true, instead of going and having those conversations with Jews yourself. But now you're having that conversation and learning the differences, which is a good thing imo. In pirkei avot it says, "Who is wise? He who learns from everyone." I quote that far too much but I do think it's good advice.

Meanwhile, the point would stand that Christians (agree or not) dont need anything but Judaism to find their ideas from.

I don't think so. Otherwise there would be no reason for conservative christians to have to say, "Oh, those other dying gods were really just to prepare people so they could accept Jesus." Such a statement is an admittance of the similarities, and the similarities are really more indicative of influence than anything else, especially since such ideas are foreign to Judaism.

Its probably a big dilema for you because much of what you know about ancient israel and its practices comes from/through Christian sources.

Not at all. The Tanach, and by that I mean the masoretic text, is a Jewish text. The Talmud is also a Jewish text. This simply reveals your ignorance of Judaism.

I suppose I would be interested in what Sanhedrin inaccuracies you think are found in the New Testament.. as long as this isnt another one of your conspiracy stories which somehow only you know from some special source nobody else knows about?

No special source nobody else knows about. Simply Jewish sources, which would be the place to turn to learn about Jewish practices. There's a whole tractate in the Talmud called Sanhedrin that goes over laws surrounding the sanhedrin. This page mentions some of them as well as other factual issues with the trial:

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/barabbasjewishandromanlaw.html

I honestly do not know much about that specific organisation (Jews for Jesus) but my understanding is that its made up of Jews?
If it was started by gentiles then I would still not see a big problem there other than an odd choice in namesake thats for sure.
Im still not sure what you are saying about Jews who are part of that organisation?
Are you saying they dont understand what they have converted to?
They were somehow tricked or mislead into it or what?

Well, essentially the group is a Christian mission that intentionally called itself Judaism and adopted Jewish practices in order to try and attract Jews, particularly those who are less educated or connected with the community, to Christianity. It's something some Christian groups have even spoke out against. There are other messianic groups that do nothing of the sort and are really Christians just trying to understand the origins of their religion and make sense of it themselves. But this particular group was doing it as a way to target people and abuse their lack of knowledge by feeding them misinformation. I really would suggest learning about groups before defending them next time.

Here is the rub: Jews who become Christians dont agree with that and in fact would understand they are practicing proper Judaism - not you or those who appoint themselves spokespeople for Jews.

But they don't get to decide anymore than Jews who decide that they are god incarnate or Jews who decide God's really an alien from another planet. If a Christian becomes a Sikh giving up central Christian beliefs and says now they're a complete Christian, that doesn't make it true either. It would be silly.

We don't have to go by any "spokespeople" of the Jewish community in order to get an answer. We can simply go by community consensus. We can even go by global consensus. You get the same answer. A Jew is a member of the Jewish religion. A Christian is not a Jew, and neither is an australian aborigine.

If Jesus is in fact the King of the Jews then all those Jews who know that - they are in fact practicing real, full on, 100% Judaism.

That's a big if given he doesn't fit the bill for the Jewish messiah and is part of a religion that drifted from its Jewish roots closer to pagan ideas and beliefs.

Likewise, If the chabadnik raibbi was indeed the Messiah - they they are the proper jews.

The problem here, as above, is they are both dead. If somebody's dead and haven't fulfilled all of the prophecies that's it. There's no mention in the Tanach of anything otherwise.

Example:
Josephus having an interpolation in a copy of his reference to Jesus doesnt 'cancel out' that he does indeed refer to Jesus.

Whatever helps you sleep at night. Fact is that the texts that were in the hands of the Church have references to Jesus. There's another text the Church never got its hands on that has no references at all because it was discovered much later and without the references to Jesus it reads more smoothly. But you're welcome to believe what you want.

In another issue, people are mistakenly believing that indirect witness equals 'cancelling out'.
Example: Pliny and Trajan talking all about Christians.
Well its a fact they themselves are not writing 'first hand accounts' like Matthew or Mark etc.
So that 'cancels out' this as a historical record of Jesus right?
wrong.

No, not at all. Expand your studies beyond those of Conservative Christians and I think you'll be surprised to find some serious and less biased scholarship suggesting the gospels are not first hand accounts.

In reality and by any historians standards this is golden evidence to confirm a real historical figure.
If we found a document written by two persians just 50 years later talking about Alexander the greats followers -
Historians would WET THEIR PANTS with what would be as good as 'proof' that Alexander the Great was a real historical person living in a real historical time.

Hey, I never said Jesus existed. I said we can't verify much of anything about who he was. But the possibility is also there, although slight, Jesus didn't exist at all. And with all your huffing and puffing, need I remind you history is not a hard science? Doesn't matter that historians would take it as hard evidence of a person if it's from 50 years after the fact. Doesn't make it so.

Now of course we're not talking about any regular Joe anyway. According to Christianity Jesus has gotta be some really big incredible guy. So if all we get from that is 50 years later some groups wrote some texts down that mention him, I'm sorry, it's not enough to validate any of the Christian claims.

But hey... all i would ask is that the same standards by which you want to 'cancel out' Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny, Thallus - I dare you to apply that to everyone else then.
Apply that across the board and not just to the one single historical figure you DONT want to see validated.
Then what?

