PDA

View Full Version : How do Jews atone today?



Pages : [1] 2

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 02:53 PM
I've been asked several times how Jews atone today without sacrifice.

First I'm going to post some biblical verses that demonstrate that sacrifice is not mandatory for receiving God's forgiveness. Then I'll post a short list of how Jews atone today.

Some verses:

Asking for forgiveness

"Then the LORD said, 'I do forgive, just as you have asked.'"
Numbers 14:20

Obedience to God

1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams.

Prayer

Hosea 14:1 O Israel, return unto The Lord thy G-d; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. [2] Take with you words, and return unto the Lord: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and accept that which is good: so will we render [as] bullocks [the offering of] our lips.


and

Proverbs 15:8 The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright [is] His delight. [9] The way of the wicked [is] an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness. (KJV)

and

2 Chronicles 6:24 And if thy people Israel be put to the worse before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee; and shall return and confess thy name, and pray and make supplication before thee in this house; [25] Then hear thou from the heavens, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest to them and to their fathers.

and

2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Feeling remorseful

Psalms 51:16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [17] The sacrifices of G-d [are] a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O G-d, thou wilt not despise. (KJV)

Song

Psalms 69:30 I will praise the name of G-d with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. [31] [This] also shall please the LORD better than an ox [or] bullock that hath horns and hoofs. (KJV)


Practicing mercy

Proverbs 16:6 By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil. (KJV)

and

Daniel 4:27 Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity. (KJV)

Just because He feels like it

Micah 7:18 Who is a G-d like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy. [19] He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea. [20] Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (KJV)

Money

Exodus 30:16 And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.

Turning from evil

Jonah 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed G-d, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. [6] For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. [7] And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: [8] But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto G-d: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. [9] Who can tell if G-d will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? [10] And G-d saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and G-d repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Yom Kippur

Leviticus 23:27 Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement; it shall be a holy gathering to you; and you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the Lord. [28] And you shall do no work in that same day; for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the Lord your G-d.



In light of these verses, repentance process is as follows:

* Ceasing to commit the forbidden act
* Regretting what he or she has done
* Confessing before God
* Firmly resolving never to repeat those actions
* If possible, bring sacrifice

But sacrifice alone is meaningless without the other four steps.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 05:58 PM
then why the sacrifice? I agree the other things on your list are important but why was the sacrifice of an unblemished without spot animal necessary?

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 06:16 PM
Good question.


OK, first of all let's clarify something. Sacrifice did not atone for all sins. Animal sacrifice was only done for certain types of sins. A careful reading of Leviticus will demonstrate that one generally brought sacrifice only for inadvertent, accidental sins. When one sinned intentionally, sacrifice was not enough to remove that sin.

So now onto your question: why sacrifice?

First of all, we have to realize that the bible was not given in a vacuum. In many ways it was evolutionary and not revolutionary. It was give to people who lived in societies where sacrifice was how they worshiped their gods. So rather than forbidding it, God took an idolatrous practice and made it into a monotheistic practice. In this manner, God weaned the Jews of the religions they saw around them.

Of course, sacrifice also had a practical aspect in the atonement process. When one brought a sacrifice for sin, they had to lean on the animal and confess their sin. Now imagine what they were thinking as they did that: this animal is going to die for my sin. Maybe it should be me that dies, but God lets me put this animal in my place. Maybe I should be more careful not to sin in the future, lest it IS me that dies for the sin next time...

And so by bringing the sacrifice, it would lead the sinner to be more careful with their actions in the future.

In the balance, the sacrifice appears to be more for US than for God.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 06:19 PM
Thank you for your answer...I understand about the sacrifice being only for certain types of sins, because other than that they would be put to death, am I correct?

So if they were leaning on this animal realizing that next time it would not be a sin of ignorance, they would be the ones to die?

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 06:26 PM
Thank you for your answer...I understand about the sacrifice being only for certain types of sins, because other than that they would be put to death, am I correct?No, the courts had a variety of punishments, depending on the crime. Some required a monetary fine. Some required being lashed. Some required death penalty. Some were so egregious that even the death penalty was insufficient.


So if they were leaning on this animal realizing that next time it would not be a sin of ignorance, they would be the ones to die?Not necessarily.

The point of repenting is to remove one's sins. One's death can also absolve them of sin. So God might decide that a person had sinned and not rectified the situation, and He would have to take their life to remove their sin.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 06:37 PM
I just finished reading the book of Leviticus so I am a little familiar with what you are saying. I have not, however, done an in depth study on it. I appreciate your patience with me.

you said, " The point of repenting is to remove one's sins. One's death can also absolve them of sin. So God might decide that a person had sinned and not rectified the situation, and He would have to take their life to remove their sin."

If a person dies in sin who does "their" death absolve them? Is there a verse for that? I am very curious.

Can I ask another question? I don't know what books of the Bible you go by so please forgive me if I use a Scripture that you wouldn't..
What does this verse mean to you?
Psalm 116:15-"Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints."
If you do use the book of Psalms what does this verse mean to you?

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 07:00 PM
I just finished reading the book of Leviticus so I am a little familiar with what you are saying. I have not, however, done an in depth study on it. I appreciate your patience with me.It is no problem, really.


you said, " The point of repenting is to remove one's sins. One's death can also absolve them of sin. So God might decide that a person had sinned and not rectified the situation, and He would have to take their life to remove their sin."

If a person dies in sin who does "their" death absolve them? Is there a verse for that? I am very curious.
One's own death can absolve them of their sins. Interestingly enough, if one has no sin they would not die. There are few few biblical examples of that. Elijah, for example.

I'll see if there's a verse on it.



Can I ask another question? I don't know what books of the Bible you go by so please forgive me if I use a Scripture that you wouldn't..
What does this verse mean to you?
Psalm 116:15-"Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints."
If you do use the book of Psalms what does this verse mean to you?

A better translation is "Difficult in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones", which doesn't really require an explanation.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 07:07 PM
I am fascinated by all of this...keep in mind I am a Christian so my beliefs are different than yours but since you didn't title your thread to allow for Christians to discuss our beliefs (I am guessing you already know full well what they are anyway...) I will only ask questions according to Jews atoning today?

Everyone dies at some point...where does a Jewish person go when they die?
I'm asking because you mentioned their death could absolve them from sin.
Since the Jewish people were God's chosen either way do they all end up in heaven with Him?

Teke
Feb 5th 2008, 07:17 PM
In the balance, the sacrifice appears to be more for US than for God.

Isn't this more an act of charity (or mercy, as you posted above) as well, since the priesthood benefited by the sacrifices which sustained it.

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 07:17 PM
I am fascinated by all of this...
Good, that means I'm contributing by being here.



Everyone dies at some point...where does a Jewish person go when they die?We should be more general. Where does a person go when they die? Well, it depends on their deeds and who they are. A Jewish person is obligated to keep 613 commandments, more or less, to the best of their ability. If they fall short, and most do, they spend some time in hell to cleanse them of their sin before ending up with God.

A non-Jew, on the other hand, is only obligated to keep seven commandments to earn favor from God. If He or she does that to the best of their ability, they too end up in heaven. If they fall short they have to go through the same process as a Jewish person to be cleansed.

Unspeakably evil people (think Hitler, Stalin, etc) are punished in hell fully for their sins and then their soul is destroyed.



I'm asking because you mentioned their death could absolve them from sin.
Since the Jewish people were God's chosen either way do they all end up in heaven with Him?
No, being born Jewish ensures nothing. As I said above, we believe that being a Jew means additional responsibilities, not additional benefits. See Amos 3:2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.
God holds us to a higher standard of behavior, because we should know better.

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 07:18 PM
Isn't this more an act of charity (or mercy, as you posted above) as well, since the priesthood benefited by the sacrifices which sustained it.
I suppose that might also be true, yes.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 07:29 PM
Is there a verse anywhere that says a person goes to hell until they are cleansed from their sin...(it almost sounds like Catholicism going to purgatory?)

If God is a perfect God and a Holy One..then I find it hard to believe that He is "ok" with sin. You make it sound so casual...by saying a Jewish person has to keep so many commandments to the best of their ability.

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 07:40 PM
Is there a verse anywhere that says a person goes to hell until they are cleansed from their sin...(it almost sounds like Catholicism going to purgatory?)No, the Jewish bible does not mention the afterlife at all.


If God is a perfect God and a Holy One..then I find it hard to believe that He is "ok" with sin.
He isn't ok with it. He expects us to make mistakes and succumb to temptation. He did create us, after all.

It's just that after one sins, they have to repent.


You make it sound so casual...by saying a Jewish person has to keep so many commandments to the best of their ability.
Well, why would God expect an imperfect being to behave perfectly? Anyway, doing some good deeds is still better than doing none.

karenoka27
Feb 5th 2008, 08:01 PM
Is the book of Genesis one of the books you use? Excuse my ignorance...

If so, then you do believe that God created man as a perfect being don't you?
I believe He expects perfection or else He would not say:
Leviticus 11:44-"For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 45For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy."



I understand the word holy to mean, "pure, free from defilement..."

If holy gives the idea of being perfect..then how do we become perfect?
Deuteronomy 18:13-"Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God."



Yet we aren't perfect..hence the sacrifice..was the forgiveness of sins (some of them as you say,) accepted by God through the blood of the animal? And once they offered this sacrifice did God now see them as perfect?

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 08:31 PM
Is the book of Genesis one of the books you use? Excuse my ignorance...Yes.



If so, then you do believe that God created man as a perfect being don't you?Man may have been perfect, but we no longer are.


I believe He expects perfection or else He would not say:
Leviticus 11:44-"For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 45For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy."



I understand the word holy to mean, "pure, free from defilement..."The word 'holy' in Hebrew has the same root as the word 'to set aside'. It doesn't mean 'be perfect', it means, 'set yourself aside because you belong to Me.'



Yet we aren't perfect..hence the sacrifice..was the forgiveness of sins (some of them as you say,) accepted by God through the blood of the animal? And once they offered this sacrifice did God now see them as perfect?No, because they weren't expected to be.

Atonement is a process, not an act. It means sinning and regretting it and trying to improve.

RoadWarrior
Feb 5th 2008, 08:55 PM
Excellent thread, Fenris, I think you add a lot by being here. Thank you.

I believe you are familiar with the Jewish books recognized by Protestant Christians (what we call the old testament). Could you help us out by stating if we are using the same books that Jews call the Bible, or if there are any differences? I understand the first 5, called the Torah, or the Pentateuch, or the book of Moses, to be: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 09:46 PM
Excellent thread, Fenris, I think you add a lot by being here. Thank you.Thank you! :)


I believe you are familiar with the Jewish books recognized by Protestant Christians (what we call the old testament). Could you help us out by stating if we are using the same books that Jews call the Bible, or if there are any differences? I understand the first 5, called the Torah, or the Pentateuch, or the book of Moses, to be: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.Yes, we use those same books.

RoadWarrior
Feb 5th 2008, 10:03 PM
.... I understand the first 5, called the Torah, or the Pentateuch, or the book of Moses, to be: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.

After these, there seems to be differences in the order for the Jewish Bible and for the Protestant Bible.

In the Tanach, I see the prophets next, and the "writings" after the prophets. In the Protestant Bibles, we count these as 33 books.

Prophets:
Joshua
Judges
Samuel (We have 1 and 2 Samuel)
Kings (1 and 2 Kings)
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Zechariah
Malachi

Writings:
Psalms
Proverbs
Job
The Songs of Songs
Ruth
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther
Daniel
Ezra-Nehemiah (We have these as two separate books)
Chronicles (We have 1 and 2 Chronicles)

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 10:12 PM
After these, there seems to be differences in the order for the Jewish Bible and for the Protestant Bible.

Yeah, some differences.

I just typed the whole thing in so I'll paste it here

Torah Written by God.
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy

Prophets Written by man after communication with God. On a lower level than the Torah.

Joshua
Judges
1 Samuel
2 Samuel
1 Kings
2 Kings
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephnia
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi

Writings Written by man. Divinely inspired, but on a lower level than the Torah or the Prophets.

Psalms
Proverbs
Job
Song of Songs
Ruth
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther
Daniel
Ezra
Nehemiah
1 Chronicles
2 Chronicles

karenoka27
Feb 6th 2008, 12:18 AM
Yes.


Man may have been perfect, but we no longer are.

The word 'holy' in Hebrew has the same root as the word 'to set aside'. It doesn't mean 'be perfect', it means, 'set yourself aside because you belong to Me.'

No, because they weren't expected to be.

Atonement is a process, not an act. It means sinning and regretting it and trying to improve.

So in your belief, reconciliation back to God is a process... and I believe that by trusting in Jesus Christ I am reconciled back to God because He was the sinless Lamb who was sacrificed for my sins..something that I couldn't do because I have sin.

Question.
When Adam and Eve sinned they broke their relationship with God. I believe the skins that God clothed them in Genesis 3:21-"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them" was the first animal sacrifice taught to man for forgiveness of sin..
When Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden of Eden the rest of their life was spent hoping that God would forgive them and allow them to be reconciled back to Him?

stillforgiven
Feb 6th 2008, 02:27 AM
A non-Jew, on the other hand, is only obligated to keep seven commandments to earn favor from God. If He or she does that to the best of their ability, they too end up in heaven. If they fall short they have to go through the same process as a Jewish person to be cleansed.

Which seven? I think I can guess most of them, but could you list them?


Yes.
The word 'holy' in Hebrew has the same root as the word 'to set aside'. It doesn't mean 'be perfect', it means, 'set yourself aside because you belong to Me.'


I love the way that reads.

TrustingFollower
Feb 6th 2008, 02:42 AM
First, I want to thank you for starting this thread, you are providing great in site to us Christians and helping all of us understand each others beliefs better.


A Jewish person is obligated to keep 613 commandments, more or less, to the best of their ability.

Now with my question. You state the obligation, in the quote above, more or less. How do you know where more or less is? What in your bible tells you when you do enough? I ask because 613 laws seems like a formidable task to try to keep.

pinky
Feb 6th 2008, 03:27 AM
A non-Jew, on the other hand, is only obligated to keep seven commandments to earn favor from God. If He or she does that to the best of their ability, they too end up in heaven. If they fall short they have to go through the same process as a Jewish person to be cleansed.




These seven commandments or mitzvahs are the Noahide laws, which are not in the Bible but are in the babylonian talmud......ie.......laws created by the pharisees.

Refrain from:

1 Idolatry: (Strange work - i.e. serving an idol) Avodah Zarah עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה א
2 Blasphemy - ‘Blessing’ the Divine Name: (Cursing G-d) Birchat (Kilelas) HaShem בִּרְכַּת הַשֵׁם ב
3 Murder: (Spilling blood) Shefichat Damim שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים ג
4 Sexual transgressions: (Exposure of nakedness) (i.e. incest, adultery, homosexual acts and bestiality etc) Gilui Arayot גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת ד
5 Theft: (To rob, embezzle.) (Includes rape and abduction) Gezel גָּזֵל ה
6 Courts system: (Judgement, justice, and law etc.) Dinim דִּינִים ו
7 Eating a limb torn from a live animal: (Limb of the living.) Ever Min HaChai אֵבָר מִן הֶחָי ז

(pinky notes that # 6 is actually to create a court system to enforce these laws and the newly revised sanhedrin is working on that right now http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/90646)


What is the penalty for breaking these laws?


The Seven Noahide laws are general commandments with many details. Transgressing any one of them is considered such a breach in the natural order that the offender incurs the death penalty. Apart from a few exceptions, the death sentence for a Ben Noach is Sayif, death by the sword / decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see the Rambam's Hilchos Melachim 9:14).




Avodah Zarah - Idolatry - עבודה זרה A gentile who worships false gods is liable to the death penalty, provided he worships them in the regular form in which that particular deity is usually worshiped. A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment.

http://www.noahide.org/article.asp?Level=173&Parent=166



Christians should be aware that according to the rabbinic 'sages', we are 'idol worshippers'.
Worshipping Christ breaks the law against idolatry as He is considered a 'false god'.



Campaign to Abolish X-mas celebration by gentiles

". . . according to the known Jewish ruling that Christians are idol worshippers. (Likkutei Sichos 37:198)"

A gentile...is liable for the death penalty...if he has invented a religious holiday for himself...The general principle is we do not allow them to make new religious rituals and to make 'mitzvahs' for themselves by their own devices. Rather they may either become a Ger Tzeddek and accept all the Mitvahs; or he (the Noahide) should stand fast in his Torah (the seven Noahide Laws) without adding or diminishing...and if he does make some new 'mitzvah,' we lash him, punish him, and inform him that he is obligated with the death penalty for this..." (Rambam Mishne Torah—Hilchos Melachim 10:9)

"...it is however obvious that if it will be perceived by them (the nations), also the matter of the negation of ****uf, until they even have some recognition of the Unity of Hashem—that 'there is nothing else besides Him'; this will add both in their carefulness and meticulousness in fulfilling the seven Noahide Laws [with all of their ramifications!] and also in their aiding of Jewish people in all of their matters pertaining to Yiddishkeit and all of their needs in general..." (Likkutei Sichos 25: YudTes Kislev)

"Any person who has already worked successfully in this area should try to influence other Jews to do likewise. Resistance should not deter one when attempting to influence a further individual to accept upon himself the task of disseminating the Noahide Laws amongst the nations." (Hisvaduyos 5750 2:18-19)


http://www.public-action.com/x/nh-xmas1/ (http://www.public-action.com/x/nh-xmas1/)

daughter
Feb 6th 2008, 08:08 AM
Hi Fenris

This is a really useful thread... thank you!

A previous poster asked whether there was any reference in the Bible to people going to hell to be purged of their sins, and you said no. Where does this tradition derive from then? I'm familiar with it as an ex Catholic, but the only Jews I've known since university have been secular, so I hadn't realised that this was a belief in Judaism. I'd be interested to know where it comes from.

Also the annihilation suggested as Hitler's final punishment... is there anything to back this up? I know Christians who believe in the annihilation of the wicked... SDA's for example, so I presume you use the same scriptures?

Interesting comment about the death penalty for breaking the seven Noahic laws... I would be considered an idolator for believing Jesus is the Messiah, and the Son of God, wouldn't I?

But before anyone gets too het up about this one, Jews aren't famous for fatwas, pogroms or witch hunts, so I think we're safe!

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 12:57 PM
So in your belief, reconciliation back to God is a process... and I believe that by trusting in Jesus Christ I am reconciled back to God because He was the sinless Lamb who was sacrificed for my sins..something that I couldn't do because I have sin.Right, well we are of different faiths.


Question.
When Adam and Eve sinned they broke their relationship with God. I believe the skins that God clothed them in Genesis 3:21-"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them" was the first animal sacrifice taught to man for forgiveness of sin..Well, since Adam and Eve didn't bring any sacrifice it's hard to see how that could be so. As I stated above, in Judaism the sacrifice is a method of making the sinner think about their actions, not some act that magically removes sin.


When Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden of Eden the rest of their life was spent hoping that God would forgive them and allow them to be reconciled back to Him?When they were cast out of the garden they changed the entire way in which mankind perceives reality.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 01:00 PM
Which seven? I think I can guess most of them, but could you list them?A list:

Prohibition against idolatry
Prohibition against blasphemy
Prohibition against murder
Prohibition against theft
Prohibition against sexual immorality
Prohibition against eating the limb of a living animal
Establish courts of justice

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 01:04 PM
First, I want to thank you for starting this thread, you are providing great in site to us Christians and helping all of us understand each others beliefs better.You are quite welcome. I believe that a greater understanding of each other's faiths can only help in bringing us closer together.