I do apply it across the board to all myth and legend, because it is immediately suspect, as well as any text that appears too biased. That goes for Judaism as well. However I generally choose to meet people at the level at which they meet me. When I am presented with someone who's into absolutes and literalism, and trying to hang that over my head, I greet them with the same absolutes. There's really no other easy way to communicate. It's unfortunate that so many conservative christians deem it necessary to trample over this lovely garden instead of frollicking in their own, or coming here with the understanding that they are guests.

[campbell34]

I compared HaSatan to a prosecutor and to someone who runs sting operations, as well as someone who tests, but you ignored the full way that I defined him.



You've just given a reason to test Job. Thus you've already defeated your argument. But also, if Job never suffered, Job never would have had that experience of being tested and staying with God. Nor would his friends have had the same interactions with him. Being tested gave Job the opportunity for rightousness.



And yet according to the text he's not opposing God. If God really opposed it he would have said, "Sorry, not gonna happen."



Well I don't think run down is the right term, but test yes, and how about the Book of Job? How can man grow without being tested?



You keep talking like something sinister went down. It all went according to God's will.



If something has free will and has to ask permission, then it's not free will. We don't have to ask God permission to act. We can act against God's will. Angels, lacking that ability, act only according to God's will. Now of course God wills that we should be able to act in this way, but being granted with this gift, we can now act in ways that God does not desire.



I would love to know what type of access the Church had to the writings of Cornelius Tacitus, as it is well-known that they tampered with the writings of Josephus, editing in references to Jesus. This is known because another copy of Josephus was found that the Church did not have access to and it did not contain the same references.



Josephus is not much of a Jewish historian, if you're trying to make a connection there, and for that matter not much of a historian. He was very self-serving. Although his writings are valuable, they shouldn't be taken as authoritative.

I would also be suspicious of Thallus for the same reason as stated above.

Ikdenk,



THose are not Jewish sources. Those are the writings of Christian communities at a later time. Please do not confuse one religion with another. That would be like a Muslim claiming Muslim writings are Christian because one of the sources for Islam is Christianity. What are your feelings about LDS?



Christians read pagan myth and theology, for example that of the dying god, or of a trinity, or of the sinfulness of man, into Jewish sources. But these sources themselves do not mention such things and are best understood in the way the nation that created them does. It is important for them to make a point of going on and on in such a way, but a claim is not a proof.



No, they contain some accuracies because they were written in the context of the time they were written. Yet they are also filled with many, many inaccuracies about the things the authors didn't know much about, like for example the legal practices of the Sanhedrin.




No, it's because Jews for Jesus is an evangelical organization. It is funded by evangelicals. It was started by evangelicals. And its theology is evangelical. There are other christians who practice "messianic judaism" (it's really a misnomer) who do not have the same manipulative practices, who are more about gettting back to their roots, in touch with the historical Jesus, and I have no problem with that. But Jews for Jesus is a wolf in sheeps clothing.



It is not. If a Jew becomes a Christian, they become kareit. All of the denominations of the Jewish community are in agreement on this. When a Jew becomes a Christian they have cut themselves off.

If a group of Hindus decide to call themselves native americans and start taking on native american practices but holding to mostly the same beliefs, and they declare they really are native americans, that doesn't make them native americans. If they try to convince some disconnected native americans that their hinduism disguised as native american religion is really authentic, and in fact more the right way, and some of them join them, that doesn't make it a native american religion either.

Now, let's stop talking about Jews for Jesus. Let's say a group of Jews actually did get together and start practicing something along the lines of what Jews for Jesus does on their own. That wouldn't make it Jewish either. There is a group of chabadniks who think that their dead rebbe is the messiah, but that does not make it Jewish either, and certainly not more correct.

Dauer
HaSatan mocked God when he told God He didn't know what He was talking about when it came to Jobs faithfulness. This should be obvious to anyone.

So Job had to have his entire family killed off just to have an opportunity to show God his rightousness. WOW.

God did not oppose HaSatan just as He did not oppose him when He allowed Hitler to kill 6 million Jews in the camps during World War II. God gives HaSatan a lot of room to work his evil. God could stop all of that killing to, yet God allowed it. God did not support it, yet He allowed it.

Anytime you allow someone to murder your family, the term run down does not seem to out of line.

And you believe God was all for HaSatan killing Jobs family. Nothing sinister in that? God and HaSatan just haveing a good old time. I wonder if they ate popcorn together. WOW, the lengths you will go to make HaSatan look like a good old boy.

HaSatan is Evil, and God does not find joy in the murder of His people, nor does He support it, yet He does allow it.

[the dauer]

If you dont understand this then try all you want to imagine how fucked up the world would be if you did this your backwards way:
Assume its something besides what it presents itself as until proven otherwise.

Anyways, reality check in mind: Jews in Judea writing about jews doing things in Judaism.

Either you're very dense or your beliefs just really cloud your ability to see from other perspectives. The gospels are not Jewish texts. Historians agree. They are early Christian texts written by early Christians, not Jews. And please stop creating straw men out of my arguments. It hardly makes you seem intelligent. Clearly we should not just take texts as what they claim to be. Because texts can claim to be whatever they'd like. We must examine the texts in the context of the time in which they were created and look at potential influences from surrounding cultures, political motivations, etc. Otherwise we get to some Greek texts and say, "Oh okay. I guess there really were lots of gods back then. This book says so."

I mean honestly, you cant see why that is about 1001 reasons why these are jewish texts.
Because thats what it just demonstrated.
Of course I understand that it assumes that any pro-jesus jewish authors must have it wrong while all others must be authoritive.
Thats a sort of 'reverse faith' i suppose.