Now with my question. You state the obligation, in the quote above, more or less. How do you know where more or less is? What in your bible tells you when you do enough? I ask because 613 laws seems like a formidable task to try to keep.
Well, all 613 do not apply to every single person and not all are in effect at any given time. Some apply only to men, or to women, or to Cohen-priests, or to non-Cohen-priests, or only in Israel, etc etc.

It IS formidable, no doubt about that. But let's look at it like this: God took my ancestors out of Egypt with great miracles. Had He not done so, we would be slaves to this very day. So every generation of Jews owes a great debt to God for His kindness to us. And so He can make difficult demands of us to repay that debt...

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 01:16 PM
These seven commandments or mitzvahs are the Noahide laws, which are not in the Bible but are in the babylonian talmud......ie.......laws created by the pharisees.We believe that the Pharisees didn't create anything. They merely codified oral law that was given to Moses at Sinai. You are free to believe what you like, of course.


Refrain from:

1 Idolatry: (Strange work - i.e. serving an idol) Avodah Zarah עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה א
2 Blasphemy - ‘Blessing’ the Divine Name: (Cursing G-d) Birchat (Kilelas) HaShem בִּרְכַּת הַשֵׁם ב
3 Murder: (Spilling blood) Shefichat Damim שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים ג
4 Sexual transgressions: (Exposure of nakedness) (i.e. incest, adultery, homosexual acts and bestiality etc) Gilui Arayot גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת ד
5 Theft: (To rob, embezzle.) (Includes rape and abduction) Gezel גָּזֵל ה
6 Courts system: (Judgement, justice, and law etc.) Dinim דִּינִים ו
7 Eating a limb torn from a live animal: (Limb of the living.) Ever Min HaChai אֵבָר מִן הֶחָי ז Good list.


(pinky notes that # 6 is actually to create a court system to enforce these laws and the newly revised sanhedrin is working on that right now http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/90646)
The newly revised Sanhedrin is a very contentious topic, worthy of its own thread. In brief: It's authority is accepted by almost no one. It is not a Sanhedrin, it is a gathering of rabbis.


What is the penalty for breaking these laws?


The Seven Noahide laws are general commandments with many details. Transgressing any one of them is considered such a breach in the natural order that the offender incurs the death penalty. Apart from a few exceptions, the death sentence for a Ben Noach is Sayif, death by the sword / decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see the Rambam's Hilchos Melachim 9:14).
I wasn't aware of this being the penalty and I can't read the site because your link is broken.




Avodah Zarah - Idolatry - עבודה זרה A gentile who worships false gods is liable to the death penalty, provided he worships them in the regular form in which that particular deity is usually worshiped. A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment. Right, so basically in Israel, with a Sanhedrin, one law applies to Jews and non-Jews about idolatry. What's the problem?





Christians should be aware that according to the rabbinic 'sages', we are 'idol worshippers'.
Worshipping Christ breaks the law against idolatry as He is considered a 'false god'.
Um, there is a fair amount of debate on the subject but the general consensus is that Christianity is not idolatry for a non-Jew. This is my opinion as well.

Now, how many Christians would say that Judaism/Islam/etc is not idolatry? How about YOU, pinky? What's your opinion?



Campaign to Abolish X-mas celebration by gentiles I don't know who this 'public action' site is, and the page source doesn't say. Suffice it to say there are alot of nuts out there. Why is it that when one Jew does something it is somehow tied to every Jew in the world?

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 01:30 PM
Hi Fenris

This is a really useful thread... thank you!You are quite welcome.


A previous poster asked whether there was any reference in the Bible to people going to hell to be purged of their sins, and you said no. Where does this tradition derive from then? I'm familiar with it as an ex Catholic, but the only Jews I've known since university have been secular, so I hadn't realised that this was a belief in Judaism. I'd be interested to know where it comes from.It's part of an oral tradition.

The Jewish bible contains scant references to the afterlife. It is believed that this was by design for two reasons.

First of all, the bible was given to the Jews after the exodus from Egypt. One thing that we know about the Egyptian beliefs is that they were obsessed with the afterlife. So the Jews had to make a clean break from those concepts and make their religion one of life, not death.

The other point is that by removing references to the afterlife, Judaism became a religion of the here and now. The primary focus became the idea of making this world a better place. Whatever lies after is for God to decide.


Also the annihilation suggested as Hitler's final punishment... is there anything to back this up? I know Christians who believe in the annihilation of the wicked... SDA's for example, so I presume you use the same scriptures?I don't know what scriptures they use, actually. As I say, with us it is more oral tradition.


Interesting comment about the death penalty for breaking the seven Noahic laws... I would be considered an idolator for believing Jesus is the Messiah, and the Son of God, wouldn't I? No, I don't think so. As I said, there is a fair amount of debate on the subject but the fine points of Christianity appear to be good enough to qualify as an acceptable religion for non-Jews. Certainly, if we look at the civilizing effect that Christianity has had on the world, I am certain that God approves of the actions of it's adherents. So I would assume likewise of it's beliefs.


But before anyone gets too het up about this one, Jews aren't famous for fatwas, pogroms or witch hunts, so I think we're safe!
Well, Jewish religious violence ended long ago. While the Romans besieged Jerusalem in 70AD, the Zealots were busy killing anyone inside the city who were not as radical as they were. Talk about fighting in a burning house. Anyway, the display of violence so disgusted the rabbis that they basically wrote out all violence for any purpose. After the Bar Kochba rebellion against Rome in the 120s, Jews didn't pick up any weapons as a group until the Warsaw Ghetto uprising against the Nazis.

karenoka27
Feb 6th 2008, 04:06 PM
Fenris, I feel like I am asking childish questions now that others have joined in and I don't even understand what they are asking. I appreciate your patience even more now!:D

Genesis 3:21-"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them."

What do you believe was the purpose of the skins...I mean where did they come from. If you agree that this was animal skin..then an animal had to die...why? I believe this was the first sacrifice taught to man by God. We see it again with Cain and Abel and they already understood offerings.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 04:18 PM
I thought you would know because you said you have read the talmud several times, and it is written in your talmud. Perhaps you overlooked it. ;)Um, bro, the Talmud comprises thousands upon thousands of pages.


"One additional element of greater severity is that violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noahide to capital punishment by decapitation. (Sanh. 57A)"
If you didn't read this in it's original language, please don't quote it. You have no idea if it even says this at all or what the context is.




The Re-established Jewish Sanhedrin (their official site)There are many fine points in Jewish law that make most religious Jews consider a modern-day Sanhedrin to be impossible right now. I do not recognize it's authority and neither do most religious Jews. Obviously you hold this body in higher esteem than I do. :lol:




However, these things ARE written in the babylonian talmud and other rabbinic literature. The most ardent believers and proponents of these teachings are the hassidic sects.

Um, until you or I read it in it's original language and context, what you posted is meaningless.

I'm trying to help people here learn a little bit more about Judaism, and you're trying to smear Judaism. If you have nothing constructive to add to this thread, I am respectfully asking you to stop posting in it.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 04:20 PM
Fenris, I feel like I am asking childish questions now that others have joined in and I don't even understand what they are asking. I appreciate your patience even more now!:D

Genesis 3:21-"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them."

What do you believe was the purpose of the skins...I mean where did they come from. If you agree that this was animal skin..then an animal had to die...why? I believe this was the first sacrifice taught to man by God. We see it again with Cain and Abel and they already understood offerings.You may feel free to believe that. The bible says nothing on the subject. But it looks like a stretch. I mean, if I wear a leather jacket, am I making a sacrifice?

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 07:52 PM
Anyone wanting to read some refutations of the lies about Jesus in the Talmud is welcome to go here: http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/jesusnarr.html

karenoka27
Feb 6th 2008, 08:30 PM
You may feel free to believe that. The bible says nothing on the subject. But it looks like a stretch. I mean, if I wear a leather jacket, am I making a sacrifice?

If the Bible says that the Lord God made them coats of skins, you know they didn't go to the mall to buy a leather jacket....and I'm not thinking they were banana skins either. Cain and Abel offered sacrifices, so at some point they were taught.
God covered them...
Genesis 3:7-"And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons."
Obviously the covering they covered themselves wasn't satisfactory.which in my teachings would be because we cannot make atonement for our own sins..God had to show them what would be acceptable and was very specific as to what kind of animals had to be sacrificed..and how it was to be done.

Also, I don't see God as wishy washy as to what sins He is ok with and what ones He isn't.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 08:37 PM
If the Bible says that the Lord God made them coats of skins, you know they didn't go to the mall to buy a leather jacket....and I'm not thinking they were banana skins either. Cain and Abel offered sacrifices, so at some point they were taught.
God covered them...
Genesis 3:7-"And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons."
Obviously the covering they covered themselves wasn't satisfactory.which in my teachings would be because we cannot make atonement for our own sins..God had to show them what would be acceptable and was very specific as to what kind of animals had to be sacrificed..and how it was to be done. Well, you're reading into it a lot. That doesn't make it wrong, but it doesn't make it right either.


Also, I don't see God as wishy washy as to what sins He is ok with and what ones He isn't.I didn't say that God was 'ok' with any sins. They all have to be paid for one way or the other.

RoadWarrior
Feb 6th 2008, 09:01 PM
Anyone wanting to read some refutations of the lies about Jesus in the Talmud is welcome to go here: http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/jesusnarr.html

Thanks Fenris.

I had encountered the Noahide teachings a few years ago. I decided at that time it must be some fringe groups. Do you have any information about them specifically?

Maybe it would help if you shared something with us about the different "denominations" of Judaism in today's world.

RoadWarrior
Feb 6th 2008, 09:05 PM
Fenris, I feel like I am asking childish questions now that others have joined in and I don't even understand what they are asking. I appreciate your patience even more now!:D

Genesis 3:21-"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them."

What do you believe was the purpose of the skins...I mean where did they come from. If you agree that this was animal skin..then an animal had to die...why? I believe this was the first sacrifice taught to man by God. We see it again with Cain and Abel and they already understood offerings.