Uh... no. It shows why it is a flawed text, and why it has pagan influences. But you've already demonstrated that you are the textbook definition of blind faith.

'Scholars claim Gospels are pseudoscriptura' in the same way that 'Scholars claim that the moon landing was a hoax'.

I thought you're educated on religion. I never once said the gospels are pseudoscriptura. I said they are pseudepigraphic material. Before you go throwing stones, pick up a dictionary.

This gets back to your same backwards precedent that suggest that you start by giving the 'conspiracy theory' the floor until you can 'disprove' it otherwise.

I'm not presenting conspiracy theory. It's what those of us looking at things from a modern perspective would consider fairly normative. If you prefer your Conservative Christian perspective, the Christian board is down the hall.

I suppose you can just find some scholar who says the Gospels are a hoax and like our 'moon landing nutters' he can just say thats the case for the landing.
And,
In their case and yours assert that it is a hoax until you can prove it is not.
Wow.
Scholars alright.

The problems with bold assertions like this are that, given your admittance to absolutism based on the teachings of the Greek Testament, it all falls flat. Clearly you won't accept anything that challenges what you yourself "know" to be true. You won't even give it a place on the floor. Rather than dialogue about the issues, you try to drown them out and make them sound smaller by calling them nonsense. You don't have to prove yourself to me or anyone else. But you ought respect the place you are visiting.

NOTE: I understand that you believe they got it wrong. Fine. Thats not the point here though.
Here its being demonstrated that (however wrong or right) they certainly took jewish ideas of a Messiah and attributed them to Jesus.

They did not though. I've linked you to Jewish ideas about the messiah. They read pagan ideas into a Jewish text. It's not a hard thing to do, read ideas into a text, especially when you're able to alter key words in the translation you're using.

We are not actually debating whether or not John the Baptist (for example) was the Spirit of Elijah or not.
We are establishing that early Christians (jew or gentile) were able to get that idea from Jewish sources alone.

But you haven't established that the christian representation of the messiah can be found in jewish texts alone. Something else against you, besides the fact that these were ideas prevalent in pagan cultures, is that there are places where Christian translations intentionally mistranslate in order to make it seem more like prophecy. So what do you have against you?

1. Prevalence of Jesus-like motifs in pagan myth that are not plainly represented in Jewish myth.

2. Prevalence of pagan concepts about the world that are not found plainly stated in Jewish texts.

3. Images of Jesus nearly identical to those of other pagan dying gods.

4. Christians intentionally mistranslate to attempt to create further plausibility.

And maybe more that we've not yet uncovered.

Good news you gotta be kidding me.
Your playing games surely.
Sorry but I cant get past Genesis without hearing about Sin and I cant even open Leviticus without a non-stop Sin, Sinfulness, Sin penalty, Sin explosion going on.

I suppose what you really mean to say is that the concept the sinful nature is presented differently by Jesus and his Apostles.
But say that then.

You said man is sinful and you knew exactly what you meant, but we don't find this relationship between man's nature and sin in the Tanach. That's plain and simple. I don't know how much clearer it can get. Are there places people sin? Sure. But nowhere is the generalization that man is sinful. Remember, sin creeps at the door, but you can conquer it. That is the message of Genesis.

In a way you are right because I do look to Jesus as the ultimate authority on Judaism. Literally the King of the Jews.
So I do learn from that Jew I hope.
As well I listen to Paul alot as well as John.

In which case you have completely shut your eyes and ears to learning about Judaism.

No thats not cool.
You dont take goofy think-alouds as being some sort of good reverse-fitting argument.
These are not 'conservative christians' whatever thats supposed to mean.

Indeed they are. And it is an argument I have heard before, not just a goofy think-aloud. Or are you the type to say that only your specific kind of Christianity is correct and anyone who is diverging will burn in hell?

Look, there are about elevteen million different versions of messiahs, prophets, demigods and gods throughout history.
As many have 'similarities' to your brand of Judaism as they do actually anything else.

We're not discussing the origins of the biblical prophecies. If we were i'd agree with you. Everything has influences. And the influences for Christianity are clearly more largely those of the pagan religions surrounding it than of Judaism.

Further to that you have a whole pile of mystery cults running around who actually make a very point and purpose out of mix-matching shit into a new thing.
Including jewish rituals and including the christian ones.

With Christianity doing pretty much the same thing. Hmm...

Seriously though, an early church father once 'speculated out loud' that themes of the coming Messiah are revealed throughout the worlds cultures even if not articulated.

Didn't you just call that a silly think-aloud argument earlier?

Thank God for Archeology or you would still be relying on Christians to carry Judaism for you.

Maybe you didn't read my message, so let me paste it again. "Not at all. The Tanach, and by that I mean the masoretic text, is a Jewish text. The Talmud is also a Jewish text. This simply reveals your ignorance of Judaism." This is again a sign of your ignorance. We've never lost any of these texts. We've always had them.

The Gospel accounts in no way whatsoever imply the trial was just or proper and pretty much go to listing the very things which were not proper or just about the trial.

I think you missed the point of the article. The point is that the portrayal in your scripture shows a lack of knowledge of the rules regarding the operation of the sanhedrin, even very basic things like not meeting on a holiday.

Thats all I wanted to hear.
Just wanted you to come clean is all.
After all, it couldnt possibly be because they are just as educated as you are.

No, they're not as educated as me about Judaism. This is fact. Education has been a big issue in the Jewish community. Because of all of the persecution, for a few generations a lot of people just wanted to be like everyone else, and this meant playing down the Jewish part of their identity, or disregarding it altogether. In our current generation, among all populations and not just Jewish, there's more of an idea that being different is good and we should take pride in our heritage and our roots and learn about that, that having a unique identity is more important than blending in. So now there's a lot more education going on, but there are still a lot of people out there it's not yet reached.

.. In any of these other examples a person would have to 'change' world views.
Sihkism and Christianity could not 'both be true' so you are right to say one must leave one for the other.
You couldnt be a Muslim and a Buddhist at the same time.
(well i suppose many mix and synth things but that digresses the point)

Not the case with Judaism to Christianity.
At no point would a believing jew need to lose or change ANY of their judaism in order to convert to Christianity.

This is complete and utter nonsense. A Jew cannot be a Christian. The beliefs of Christianity violate central beliefs of Judaism and furthermore holding certain of those beliefs would render one kareit, cut-off from the Jewish community.

Again, I realise that you think they are misunderstanding judaism but they certainly do not believe they are.

It's not about what they believe. It's about Judaism. And they are violating the Tanach.

You really need to kind of absorb that for a while and just try and get your mind around that.
It will make sense eventually i promise.

Do not missionize on this board. It is unwelcome. If you want to missionize go over to the Christianity board where you can be with your buddies in the "everyone else is doomed to hell" club. Why don't you, instead of insisting everyone else wrap their mind around your own narrow world-view, do a little reading on what other people actually believe? A Jew cannot be a Christian anymore than a Christian can be a worshipper of Baal.

Im not sure but someone might do a survey one day showing there are now more Christian jews than ones who reject Jesus as Messiah.
If so, will that conconcenus rule the day?

No because by becoming Christians they have rendered themselves kareit.

Again you are suggesting (or something) that an interpolation in the churchs copy 'cancels out' the main point of this being a reference to an 'external' historical jesus.

No, this isn't about cancelling out the historical Jesus. This is about you proving the mythical Jesus. The texts you have presented as proof of the historical "not mythical" are not proof for the reasons I have stated.

Expand what.. all i freaking see year after year, discovery channel after Newsweek after liberal Uni course after documentary after Davinci code is the so-called 'liberal scholars' and the schools of 'higher criticism'.

What I did was expand my studies away from those fringe scholars (and they are a fringe group) to moderate and realistic studies.
There you do not find idiotic 'moon landing' theories about Gospels written 100s of year later and this conspiracy crap.

Again, you can call a rose a turd as much as you'd like, but you're still dealing with real, respected scholars, who are not really fringe, doing what scholars do best.

Apply your exact same standards and criticism to Moses now.
No?

You see this is what separates you and I, one of the things. I am not an absolutist. And I hold even the existence of a historical Moses suspect. I think it's plausible there was one given what a primary role he plays in the Torah and its structure, but I'm much less optimistic about the historical existence of earlier figures like Abraham.

Actually, Jesus runs a fairly humble (most times) local ministry

You mean like claiming to be God's only son and that the only to God is through him? Or like his public and foul-mouthed attacked on his neighbors?

I think you're missing the point with the examples you're presenting. What you're presenting has more to do with the movement than the individual. Really you don't even need a real person to found a movement, if you can attribute some teachings and legends to them. The problem is that he didn't get the press he should've gotten if he was such a big deal. No histrians reporting water into wine, or any of that. Not outside those in the hands of the Church, whose hand in their editing is most likely. You also see no mention of him in Jewish sources like the gemara, which does bother to mention a false messiah from around his time who made a real splash on the local scene, bar kokhba.

I would never set my default to 'hoax first' and then proceed to demand proof otherwise.
Yes, of course I understand what you are getting at but if I take the Koran for example.
I dont start by presuming it was written by someone else besides Mohammed and I dont assume Muhammed is a fictional character either.
I didnt do that with the Gospels either.
To me, you can cheat yourself by starting with a hoax theory first and then trying to work backwards.

It's not a "hoax first" approach. It's a "take everything into account" approach, instead of relying on the text alone, because historical texts are often biased, especially if we're dealing with something like religion.

campbell,

HaSatan mocked God when he told God He didn't know what He was talking about when it came to Jobs faithfulness. This should be obvious to anyone.

Mine citing your sources so we can be on the same page? Makes things easier.

So Job had to have his entire family killed off just to have an opportunity to show God his rightousness. WOW

Life isn't fair. The rightous suffer. It's a fact of life. But got makes peace AND creates evil. He is the source of all things, right? So ultimately you have to ask, what is the purpose of the suffering of the rightous? You also might ask, what happens to his family after they die? And what were they working through in suffering through their deaths? How were these experiences significant for their neshamot?

God did not oppose HaSatan just as He did not oppose him when He allowed Hitler to kill 6 million Jews in the camps during World War II. God gives HaSatan a lot of room to work his evil. God could stop all of that killing to, yet God allowed it. God did not support it, yet He allowed it.

God's the source of everything, even the Holocaust. The question of evil and suffering is a big one in most religions, and no less true for judaism. Lots written on it.

And you believe God was all for HaSatan killing Jobs family. Nothing sinister in that?

From your limited human perspective, maybe, but from God's perspective it serves a purpose.