I also hope this question doesn't get lost ...

Would you be so kind as to speak about this, what it means to the Jew of today? Genesis always gets people going in all directions, it seems. I'd like to know what is understood about the offerings of Cain and Abel.

Are you a rabbi? :D We certainly are asking you a lot of questions!

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 09:44 PM
Thanks Fenris.

I had encountered the Noahide teachings a few years ago. I decided at that time it must be some fringe groups. Do you have any information about them specifically?No, I don't think they have any sort of formal organization.


Maybe it would help if you shared something with us about the different "denominations" of Judaism in today's world.
Yeah, that would actually be a good topic. :idea:

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 09:52 PM
Would you be so kind as to speak about this, what it means to the Jew of today? Genesis always gets people going in all directions, it seems. I'd like to know what is understood about the offerings of Cain and Abel.Well, Abel's was considered superior because he "brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. "

If you're asking about sacrifice in general, it is a way to come close to God but we can't do it today because we have no temple and no altar.


Are you a rabbi? :D We certainly are asking you a lot of questions!No, but I consider it very flattering that you asked me that question. :hug:

daughter
Feb 6th 2008, 10:53 PM
Well, technically you are acting as a rabbi, you're teaching us a lot! Can I ask, do you speak Hebrew? I'm learning Hebrew at the moment, and am painstakingly working my way through the Talmud. If I get really seriously stuck, am I okay to ask you for help?

karenoka27
Feb 6th 2008, 11:01 PM
Fenris, I just wanted to apologize...I shouldn't have said that you were insinuating that God was ok with some sins..


I am trying to understand the whole sacrifice thing though..and you mentioned that you can't sacrifice today because there is no temple or altar..wouldn't you wonder why if God required these things are they no longer here? Unless.................the final sacrifice has already been offered and there is no need for any more?......

Kahtar
Feb 7th 2008, 04:09 AM
Hey Fenris, is there an English version of Talmid or Mishnah that you would recommend?

Fenris
Feb 7th 2008, 01:51 PM
Well, technically you are acting as a rabbi, you're teaching us a lot! Thank you.:) I like to teach.


Can I ask, do you speak Hebrew? I'm learning Hebrew at the moment, and am painstakingly working my way through the Talmud. If I get really seriously stuck, am I okay to ask you for help?I can read it fluently, but I don't speak it that well. Of course, I'll help you the best that I can...

When you say you're working through the Talmud, what do you mean? The Mishna part of the Talmud is written in Hebrew, but the Gemara part is actually in Aramaic. Unless you're doing the Jerusalem Talmud, of course...

Fenris
Feb 7th 2008, 01:55 PM
Fenris, I just wanted to apologize...I shouldn't have said that you were insinuating that God was ok with some sins..A simple miscommunication. No need to apologize.



I am trying to understand the whole sacrifice thing though..and you mentioned that you can't sacrifice today because there is no temple or altar..wouldn't you wonder why if God required these things are they no longer here? Unless.................the final sacrifice has already been offered and there is no need for any more?......
That's one way to look at it I suppose. :hmm:

Of course, the Jewish perspective is that God doesn't want sacrifice from us right now. That's why He created the conditions where we can't bring one. This was foreseen, by the way- Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall sit solitary many days without king, and without prince, and without sacrifice, and without pillar, and without ephod or teraphim;

Fenris
Feb 7th 2008, 01:59 PM
Hey Fenris, is there an English version of Talmid or Mishnah that you would recommend?
The Schottenstein Edition is pretty good. But no translation includes the voluminous commentaries which are sometimes necessary to gain a full understanding. Even I have problems with complete comprehension :lol:

Kahtar
Feb 7th 2008, 02:03 PM
The Schottenstein Edition is pretty good. But no translation includes the voluminous commentaries which are sometimes necessary to gain a full understanding. Even I have problems with complete comprehension :lol::lol:I can understand that! I have a computer version of the Babylonian Talmud translated by Michael L. Rodkinson. Any thoughts on it? I was also looking at getting the Mishnah by Herbert Danby, which I think is a 'trimmed down' version. Only seven volumes.

Fenris
Feb 7th 2008, 02:33 PM
:lol:I can understand that! I have a computer version of the Babylonian Talmud translated by Michael L. Rodkinson. Any thoughts on it?I'm not familiar with it, to be honest.


I was also looking at getting the Mishnah by Herbert Danby, which I think is a 'trimmed down' version. Only seven volumes.
Well, the Mishna itself is only six (looong) books.

Kahtar
Feb 7th 2008, 03:02 PM
I'm not familiar with it, to be honest.

Well, the Mishna itself is only six (looong) books.Guess it depends on waht you get. The Mishnayot Kehati is 21 volumes. Danby has some good reviews so I may go with that.

Do you own the Schottenstein? $2200 for that set!



But I guess this is a bit off topic. Sorry about that.........:blush:

Fenris
Feb 7th 2008, 03:07 PM
Do you own the Schottenstein? $2200 for that set!
No, I just have a couple. I have to be honest, when I read the translated Talmud it helps that I studied it in school. There's a certain ebb and flow to the text that I can't exactly describe.



But I guess this is a bit off topic. Sorry about that.........:blush:
Shh, it will be our secret. :kiss:

tgallison
Feb 8th 2008, 12:59 AM
No, the Jewish bible does not mention the afterlife at all.

Fenris Greetings

I remember you stating something about eleven months, but I don't remember the details. Would you mind refreshing my memory.

respectfully, terrell

Fenris
Feb 8th 2008, 10:52 AM
Greetings.

Since virtually no one is without sin, misdeeds must be cleansed in the afterlife. To that end, most people spend some amount of time in hell after their death. For normal people, the belief goes, that time period does not exceed 11 months.

napsnsnacks
Feb 8th 2008, 07:07 PM
There is only by one method that all people can receive atonement.

Unfortunately, most religious Jews outside of Christianity consider the following to be heresy...

HEB 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
HEB 7:23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
HEB 7:24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
HEB 7:25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
HEB 7:26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
HEB 7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
HEB 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
HEB 8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
HEB 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
HEB 8:3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
HEB 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
HEB 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
HEB 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
HEB 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
HEB 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
HEB 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
HEB 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
HEB 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
HEB 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
HEB 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
HEB 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
HEB 9:2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
HEB 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
HEB 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
HEB 9:5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
HEB 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
HEB 9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
HEB 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
HEB 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
HEB 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
HEB 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
HEB 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
HEB 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
HEB 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
HEB 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
HEB 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
HEB 9:17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
HEB 9:18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
HEB 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
HEB 9:20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
HEB 9:21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
HEB 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
HEB 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
HEB 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
HEB 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
HEB 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
HEB 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
HEB 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
HEB 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
HEB 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
HEB 10:3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
HEB 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
HEB 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
HEB 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
HEB 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
HEB 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
HEB 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
HEB 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
HEB 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
HEB 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
HEB 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
HEB 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
HEB 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
HEB 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
HEB 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
HEB 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
HEB 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
HEB 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
HEB 10:21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
HEB 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
HEB 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
HEB 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
HEB 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
HEB 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
HEB 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
HEB 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
HEB 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

karenoka27
Feb 8th 2008, 07:21 PM
Greetings.

Since virtually no one is without sin, misdeeds must be cleansed in the afterlife. To that end, most people spend some amount of time in hell after their death. For normal people, the belief goes, that time period does not exceed 11 months.

I have such a hard time with this. You say you can't back it up with Scripture yet you say it is truth. 11 months is allowed for hell and no more...what if you were really bad?

I need to understand something. Aren't the Jews God's chosen people in the OT? So would all Jews go to heaven the way you believe?

You say that no one is without sin, and then you said that "most" people spend some time in hell. If no one is without sin and I agree, then why don't all people have to spend time in hell according to what you believe.
Who becomes righteous enough to enter into heaven before they die?

I have one more question...is the belief of all Jews? I have never studied this before so I don't know if this is a silly question...

Fenris
Feb 10th 2008, 09:33 PM
There is only by one method that all people can receive atonement.

Unfortunately, most religious Jews outside of Christianity consider the following to be heresy...

Well, the book you're quoting isn't in our bible.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2008, 09:42 PM
I have such a hard time with this. You say you can't back it up with Scripture yet you say it is truth. 11 months is allowed for hell and no more...what if you were really bad? I don't know, God is just and fair. Everyone gets what they deserve.


I need to understand something. Aren't the Jews God's chosen people in the OT? So would all Jews go to heaven the way you believe?No, of course not. One's lineage or beliefs do not determine where they go in the afterlife; their actions determine where they go.

God did not choose Jews to go to heaven. Where would the fairness in that be?

Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, former Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Great Britain, describes chosenness in this way:

Yes, I do believe that the chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its millennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people - and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual - is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parliamentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose.



You say that no one is without sin, and then you said that "most" people spend some time in hell. If no one is without sin and I agree, then why don't all people have to spend time in hell according to what you believe.
Who becomes righteous enough to enter into heaven before they die?Elijah the prophet, for one.




I have one more question...is the belief of all Jews? I have never studied this before so I don't know if this is a silly question...
Religious Jews, yes.

karenoka27
Feb 10th 2008, 09:53 PM
I knew you were going to say Elijah!:D

If all of us have been called for a different purpose on this earth..then what is the real purpose? The way I have always understood the Jews who were chosen by God to be a peculiar people..didn't really see that they were to be pioneers but that they alone were the chosen ones. Where do you see the Jews today inviting the world to be a part of God's people?
I do however see the Gentiles who have been adopted into the family of God inviting people to come to know Him.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2008, 10:14 PM
I knew you were going to say Elijah!:DThen why did you ask? :lol:


If all of us have been called for a different purpose on this earth..then what is the real purpose? The purpose it to make the world a place for God to dwell. And we all play a part in reaching that outcome.


The way I have always understood the Jews who were chosen by God to be a peculiar people..didn't really see that they were to be pioneers but that they alone were the chosen onesThat's fine but it isn't the Jewish perspective. There is a saying in the Talmud: "A gentile who studies the bible is better than an ignorant High Priest". Judaism is more concerned with what you do that with who you are.


Where do you see the Jews today inviting the world to be a part of God's people?God doesn't want everyone to be Jewish. He wants everyone to do their part in advancing His plans. The Jews have a certain role and so does every other people.


I do however see the Gentiles who have been adopted into the family of God inviting people to come to know Him.

Why does everyone want to be Jewish without being Jewish? :hmm:

RoadWarrior
Feb 10th 2008, 10:45 PM
...

Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, former Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Great Britain, describes chosenness in this way:

Yes, I do believe that the chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its millennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people - and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual - is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parliamentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose.

...

Thanks for the quote, Fenris. I see that Rabbi Jakobovits is of Reform Judaism. His statements therefore reflect that branch of Judaism, and might differ perhaps from the positions held by other branches. I believe the statement to be valid, however, I think the Jews have given the world much more than religion and morality.

Religion exists in many cultures, but Judaism introduced the concept of One God, in a sea of peoples worshipping a multitude of gods. Judaism introduced the concept of law and order in a world of chaos. Judasim introduced the concept of justice and righteousness tempered by mercy. Perhaps those are all included in "religion and morality."

Some (many?) of us see Christianity as a flowering of the root of Judaism. Therefore Christianity is built on the foundation of the Jewish faith. Jesus was born into a Jewish family, lived in a Jewish community, and called Jewish men to be His disciples. Without Judaism, Christianity would not have existed.

If the purpose of Judaism was to pioneer religion and morality, then the purpose of Christianity must be to further that same goal. Our commandments as Christians are based on the laws (10 commandments) of Judaism - Love God, love your neighbor, love one another. And our mission (purpose) is to go into all the world and tell people the gospel, making disciples of those who believe.

What the Jews have given to us, wrapped up in a box, has been opened and is there to be shared with everyone.

I am grateful.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2008, 10:58 PM
Thanks for the quote, Fenris. I see that Rabbi Jakobovits is of Reform Judaism. His statements therefore reflect that branch of Judaism, and might differ perhaps from the positions held by other branches. I believe the statement to be valid, however, I think the Jews have given the world much more than religion and morality.

Religion exists in many cultures, but Judaism introduced the concept of One God, in a sea of peoples worshipping a multitude of gods. Judaism introduced the concept of law and order in a world of chaos. Judasim introduced the concept of justice and righteousness tempered by mercy. Perhaps those are all included in "religion and morality." Well, we transmitted God's word. It was the power of the idea that did the rest.



Some (many?) of us see Christianity as a flowering of the root of Judaism. Therefore Christianity is built on the foundation of the Jewish faith. Jesus was born into a Jewish family, lived in a Jewish community, and called Jewish men to be His disciples.
And Christianity has done a wonderful job of transmitting the Jewish scriptures and morals to the world at large. I am certain that was part of God's plan.

Without Judaism, Christianity would not have existed.Certainly true.


If the purpose of Judaism was to pioneer religion and morality, then the purpose of Christianity must be to further that same goal. Our commandments as Christians are based on the laws (10 commandments) of Judaism - Love God, love your neighbor, love one another. And our mission (purpose) is to go into all the world and tell people the gospel, making disciples of those who believe.Yes, I agree.


What the Jews have given to us, wrapped up in a box, has been opened and is there to be shared with everyone.

I am grateful.


One of the things I love about the American Christian community is that it contains members who feel a closeness and kinship with the Jews.

stillforgiven
Feb 11th 2008, 05:22 PM
One of the things I love about the American Christian community is that it contains members who feel a closeness and kinship with the Jews.

Why do you suppose this is pecular to us? Or I guess I'm asking, is the rest of the current world's Christians anti-Jew or just simply not thinking about them in any form at all?

Even though I wasn't raised in church, my dad has always taught me that Jesus was a Jew, and that Christianity came from the Jews, and to never speak ill of them no matter what others might try to say.

Fenris
Feb 11th 2008, 06:01 PM
Why do you suppose this is pecular to us? Or I guess I'm asking, is the rest of the current world's Christians anti-Jew or just simply not thinking about them in any form at all? My understanding is that non-American Christians on the whole have a neutral to negative view of Jews. American Christians generally have a positive view of Jews. Why this should be is hard to say, but as a phenomena it definitely exists.


Even though I wasn't raised in church, my dad has always taught me that Jesus was a Jew, and that Christianity came from the Jews, and to never speak ill of them no matter what others might try to say.That's beautiful. It pleases me to hear that.

RoadWarrior
Feb 11th 2008, 08:31 PM
My understanding is that non-American Christians on the whole have a neutral to negative view of Jews. American Christians generally have a positive view of Jews. Why this should be is hard to say, but as a phenomena it definitely exists.


Fenris, do you know Rabbi Daniel Lapin, or rather do you know about him? I learned about him from an ad that popped up on this board, and have listened to a few of his lectures via podcast (iTunes). He frequently speaks in a Christian church apparently. He talked in one of his lectures about the frequency of Jewish names being used in this country for towns, etc. He has a very interesting perspective on the relationship between Jews and Christians in America.

Oh, I wanted to add this, I met the nicest lady on an airplane once and we had a fruitful conversation. She seemed quite surprised that I as a Christian was "so nice" to her, a Jew. She was of the Reformed group. I wished I could have known her more than just that brief encounter.

Fenris
Feb 11th 2008, 08:53 PM
Fenris, do you know Rabbi Daniel Lapin, or rather do you know about him? I learned about him from an ad that popped up on this board, and have listened to a few of his lectures via podcast (iTunes). He frequently speaks in a Christian church apparently. He talked in one of his lectures about the frequency of Jewish names being used in this country for towns, etc. He has a very interesting perspective on the relationship between Jews and Christians in America.I know of him. I have read very little of his work. He sounds like someone I should be researching.


Oh, I wanted to add this, I met the nicest lady on an airplane once and we had a fruitful conversation. She seemed quite surprised that I as a Christian was "so nice" to her, a Jew. She was of the Reformed group. I wished I could have known her more than just that brief encounter.Well, a lot of Jews here still view Christians as though they were of the European sort. That is a shame, because there is fertile ground for meaningful relationship here.

JesusisGod
Feb 12th 2008, 01:17 PM
Hi Fenris.
Hebrews 9 talks about how the High Priest would enter the holy place once a year to offer blood for the sins of the people and relates this act as a figure of Jesus entering Heaven to atone for our sins. He.9:24-26. The writer states,

"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission." He.9:22

Comments?

karenoka27
Feb 12th 2008, 01:46 PM
hi Fenris!
Have you ever been to Israel? I was just wondering what the Jews over thought of all of us Christians going over there.
I have a question. You shared a verse about why you don't offer sacrifices at this time..and I can't remember which verse it was..could you share that again?

Fenris
Feb 12th 2008, 02:03 PM
Hi Fenris.
Hebrews 9 talks about how the High Priest would enter the holy place once a year to offer blood for the sins of the people and relates this act as a figure of Jesus entering Heaven to atone for our sins. He.9:24-26. The writer states,

"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission." He.9:22

Comments?Ah.

Well, on Yom Kippur the High Priest did indeed enter the Holy of Holies and perform a ritual. But that was only one possible way of achieving atonement.

The phrase "without shedding of blood there is no remission" is not a Jewish concept.

Fenris
Feb 12th 2008, 02:07 PM
hi Fenris!
Have you ever been to Israel? I was just wondering what the Jews over thought of all of us Christians going over there.I have been there and will be there again for Passover this year, God willing. Israelis don't mind Christians touring their country, provided that no one is proselytizing them.


I have a question. You shared a verse about why you don't offer sacrifices at this time..and I can't remember which verse it was..could you share that again?
I didn't post a phrase saying why it isn't done, only that it was prophesized to happen. Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king, and without prince, and without sacrifice, and without pillar, and without ephod or teraphim...

karenoka27
Feb 12th 2008, 02:12 PM
I would love to go to Israel one day...and I would be very polite;)

thank you for that verse...I was thinking about that the other day..."many days without a king.."
what king or is there a king that the Jews are waiting for? There are no Kings over Israel at this time so I was wondering how would a King suddenly come on the scene?

Also, what you just shared about the shedding of blood..it wasn't about that. Ok as you know I use the new testament also and we read in Hebrews 9:22-"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission."

This verse does refer to the the law and the blood. What was the purpose of killing an animal if it wasn't the shedding of blood?
Leviticuas 17:11-"For the life of the flesh is in the blood:..."

Fenris
Feb 12th 2008, 02:36 PM
I would love to go to Israel one day...and I would be very polite;)You would find it to be a lovely country.
My wife's former boss is Baptist and he went to Israel with a Christian group. They visited all the Christian holy sites and many of the Jewish ones. All in all, they had a great time.


thank you for that verse...I was thinking about that the other day..."many days without a king.."
what king or is there a king that the Jews are waiting for? There are no Kings over Israel at this time so I was wondering how would a King suddenly come on the scene? Well, there are many Jews alive today who can trace their lineage to king David. There is the problem of having a Sanhedrin to anoint them, of course. :lol:

Obviously the kingship will be restored in the messianic era.


Also, what you just shared about the shedding of blood..it wasn't about that. Ok as you know I use the new testament also and we read in Hebrews 9:22-"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission."

This verse does refer to the the law and the blood. What was the purpose of killing an animal if it wasn't the shedding of blood?
Leviticuas 17:11-"For the life of the flesh is in the blood:..."

Ok, let's look at the verse in context:

Leviticus 17:10 And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. [11] For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul. [12] Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood,neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.

So all it's really saying is that blood makes atonement, so don't eat it. That's it.

It doesn't say that blood is the only way to atone, and I have posted numerous verses showing alternate methods at the start of this thread.