God and HaSatan just haveing a good old time. I wonder if they ate popcorn together. WOW, the lengths you will go to make HaSatan look like a good old boy.


Now you're creating a straw man. I never said they were having a good time. I even said HaSatan gets one of the dirty jobs. He's filling a role that is necessary. Could you imagine life without suffering? Without death? Without evil in the world? We could not grow. And the ability to grow is what separates us from the angels, who lacking free will, cannot.

and God does not find joy in the murder of His people

I agree. He probably doesn't. But just like a mother teaching a child, sometimes it requires tough love.

[campbell34]

Either you're very dense or your beliefs just really cloud your ability to see from other perspectives. The gospels are not Jewish texts. Historians agree. They are early Christian texts written by early Christians, not Jews. And please stop creating straw men out of my arguments. It hardly makes you seem intelligent. Clearly we should not just take texts as what they claim to be. Because texts can claim to be whatever they'd like. We must examine the texts in the context of the time in which they were created and look at potential influences from surrounding cultures, political motivations, etc. Otherwise we get to some Greek texts and say, "Oh okay. I guess there really were lots of gods back then. This book says so."



Uh... no. It shows why it is a flawed text, and why it has pagan influences. But you've already demonstrated that you are the textbook definition of blind faith.



I thought you're educated on religion. I never once said the gospels are pseudoscriptura. I said they are pseudepigraphic material. Before you go throwing stones, pick up a dictionary.



I'm not presenting conspiracy theory. It's what those of us looking at things from a modern perspective would consider fairly normative. If you prefer your Conservative Christian perspective, the Christian board is down the hall.



The problems with bold assertions like this are that, given your admittance to absolutism based on the teachings of the Greek Testament, it all falls flat. Clearly you won't accept anything that challenges what you yourself "know" to be true. You won't even give it a place on the floor. Rather than dialogue about the issues, you try to drown them out and make them sound smaller by calling them nonsense. You don't have to prove yourself to me or anyone else. But you ought respect the place you are visiting.



They did not though. I've linked you to Jewish ideas about the messiah. They read pagan ideas into a Jewish text. It's not a hard thing to do, read ideas into a text, especially when you're able to alter key words in the translation you're using.



But you haven't established that the christian representation of the messiah can be found in jewish texts alone. Something else against you, besides the fact that these were ideas prevalent in pagan cultures, is that there are places where Christian translations intentionally mistranslate in order to make it seem more like prophecy. So what do you have against you?

1. Prevalence of Jesus-like motifs in pagan myth that are not plainly represented in Jewish myth.

2. Prevalence of pagan concepts about the world that are not found plainly stated in Jewish texts.

3. Images of Jesus nearly identical to those of other pagan dying gods.

4. Christians intentionally mistranslate to attempt to create further plausibility.

And maybe more that we've not yet uncovered.



You said man is sinful and you knew exactly what you meant, but we don't find this relationship between man's nature and sin in the Tanach. That's plain and simple. I don't know how much clearer it can get. Are there places people sin? Sure. But nowhere is the generalization that man is sinful. Remember, sin creeps at the door, but you can conquer it. That is the message of Genesis.



In which case you have completely shut your eyes and ears to learning about Judaism.



Indeed they are. And it is an argument I have heard before, not just a goofy think-aloud. Or are you the type to say that only your specific kind of Christianity is correct and anyone who is diverging will burn in hell?



We're not discussing the origins of the biblical prophecies. If we were i'd agree with you. Everything has influences. And the influences for Christianity are clearly more largely those of the pagan religions surrounding it than of Judaism.



With Christianity doing pretty much the same thing. Hmm...



Didn't you just call that a silly think-aloud argument earlier?



Maybe you didn't read my message, so let me paste it again. "Not at all. The Tanach, and by that I mean the masoretic text, is a Jewish text. The Talmud is also a Jewish text. This simply reveals your ignorance of Judaism." This is again a sign of your ignorance. We've never lost any of these texts. We've always had them.



I think you missed the point of the article. The point is that the portrayal in your scripture shows a lack of knowledge of the rules regarding the operation of the sanhedrin, even very basic things like not meeting on a holiday.



No, they're not as educated as me about Judaism. This is fact. Education has been a big issue in the Jewish community. Because of all of the persecution, for a few generations a lot of people just wanted to be like everyone else, and this meant playing down the Jewish part of their identity, or disregarding it altogether. In our current generation, among all populations and not just Jewish, there's more of an idea that being different is good and we should take pride in our heritage and our roots and learn about that, that having a unique identity is more important than blending in. So now there's a lot more education going on, but there are still a lot of people out there it's not yet reached.



This is complete and utter nonsense. A Jew cannot be a Christian. The beliefs of Christianity violate central beliefs of Judaism and furthermore holding certain of those beliefs would render one kareit, cut-off from the Jewish community.



It's not about what they believe. It's about Judaism. And they are violating the Tanach.



Do not missionize on this board. It is unwelcome. If you want to missionize go over to the Christianity board where you can be with your buddies in the "everyone else is doomed to hell" club. Why don't you, instead of insisting everyone else wrap their mind around your own narrow world-view, do a little reading on what other people actually believe? A Jew cannot be a Christian anymore than a Christian can be a worshipper of Baal.



No because by becoming Christians they have rendered themselves kareit.