JesusisGod
Feb 12th 2008, 03:47 PM
Hi Fenris.
At the beginning of your thread, you cited certain passages of scripture to disprove the teaching that blood sacrifice is required for the forgiveness of sins.

Asking for forgiveness

"Then the LORD said, 'I do forgive, just as you have asked.'"
Numbers 14:20
I believe your interpretation of Nu.14:20 is incorrect. God answered Moses according to how he asked. How did Moses ask? According to Gods own word. Nu.14:17. And what was Gods word on the matter?

The Lord is longsuffering and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing [the guilty]….Nu.14:18

Here is Gods decision.

Surely they shall not see the land which I swore to their fathers…Nu.14:23

God answered Moses petition by not forgiving them.


Obedience to God

1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams.
This passage doesn’t disprove that blood is needed for the cleansing of sin. Saul was instructed to annihilate Amalek. 1 Sa.15:3. His decision to offer an improper sacrifice to God (1 Sa.15:15) does not in any way infer that blood isn’t needed to remove sin. Samuels instruction that God takes greater delight in those who obey Him includes His commandments of offering sacrifice properly.

Instead of going through every objection on your list to the necessity of blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, I would like to point out that every one of them are fulfilled in Jesus, even though He Himself had no need of forgiveness.

karenoka27
Feb 12th 2008, 03:53 PM
I feel as though you are so limited...because you can take a verse as you have from Leviticus and say that it only means don't eat it, but I take a verse from the NT and it tells me that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. And the NT says that it is that way according to the law.

So if there is no way to personally atone for your sins at this point since there is no sacrifice at this time because there is no king..then you all have to go to hell as you have shared, to be cleansed of sin..am I saying this correctly?

May I remind you how much I love what a patient person you are?:hug:

Fenris
Feb 12th 2008, 04:53 PM
Instead of going through every objection on your list to the necessity of blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, I would like to point out that every one of them are fulfilled in Jesus, even though He Himself had no need of forgiveness.

Well, they were only fulfilled if you believe that they were.

In any case, Jews see that fulfillment as unnecessary since we are capable of being forgiven without sacrifice.

Fenris
Feb 12th 2008, 04:56 PM
I feel as though you are so limited...because you can take a verse as you have from Leviticus and say that it only means don't eat it, but I take a verse from the NT and it tells me that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. And the NT says that it is that way according to the law.Well, you believe that the NT is God's word and I don't. So obviously you're going to see that verse in Hebrews as binding and significant, and I am not.


So if there is no way to personally atone for your sins at this point since there is no sacrifice at this time because there is no king..then you all have to go to hell as you have shared, to be cleansed of sin..am I saying this correctly?No. As I started this thread, there are plenty of ways to be forgiven without sacrifice. And sacrifice wasn't even capable of forgiving every sin.


May I remind you how much I love what a patient person you are?:hug:
Well, I like to teach and share ideas. :)

JesusisGod
Feb 12th 2008, 11:06 PM
Hi Fenris.

Well, they were only fulfilled if you believe that they were.

Not to be impolite, but I find your statement above to be illogical. People believe all kinds of things that aren't true. Belief that Jesus fulfilled all of His Fathers requirements wouldn't mean that he did. The Bible testifies that he did.

...Adonai laid on him the guilt of us all.....for the crimes of my people he was beaten....it pleased Adonai....to present him as an offering...Adonais desire will be accomplished...it is for their sins that he suffers....Therefore I will assign him a share with the great...he will divide the spoil with the mighty, for having exposed himself to death....while actually bearing the sin of many and interceding for the offenders. [Isaiah 53:6,8,10-12. Complete Jewish Bible by David H. Stern]

Question: Why would God make someone an offering for the sins of others?

JesusisGod
Feb 13th 2008, 12:27 PM
The phrase "without shedding of blood there is no remission" is not a Jewish concept.
If it's an apparent Christian teaching found in the Bible, it can only be a Jewish concept.

Fenris
Feb 13th 2008, 01:51 PM
Hi Fenris.

Not to be impolite, but I find your statement above to be illogical. People believe all kinds of things that aren't true. Belief that Jesus fulfilled all of His Fathers requirements wouldn't mean that he did. The Bible testifies that he did. Your bible may say that. Mine doesn't.


...Adonai laid on him the guilt of us all.....for the crimes of my people he was beaten....it pleased Adonai....to present him as an offering...Adonais desire will be accomplished...it is for their sins that he suffers....Therefore I will assign him a share with the great...he will divide the spoil with the mighty, for having exposed himself to death....while actually bearing the sin of many and interceding for the offenders. [Isaiah 53:6,8,10-12. Complete Jewish Bible by David H. Stern]This refers to the Jewish people, according to our understanding. See my lengthy post on the subject in page 2 of this thread: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=115439


Question: Why would God make someone an offering for the sins of others?
He wouldn't and He didn't.

stillforgiven
Feb 13th 2008, 06:27 PM
...Rabbi Daniel Lapin..he has a very interesting perspective on the relationship between Jews and Christians in America.

I saw him on TV a few days ago, and he was very interesting to listen to.


I have been there and will be there again for Passover this year, God willing. Israelis don't mind Christians touring their country, provided that no one is proselytizing them.

I hope you get to go for Passover. I was in Israel a few months ago, and I absolutely love the country, now more than ever. I hope I can go back someday and see some of the sites at a slower pace than I did with the tour group. As for proselytizing, it was done by some, as is to be expected in a group of Christians. :D Our tour guide is a Jew married to a Christian, and he apparently catches it from her too from time to time. ;) As for the people, pretty much, if you respect them, they respect you.

Did I mention that I want to go back? :)

Fenris
Feb 13th 2008, 06:38 PM
Did I mention that I want to go back? :)
It is a very spiritually blessed country. :)

karenoka27
Feb 13th 2008, 10:29 PM
Hi Fenris...no question right now...just wanted to stop in and say hello...:)

Fenris
Feb 13th 2008, 10:32 PM
Well hello yourself.

Have a blessed day. :)

JesusisGod
Feb 14th 2008, 12:12 AM
Hi Fenris.

Jews and Christians read through the bible in a much different manner. The bible was given to everyone, but that doesn't mean that just anyone can sit down and come up with an analysis of the bible and be correct. Someone has to be the authority who determines what is and isn't within the bounds of interpretation on biblical text. In Christianity, I see people all the time who sit down and reason out some verses, come up with the conclusion that it points to Jesus, and are satisfied with the results. The problem with that (from the Jewish perspective) is that said interpretation is based on no precedent; it's just something a single individual came up with, based on their pre-existing religious beliefs.
This isn’t true in the case of the first “Christians”, because the first believers in Jesus were Jews, whose pre-existing religious beliefs were founded upon Torah. Of those people, none of them had any real conception that Messiah was going to die. We also have the testimony of one Jew, a Pharisee no less, who condoned the murder of Jesus’ followers before he came to another understanding of his own religion.

I have partly looked at your interpretation of Is.53.

The speaker in 53:1 is the nations and kings in the previous verse.
I think you would be hard pressed to find any Rabbi before Jesus came who believed this. I’m fairly certain that every Rabbi prior to Jesus believed Is.53 is in the 1st person with Isaiah as the speaker and that the suffering servant is Messiah. Why do you think the Rabbis view of Isaiah 53 changed approximately 200 years after Jesus came?


He wouldn't and He didn't.
God never commanded the lives of sheep for the sins of the Jews?

I have to look at the rest of your interpretation of Is.53. I'll get back to you.

Fenris
Feb 14th 2008, 01:50 PM
This isn’t true in the case of the first “Christians”, because the first believers in Jesus were Jews, whose pre-existing religious beliefs were founded upon Torah. Of those people, none of them had any real conception that Messiah was going to die.Uh, that's true but I don't follow where you're going with this.


We also have the testimony of one Jew, a Pharisee no less, who condoned the murder of Jesus’ followers before he came to another understanding of his own religion.
Can you please relate the facts to me?



I have partly looked at your interpretation of Is.53.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any Rabbi before Jesus came who believed this. I’m fairly certain that every Rabbi prior to Jesus believed Is.53 is in the 1st person with Isaiah as the speaker and that the suffering servant is Messiah. What makes you 'fairly certain' that Jews prior to Jesus believed that this referred to the messiah?


Why do you think the Rabbis view of Isaiah 53 changed approximately 200 years after Jesus came? How do you know this?



God never commanded the lives of sheep for the sins of the Jews? Sacrifice was part of the atonement process. It wasn't a magical act that by itself removed sin.


I have to look at the rest of your interpretation of Is.53. I'll get back to you.

Yes, please do.

JesusisGod
Feb 14th 2008, 09:33 PM
Hi Fenris.

Uh, that's true but I don't follow where you're going with this.

Where I'm going with this is that your statement, "Christians and Jews read through the Bible in a much different manner" isn't true when it comes to the Bible itself. You act as if the "Christian" interpretation of the scriptures was dreamed up by a roving band of gentiles :). But as I said, the people who penned what we commonly call the NT were all Jews. Example:

Is.53:1 and Jn.12:38/Ro.10:16, Is.53:4-5 and Mt.8:17, Is.53:7 and Ac.8:32, Is.53:12 and Mk.15:28

Therefore, my interpretation of Torah is solely-completely-totally Jewish in nature.


Can you please relate the facts to me.
More than happy to.

Paul was a Pharisee. Phil.3:5
He persecuted Jesus followers. Ac.26:9-11
His initial meeting with Messiah is recorded in Ac.9
His former way of thinking was ignorant 1 Ti.1:13
His new understanding of Torah was taught to him by Messiah. Ga.1:11-12

In fact, Jesus did this for others as well.

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself. Lk.24:27


What makes you 'fairly certain' that Jews prior to Jesus believed that this referred to the messiah?
Because the oral law which predates the birth of Messiah was converted into the Talmud, where the Teachers viewed Is.53 as speaking of Messiah:
"Is this not Messiah, the son of Joseph, who was slain?" Suka 52

The ancient Rabbis couldn't understand the texts which speak of Messiah the King and also suffering servant, so they invented an interpretation where there were two Messiahs, Messiah ben David (the King) and Messiah ben Joseph (suffering), named after Jacobs son.