No, this isn't about cancelling out the historical Jesus. This is about you proving the mythical Jesus. The texts you have presented as proof of the historical "not mythical" are not proof for the reasons I have stated.



Again, you can call a rose a turd as much as you'd like, but you're still dealing with real, respected scholars, who are not really fringe, doing what scholars do best.



You see this is what separates you and I, one of the things. I am not an absolutist. And I hold even the existence of a historical Moses suspect. I think it's plausible there was one given what a primary role he plays in the Torah and its structure, but I'm much less optimistic about the historical existence of earlier figures like Abraham.



You mean like claiming to be God's only son and that the only to God is through him? Or like his public and foul-mouthed attacked on his neighbors?

I think you're missing the point with the examples you're presenting. What you're presenting has more to do with the movement than the individual. Really you don't even need a real person to found a movement, if you can attribute some teachings and legends to them. The problem is that he didn't get the press he should've gotten if he was such a big deal. No histrians reporting water into wine, or any of that. Not outside those in the hands of the Church, whose hand in their editing is most likely. You also see no mention of him in Jewish sources like the gemara, which does bother to mention a false messiah from around his time who made a real splash on the local scene, bar kokhba.



It's not a "hoax first" approach. It's a "take everything into account" approach, instead of relying on the text alone, because historical texts are often biased, especially if we're dealing with something like religion.

campbell,



Mine citing your sources so we can be on the same page? Makes things easier.



Life isn't fair. The rightous suffer. It's a fact of life. But got makes peace AND creates evil. He is the source of all things, right? So ultimately you have to ask, what is the purpose of the suffering of the rightous? You also might ask, what happens to his family after they die? And what were they working through in suffering through their deaths? How were these experiences significant for their neshamot?



God's the source of everything, even the Holocaust. The question of evil and suffering is a big one in most religions, and no less true for judaism. Lots written on it.



From your limited human perspective, maybe, but from God's perspective it serves a purpose.



Now you're creating a straw man. I never said they were having a good time. I even said HaSatan gets one of the dirty jobs. He's filling a role that is necessary. Could you imagine life without suffering? Without death? Without evil in the world? We could not grow. And the ability to grow is what separates us from the angels, who lacking free will, cannot.



I agree. He probably doesn't. But just like a mother teaching a child, sometimes it requires tough love.
Well it's obvious your idea of God and mine are different. You believe that God supports a person like HaSatan to go about killing and destroying lives just to prove a point? If that is the case, you truly believe in a God who He Himself would have an evil nature. Tough love is only employed when you have a child who is overly disobedient, this was not the case for Job. The question for evil still remains a question for you, because you donot understand how God can support such atrocities. We Christians know that He doesen't. God did not have six million Jews killed in Hitlers camps just to prove some kind of idiotic point. What you donot understand, is the evil in this world is not inspired by God, and much of it is not just man alone. You honestly think that people are being murdered everyday, and God is doing this just to prove points. What kind of God do you believe in.

[the dauer]

Early Christian Jews yes.
You may have noticed (if you ever read a Gospel) they are jews in judea who practiced judaism and how they followed a jewish rabbi who was teaching judaism and so on.
Surprise!

If a text makes a claim that does not make it true. As I said it's pseudepigraphic material.

What you are doing is manipulating the way this will be perceived by the masses.
Select the fringe group of 'liberal' scholars (incredibly this is a school of thought that was pre-nazi germanys specialty but thats another topic) and what you do is present that 'as if' thats now the 'new middle'.
Which,

I am doing nothing of the sort. You on the other hand are schewing all of the facts to make it appear that conservative scholars have more clout. If you detached yourself from your Absolutist worldview for a little bit, you might find there really aren't so many answers, but on the other hand, many questions.

Hey you know what else you should do - push that 'Literalist' term in there too.
Talk as if 'some 'literalist christians' believe in a 'literal' new testament.
Thats effective.

You've already shown yourself to be quite the literalist. Maybe there is some exception to that but I've yet to see it.

Ya i have bad news but 'The Davinci Code' is a fictional novel although I guess this will get you squared up against whoever wrote the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
BTW... thats not intended to be an 'instructional guide' which your actually supposed to follow you know?

Ignorance from you again? This has nothing to do with the DaVinci Code. I never even read the book or saw the movie, and was aware of the pagan ideas and myths before then. I'd connect a link to you, but based on the way you talk now I can only guess you've already disregarded earlier links. I guess what you don't know can't harm you. Right?

Try reading carefully before going off again - the Gospel accounts are NOT ATTEMPTING TO BE anything more than an account of 'what happened'.
NOT what was 'supposed to happen'

Right, and I'm saying they're not an accurate account based on what we know about the Jewish legal system as it operated in those days, of which there is a wealth of information. I'm not saying that if the event actually happened it went down exactly as the other sources describe it, but it gets basic rules of the way in which the court operates wrong. Let's say for example, that I too wrote a pseudo-historical account of a trial. Takes place in America. Now let's say I said the judge was yelling and being rude. That would be potentially more legitimate. But let's say I said the judge made us go two days without a break, and to get order when things got rowdy, would take a rock in his hand and bang it against a metal plate. That just wouldn't jive with what we know about the American court system.

The account is describing what happened regardless.

Oh really, so you have proof of this or is this another absolutist claim based on your faith in the supreme infallibility of one particular text?

No of course not.
After all, there is no way you can be wrong on all this stuff.
Thats established right.
So,
The only possible explanation left simply 'must' be that these people are not 'educated'.