How do you know this?
It's your history, not mine.


Sacrifice was part of the atonement process. It wasn't a magical act that by itself removed sin.
I never said atoning sacrifice was a magic act. Your assertion that God never used anyone to atone for the sins of others is contrary to Torah and that is the interpretation of your ancestors, not mine.

For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. 1 Co.5:7

Fenris
Feb 14th 2008, 10:44 PM
Hi Fenris.Hello.


Where I'm going with this is that your statement, "Christians and Jews read through the Bible in a much different manner" isn't true when it comes to the Bible itself. You act as if the "Christian" interpretation of the scriptures was dreamed up by a roving band of gentiles :). But as I said, the people who penned what we commonly call the NT were all Jews. Example:

Is.53:1 and Jn.12:38/Ro.10:16, Is.53:4-5 and Mt.8:17, Is.53:7 and Ac.8:32, Is.53:12 and Mk.15:28

Therefore, my interpretation of Torah is solely-completely-totally Jewish in nature.Hmm. Not all of the NT authors are even known, so it's difficult to prove that they were Jews.

In any case, how Jews look at the bible is quite different from the way that Christians do. Just because (as you contend) some Jews in the first century saw the bible differently does not make that outlook Jewish in origin; their viewpoint would have been quite unusual by Jews of that, or any other, time.

It's like saying that all Jews are communists because one Jew wrote The Communist Manifesto.





Paul was a Pharisee. Phil.3:5 Well, he claims to be one. Not quite the same thing.


He persecuted Jesus followers. Ac.26:9-11Pharisees were not in power to have persecuted anybody. Saducees where. He admits to be working for the High Priest, who was known to be a Roman-appointed Saducee.


His initial meeting with Messiah is recorded in Ac.9Right, the vision.


His former way of thinking was ignorant 1 Ti.1:13
His new understanding of Torah was taught to him by Messiah. Ga.1:11-12Right. Which goes to show that Jews did not read the bible in the same manner that Christians do. Until Jesus taught him, he read the bible a a Jew. After Jesus taught him, he read the bible a a Christian. Thanks for proving my point!



Because the oral law which predates the birth of Messiah was converted into the Talmud, where the Teachers viewed Is.53 as speaking of Messiah:
"Is this not Messiah, the son of Joseph, who was slain?" Suka 52Well, this is Aggadita, not Halacha. It's a sermon. But if you want to drag in the whole Messiah from Joseph, you have to read the whole thing: It's messiah from the tribe of Joseph, not son of Joseph. Jesus was from Judah, I thought. And he'll be killed in battle, not slain and crucified.


The ancient Rabbis couldn't understand the texts which speak of Messiah the King and also suffering servant, so they invented an interpretation where there were two Messiahs, Messiah ben David (the King) and Messiah ben Joseph (suffering), named after Jacobs son.Even if what you say is true, which I disproved above, you haven't demonstrated a nexus to Isaiah 53.



It's your history, not mine.So it is.

Do you think you know it better than I do?



I never said atoning sacrifice was a magic act. Your assertion that God never used anyone to atone for the sins of others is contrary to Torah and that is the interpretation of your ancestors, not mine.Really? Deuteronomy 24:16 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.

You'll have to provide a counterexample.



For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. 1 Co.5:7The passover sacrifice was not a sin sacrifice. Just FYI.

JesusisGod
Feb 16th 2008, 01:44 AM
Hi Fenris.

Hmm. Not all of the NT authors are even known, so it's difficult to prove that they were Jews.
If you want to question the authenticity of the NT, we can throw out every other ancient body of lit as well, including Moses. (Of course, yours truly does believe Moses writings because he was affirmed by Jesus.) :hug:


In any case, how Jews look at the bible is quite different from the way that Christians do. Just because (as you contend) some Jews in the first century saw the bible differently does not make that outlook Jewish in origin; their viewpoint would have been quite unusual by Jews of that, or any other, time.
What you say would be true if the prophets didn't speak to us about Jesus.


It's like saying that all Jews are communists because one Jew wrote The Communist Manifesto.
Or like saying that all Jews believe Is.53 is about Israel because Rashi said so.


Well, he claims to be one. Not quite the same thing.
I have a suspicion that in your opinion he could have been a gentile named George.


Right. Which goes to show that Jews did not read the bible in the same manner that Christians do. Until Jesus taught him, he read the bible a a Jew. After Jesus taught him, he read the bible a a Christian. Thanks for proving my point!
I would like to pick your brain, if you would allow. How do you see the followiing.

He said, go and tell this people, keep on listening, but do not perceive. Keep on looking, but do not understand. Is.6:9

For the Lord has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep. He has shut your eyes, the prophets and covered your heads, the seers. The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate saying, Please read this, he will say, I cannot, for it is sealed. Is.29:10-11


Well, this is Aggadita, not Halacha. It's a sermon.
It doesn't matter my friend. I gave you evidence that the sages who lived long before Rashi believed Is.53 spoke of Messiah. (Btw, it has been said that Rashi once believed Messiah to be the focus of Is.53 also. Wonder what changed his mind?)


But if you want to drag in the whole Messiah from Joseph, you have to read the whole thing: It's messiah from the tribe of Joseph, not son of Joseph. Jesus was from Judah, I thought. And he'll be killed in battle, not slain and crucified.
Jesus is from Judah and it's not necessary to bring the Messiah from Joseph idea into the mix, because even though some ancients correctly understood Is.53 to speak of Messiah, they wrongfully thought He must be two people. I'm not agreeing with the "killed in battle" teaching. That was their idea.


Even if what you say is true, which I disproved above, you haven't demonstrated a nexus to Isaiah 53.
Can't see what you've disproved. You asked how I knew the Rabbis before Rashi believed Messiah would suffer and I gave it to you. My proof was met with, "Well, this is aggadita...." But I can see one way in which you're right, because the knowledge that Messiah would suffer and die wasn't plain to Jesus own disciples.


So it is.

Do you think you know it better than I do?

I have much to learn. Can you be taught as well?


Really?
Yes, really. The Apostles come from your heritage, not mine. You seem amazed by this.


Deuteronomy 24:16 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.

You'll have to provide a counterexample.
There is no counter example to judgement without mercy. What you've cited isn't what we've been talking about, is it? What we are discussing is substitutionary sacrifice, specifically what Torah says of it. De.24:16 is about capital punishment. It is also true of Gods final judgement, but this is where God in mercy allows for atonement through blood sacrifice.
The innocent in place of the guilty.

You will slaughter the bull before the Lord at the doorway of the tent of meeting....but the flesh of the bull and its hide and its refuse you will burn with fire outside the camp. It is a sin offering. Ex.29:11,14

For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate. He.13:11-12


The passover sacrifice was not a sin sacrifice. Just FYI.
That's right. Without the blood of the lamb, God would have destroyed all Israel. :eek:

Fenris
Feb 17th 2008, 07:08 PM
Hi Fenris.Hello again.


If you want to question the authenticity of the NT, we can throw out every other ancient body of lit as well, including Moses. (Of course, yours truly does believe Moses writings because he was affirmed by Jesus.) :hug:If I didn't question the authority of the NT, I'd be a Christian.



What you say would be true if the prophets didn't speak to us about Jesus.
They don't speak to me about Jesus.


Or like saying that all Jews believe Is.53 is about Israel because Rashi said so.Right. Except that Rashi was a Jewish rabbi who concurred with other Jewish texts written by other rabbis.

The authors of the NT, on the other hand, wrote something completely new. That doesn't make it wrong, of course, but you won't find proof of it in other Jewish writings.



I have a suspicion that in your opinion he could have been a gentile named George.I don't get it.



I would like to pick your brain, if you would allow. How do you see the followiing.Of course, that's why I'm here.


He said, go and tell this people, keep on listening, but do not perceive. Keep on looking, but do not understand. Is.6:9
Well, let's look at the whole chapter:

1. In the year of the death of King Uzziah, I saw the Lord sitting on a high and exalted throne, and His lower extremity filled the Temple.

2. Seraphim stood above for Him, six wings, six wings to each one; with two he would cover his face, and with two he would cover his feet, and with two he would fly.

3. And one called to the other and said, "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory."

4. And the doorposts quaked from the voice of him who called, and the House became filled with smoke.

5. And I said, "Woe is me for I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips, and amidst a people of unclean lips I dwell, for the King, the Lord of Hosts have my eyes seen.

6. And one of the seraphim flew to me, and in his hand was a glowing coal; with tongs he had taken it from upon the altar.

7. And he caused it to touch my mouth, and he said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity shall be removed, and your sin shall be atoned for."

8. And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" And I said, "Here I am; send me."

9. And He said, "Go and say to this people, 'Indeed you hear, but you do not understand; indeed you see, but you do not know.'

10.This people's heart is becoming fat, and his ears are becoming heavy, and his eyes are becoming sealed, lest he see with his eyes, and hear with his ears, and his heart understand, and he repent and be healed."

In other words, a call for repentance to Isaiah's contemporaries. Not a secret message to the future about Jesus.




For the Lord has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep. He has shut your eyes, the prophets and covered your heads, the seers. The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate saying, Please read this, he will say, I cannot, for it is sealed. Is.29:10-11Again, let's look at the whole chapter.

9. Stop and wonder; they became blind and they blinded. They were intoxicated but not from wine; they reeled but not from strong wine.

10. For the Lord has poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and He has closed your eyes; the prophets and your heads who stargaze, He has covered.

11. And the vision of everything has been to you like the words of a sealed book, which they give to one who can read, saying, "Now read this," and he shall say, "I cannot, for it is sealed."

12. And if the book is given to one who cannot read, saying, "Now read this," he shall say, "I cannot read."

13. And the Lord said: "Because this people has come near; with their mouth and with their lips they honor Me, but their heart they draw far away from Me, and their fear of Me has become a command of people, which has been taught.