No, they are absolutely going against judaism, because what they are saying goes against torah, and goes against gemara. The statements that I made about the Jewish population are factual, whether or not you wish to accept them as so. Do you want to know why they are wrong? Have a look here:

http://www.kosherjudaism.com/elohimacharim.html

But I know it's unlikely you'll go check, because you don't want to learn about other people's beliefs. You are so convinced that you have the only truth. So I will copy a little here:

Exodus:

20:3 - There shall not be for you Elohim Acharim before me.

23:13 - The names of the Elohim Acharim you shall not mention nor heard through your mouth.

Deuteronomy:

5:7 - There shall not be for you Elohim Acharim before me.

6:14 - You shall not follow after the Elohim Acharim of the deities of the nations who are around you.

7:3 - You will not intermarry with them. You will not give your daughter to his son, and you shall not take his daughter for your son, for he will turn your child away from following Me and [the child] will serve Elohim Acharim.

8:19 - If you forget that HaShem is your [only] G-d and go after the Elohim Acharim, and worship them, and prostrate yourself to them, I testify against you today that you shall surely perish.

11:16 - Beware for yourselves so your heart is not seduced, turning you away and serving Elohim Acharim and prostrating yourself to them.

11:28 - And the curse is if you do not hear/accept the mitzvot of HaShem and you stray from the path that I command you today, to follow the Elohim Acharim that you did not know.

13:2 ? If there should stand up in your midst a ñprophetî or dreamer of a dream, and he will give you a sign or wonder, and the sign or the wonder happens [as he said, and] he says to you "let us follow the Elohim Acharim that you did not know and worship them", do not listen to/accept the words of that prophet or to that person who dreamed a vision.

13:7 - If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son, or your daughter, or the wife you are close to or your friend who is like your own soul will entice you saying, "Let's go serve Elohim Acharim, that you did not know, you or your fathers, from the deities of the [non-Jewish] nations around you, those [nations] near to you or those far from you, from the end of the earth to the end of the earth. [In such a case], you shall not desire nor listen to him. Your eye shall not take pity on him. You shall not be compassionate nor shall you cover up for him. Rather, you will kill him. You hand shall be the first against him to put him to death and the hand of the entire people afterward.

13:13 - If in one of your cities that HaShem your G-d give you to dwell there, you hear [people] saying, ñMen, sons of criminals, have emerged from your midst, and they have caused the residents of their city to go astray, saying, "Let's go and serve Elohim Acharim, that you have not known" you are to find, look for, and fully investigate. And behold, if itÍs true, if the accusation is correct, if this abomination is in your midst, SMITE! You shall smite the inhabitants of the city with the edge of the sword. Lay it to waste and everything in it, and its animals with the edge of the sword. You are then to gather together all of its possessions, bring it to the midst of the open square, and you shall burn the entire city and all itÍs contents and possessions for HaShem, your G-d.

17:2 - If there be found among you, in one of your cities, which HaShem, your G-d, gives you, a man or a woman who commits what is evil in the eyes of HaShem your G-d, by violating his covenant, and he/she goes and serves the Elohim Acharim, and prostrates himself before themƒ you shall pelt them with stones so that they will die.

18:20 - ...[the prophet] who speaks in the name of an Elohim Acharim, that prophet shall die.

28:14 - And do not turn away from any words that I command you this day, right or left, to follow Elohim Acharim, to serve them. But if you do not listen to the voice of HaShem...cursed will you be in the city and fields, cursed shall you be...

28:36 - ƒ[curses continue] And there you will work for the Elohim Acharim of wood and stone... all these curses shall come upon you...

28:64 - HaShem will scatter you...and there you will serve the Elohim Acharim, whom you did not know, you or your fathers, of wood and stone.

29:25 - [Why will HaShem punish us?] They went and served the Elohim Acharim and bowed to them, deities that they did not know.

30:17 - But if...you prostrate yourself to Elohim Acharim and serve them...you will be lost.

31:18 - But I will have surely hidden my face on that day because of all the evil that it did, for it had turned to the Elohim Acharim.

31:20 - I shall bring them to the land that I swore...and they shall serve the Elohim Acharim and serve them, and they will anger Me and annul my covenant [of the land]."

"An Elohim can be either physical or metaphysical. An Elohim is perceived as having the ability to render a judgment of life and death over someone. When this homonym is used in the context of speaking of the Source of the Universe, we are speaking of Him and assigning a title that expresses His middot, his outward expression, as we perceive it. This certainly does not mean that there is HaShem and another deity called an Elohim, but it is a title that we assign to the One for our human perception so that we can relate to Him on that level...

"But what is ñAcharimî?

ñAcharimî is a plural form of the word achar. Achar is sometimes translated to as ñotherî, but its meaning needs a bit more explaining. Achar always implies a separation, and a distancing. In the Torah we see it used to indicate a delay [7] , being backward [8] , being behind [9] , being after [10] , being in the past [11] and even in the future [12] . We even have an example of using it to describe a person who severed his connection with Torah"

I have bad news for you.
You are the one who is cut-off.

No, they are the ones worshipping an elohim acharim. The things that must happen in the lifetime of the moshiach are very clear and it's not a matter of belief. If it happened, we would know that person was the moshiach. They are not supposed to happen 100s or thousands of years later. This is not supposed to be a supernatural mangod or someone to remove sin. None of that is required. Just to accomplish these tasks:

Isaiah 2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. (KJV)

11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. (KJV)

Even if these verses are not taken literally, we do not yet have world peace.

Isaiah 26:19 Thy dead [men] shall live, [together with] my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew [is as] the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. (KJV)

Ezekiel 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord G-D; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. [13] And ye shall know that I [am] the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, [14] And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken [it], and performed [it], saith the LORD. (KJV)


The dead are not walking among us, last I checked.

Isaiah 11:11 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. [12] And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. (KJV)

There are still Jews all over the world. In fact there are about the same number of Jews in the United States as there are in Israel, and it's been that way for quite some time.

Ezekiel 37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. [27] My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their G-d, and they shall be my people. [28] And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore. (KJV)

The beit hamikdash is still in ruins.

Now as a Christian you might claim there will be a second coming, but this is not mentioned in the Tanach, and even your own Greek Testament seems to say Jesus is coming within the next generation or so, and not the distant future. For example,

Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: [30] And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. [31] And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. [32] Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer [is] nigh: [33] So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, [even] at the doors. [34] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. (KJV)

And also:

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; [26] Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. [27] And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. [28] And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. [29] And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; [30] When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. [31] So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of G-d is nigh at hand. [32] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. (KJV)

Also,

1 Thessalonians 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. [14] For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will G-d bring with him. [15] For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive [and] remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. (KJV)

Sounds like they got their timing wrong, and we know what the Torah says about that:

Deuteronomy 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. [21] And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? [22] When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. (KJV)

Now as far as your claim about Elijah the Prophet, your Greek Testament answers that too:

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. (KJV)

But you have to actually go through and accept the wedding vows and ceremony before you are now 'properly married'.

This is again an example of your ignorance. Judaism sees itself as God's partner. Not for a little while, not incompletely, but in full. A better way of describing it would be to say that a person who is a Jew and gets involved in Christianity is involved with someone, and yet then they go on and cheat on them.

Its a forum.
We are talking about Judaism in a comparative study.

There is a difference between talking comparatively and missionizing and you know it, and it also becomes less of a comparative study when one of the members is unwilling to learn what the other believes, but instead just wishes to force their view on the individual.

Christianity is fulfilled Judaism.
Properly fulfilled Judaism.

No, Christianity is to Judaism as Sikhism is to Islam. It is a separate religion that formed by combining.

Theres alot of things in todays Media that you wouldnt think existed at all and then would be stunned to find out.
Just saying.

Aha! But here there is a difference, depending on the type of media of course and how much it was actually investigative. You are talking about, essentially a historical novel. Maybe Jules Verne, something that goes beyond the way things really are. Whereas I am referring to hard media.

[the dauer]

Campbell,

You believe that God supports a person like HaSatan to go about killing and destroying lives just to prove a point?

A point? It's a little deeper than that. It's the way we grow. We can't grow without tragedy. Can you explain to me how "not stopping" your understanding of Satan, which in this case really is an absolute evil, and not just something humanity might consider bad, makes God any less responsible? It sounds like a worse situation, given that in yours Satan really is truly evil, and it's something that God ultimately wouldn't want happening to his people.

If that is the case, you truly believe in a God who He Himself would have an evil nature.

No, God does not have an evil nature. However, as Isaiah states, he makes peace and creates evil.

Tough love is only employed when you have a child who is overly disobedient

No, not only. What about when a bird knows its chick needs to fly, and the only way to do so is to push it out of the nest? It's hardly fair pushing a chick out of the nest, but its experiences would be so limited otherwise, and eventually it would die without learning what it had to.

The question for evil still remains a question for you, because you donot understand how God can support such atrocities.

No, the question of evil is not a question for me at all. I see evil as a projection of mankind of some sort of badness onto things that go wrong in life and the world due both to nature and to the actions of humans according to their genes and experiences up to this point, instead of accepting them as a part of life, that we need not dwell on or worry about.

What kind of God do you believe in.

I thought I said it before, but if I didn't, I'm an agnostic panentheist. Although subjectively for me God is everything, and goes beyond everything, I do not believe that subjective experience really can confirm absolutes, because, after all, it is subjective. Even when a situation happens that most people don't have conflicting subjective experiences about, we are still viewing from the limited lense of humans. It may be possible to find absolute truth, but if we ever found it, I do not believe there would be any way to verify. However personal truth I am quite sure of.. There can be things that are true for me, or true for you, and on some level all of our experiences are real, because they are real for us. And this includes the hallucinations of those who are mentally ill. That does not mean that those experiences necessarily have an effect on the reality around us. They are just the way we experience the world.

[neodude1212]

ok you guys are way too long winded for your own good. i mean this is ridiculous.

as a christian, I see Jesus as the son of God, not God himself. If he was God himself, then why would he pray? Also exactly who did he ask to take his life when he was on the cross? himself? no he was not God in any means, he was his Son. That being said, why does it even matter? All that really matters is love and peace, so why is this such a heated argument? This is what turns me off from Judaism, how everyone breaks everything down into the tinest most literal form possible. Don't read for the prose, read for the message.....

[xexon]

Jews don't believe in Jesus. They liked him in the beginning, because they thought he was going to lead a revolt against the Romans. After that fell apart, he was regarded as just another holy fool.

Some Jews make a very good living off the Christian pilgrims that flock to Israel however.

Always been good money in "God".



x