14. Therefore, I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden.


As above, a message regarding Isaiah's contemporaries. They have forsaken God so He will hide from them.

Neither of those comments should be read to apply to all Jews of all time. For example, we have the very interesting line in Psalms 199:165 Those who love Your Torah have abundant peace, and there is no stumbling for them which could certainly be read as applying to those Jews who remained true to the Torah's teachings.



It doesn't matter my friend. I gave you evidence that the sages who lived long before Rashi believed Is.53 spoke of Messiah.Uh, no you didn't. You haven't cited a single Jewish source that says anything of the sort.
(Btw, it has been said that Rashi once believed Messiah to be the focus of Is.53 also. Wonder what changed his mind?)'It has been said'? By who?:rolleyes:



Jesus is from Judah and it's not necessary to bring the Messiah from Joseph idea into the mix, because even though some ancients correctly understood Is.53 to speak of Messiah, they wrongfully thought He must be two people. I'm not agreeing with the "killed in battle" teaching. That was their idea.Again, there is no nexus to chapter 53. None.



Can't see what you've disproved. You asked how I knew the Rabbis before Rashi believed Messiah would suffer and I gave it to you. Um, pretty much every Jewish prophet had suffered. So it's natural to think that the messiah might too suffer. That doesn't mean he's going to be killed for the sins of mankind, an alien concept to Judaism.

But hey, Moses suffered too. Maybe Isaiah 53 referred to him?


My proof was met with, "Well, this is aggadita...." But I can see one way in which you're right, because the knowledge that Messiah would suffer and die wasn't plain to Jesus own disciples.Yes, why didn't they rejoice over his death? Why didn't they say, "Aha! Isaiah 53 has been fulfilled"?



I have much to learn. Can you be taught as well?Well, I too am here to learn. But if you think you're going to teach me by claiming to know Jewish writings better than me, you aren't making a very strong case for yourself.



Yes, really. The Apostles come from your heritage, not mine. You seem amazed by this.Well again, it's not clear who they were. In any case, whatever ideas they had were not Jewish in origin. That doesn't make them wrong, of course, but they were definitely not Jewish.



There is no counter example to judgement without mercy. What you've cited isn't what we've been talking about, is it? What we are discussing is substitutionary sacrifice, specifically what Torah says of it. De.24:16 is about capital punishment. It is also true of Gods final judgement, but this is where God in mercy allows for atonement through blood sacrifice.I don't see where it says that blood sacrifice is required.



You will slaughter the bull before the Lord at the doorway of the tent of meeting....but the flesh of the bull and its hide and its refuse you will burn with fire outside the camp. It is a sin offering. Ex.29:11,14Again you cite a single line out of context. The chapter begins: And this is the thing that you shall do for them to sanctify them to serve Me. So this was a sacrifice only for Cohen-priests.


For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate. He.13:11-12Again, in Judaism there is no concept of vicarious atonement.



That's right. Without the blood of the lamb, God would have destroyed all Israel. :eek:The blood of the lamb was a sign. It did not provide atonement. Please read your bible more carefully.

Teke
Feb 17th 2008, 10:22 PM
I agree with a great many things you've posted Fenris, on this subject of atonement. We have a lot in common on praxis.

The only thing we differ on is "physical redemption". Your view is that this happens when Israel overcomes the world. And in my view, "physical redemption" occurred with the Incarnation. ;)

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 02:20 PM
I agree with a great many things you've posted Fenris, on this subject of atonement. We have a lot in common on praxis.Awesome. :)


The only thing we differ on is "physical redemption". Your view is that this happens when Israel overcomes the world. And in my view, "physical redemption" occurred with the Incarnation. ;)
Well, that comes from a different understanding of the text of the bible. That's ok; we can agree to disagree on the point.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 02:48 PM
Awesome. :)

Well, that comes from a different understanding of the text of the bible. That's ok; we can agree to disagree on the point.

Yes, but it would seem that your "different understanding" keeps you separated from the rest of humanity. Are you not physically in the same state as the rest of humanity?

How can you see reconciliation (atonement) and not see physical redemption?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 02:56 PM
Yes, but it would seem that your "different understanding" keeps you separated from the rest of humanity. Are you not physically in the same state as the rest of humanity?There was a time when Jews were the only monotheists int he world. They were separate from the rest of the world then, too.

I'm really not one for being popular. I'd rather do what I feel is right, regardless of what the rest of the world thinks of me.

Besides, does not the bible describe the Jews as "a people who dwells apart, and will not be reckoned among the nations"?


How can you see reconciliation (atonement) and not see physical redemption?Please explain.

JesusisGod
Feb 18th 2008, 03:20 PM
Hi Fenris.

If I didn't question the authority of the NT, I'd be a Christian.
I guess doubt after questiong would have been a better way of putting it.


They don't speak to me about Jesus.
Is that because you were always told by those you respect that Jesus is not Messiah?


Right. Except that Rashi was a Jewish rabbi who concurred with other Jewish texts written by other rabbis.
What did Maimonides think of Rashis interpretation?


The authors of the NT, on the other hand, wrote something completely new. That doesn't make it wrong, of course, but you won't find proof of it in other Jewish writings.
Then where did the idea of two Messiahs come from, one a sufferer and the other a King?


Well, let's look at the whole chapter:


1. In the year of the death of King Uzziah, I saw the Lord sitting on a high and exalted throne, and His lower extremity filled the Temple.

2. Seraphim stood above for Him, six wings, six wings to each one; with two he would cover his face, and with two he would cover his feet, and with two he would fly.

3. And one called to the other and said, "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory."

4. And the doorposts quaked from the voice of him who called, and the House became filled with smoke.

5. And I said, "Woe is me for I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips, and amidst a people of unclean lips I dwell, for the King, the Lord of Hosts have my eyes seen.

6. And one of the seraphim flew to me, and in his hand was a glowing coal; with tongs he had taken it from upon the altar.

7. And he caused it to touch my mouth, and he said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity shall be removed, and your sin shall be atoned for."

8. And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" And I said, "Here I am; send me."

9. And He said, "Go and say to this people, 'Indeed you hear, but you do not understand; indeed you see, but you do not know.'

10.This people's heart is becoming fat, and his ears are becoming heavy, and his eyes are becoming sealed, lest he see with his eyes, and hear with his ears, and his heart understand, and he repent and be healed."

In other words, a call for repentance to Isaiah's contemporaries. Not a secret message to the future about Jesus.
If their ears and eyes were closed, how would they know what the Prophet was talking about?


Again, let's look at the whole chapter.


9. Stop and wonder; they became blind and they blinded. They were intoxicated but not from wine; they reeled but not from strong wine.

10. For the Lord has poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and He has closed your eyes; the prophets and your heads who stargaze, He has covered.

11. And the vision of everything has been to you like the words of a sealed book, which they give to one who can read, saying, "Now read this," and he shall say, "I cannot, for it is sealed."

12. And if the book is given to one who cannot read, saying, "Now read this," he shall say, "I cannot read."

13. And the Lord said: "Because this people has come near; with their mouth and with their lips they honor Me, but their heart they draw far away from Me, and their fear of Me has become a command of people, which has been taught.

14. Therefore, I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden.


As above, a message regarding Isaiah's contemporaries. They have forsaken God so He will hide from them.

Neither of those comments should be read to apply to all Jews of all time. For example, we have the very interesting line in Psalms 199:165 Those who love Your Torah have abundant peace, and there is no stumbling for them which could certainly be read as applying to those Jews who remained true to the Torah's teachings.
I agree, although we can say that at least during Isaiahs time, there were Rabbis who didn’t understand what God was saying. Don’t you think it’s possible that when the people looked for answers from those teachers, they were given the wrong ones?


'It has been said'? By who?
David Baron in a book titled “The Servant Of Jehovah”, pg.20. He said that when Rashi was younger and he believed an older interpretation of Is.53 that explained the text to be about Messiah. Baron said Rashi probably wrote his Commentary on the Talmud after the 2nd Crusade, when his people were slaughtered by you know who.



Again, there is no nexus to chapter 53. None.
I must admit has been difficult to find out what the Talmud says about Messiah, since I can’t seem to find a copy of the Talmud….but since you seem to be astute of what it teaches, does it ever refer to Messiah as suffering, with respect to Is.53 or otherwise?



Um, pretty much every Jewish prophet had suffered. So it's natural to think that the messiah might too suffer. That doesn't mean he's going to be killed for the sins of mankind, an alien concept to Judaism.


But hey, Moses suffered too. Maybe Isaiah 53 referred to him?
Did Israel persecute almost all the prophets God sent to them?



Yes, why didn't they rejoice over his death? Why didn't they say, "Aha! Isaiah 53 has been fulfilled"?
That’s a very good question. Maybe by the time the Apostles were taught Torah, the interpretations were passed down to them by Rabbis who lived in Isaiahs day:

Oh sinful nation, a people weighed down by iniquity, descendants of evildoers, immoral children. They have abandoned Adonai, spurned the Holy one of Israel, turned their backs on Him. Is.1:4

Please understand that I’m not picking on Jews here. Within Christianity itself, false teachings have entered the Church by people who really didn’t love God. One of the atrocities that turns my stomach is the history of Jewish persecution at the hands of those who said they loved Jesus. Liars they were.


Well, I too am here to learn. But if you think you're going to teach me by claiming to know Jewish writings better than me, you aren't making a very strong case for yourself.
I must say I haven’t done a very good job, but please give me some time. Who knows, you might even convince me that Jesus isn’t Messiah.


Well again, it's not clear who they were. In any case, whatever ideas they had were not Jewish in origin. That doesn't make them wrong, of course, but they were definitely not Jewish.
If the NT writers weren’t Jewish, that would mean gentiles wrote it. But why would gentiles even care about what Moses and the Prophets said? Why would non Jews look at Torah and decide to write stories about a Jew named Yeshua linking Him to it?


I don't see where it says that blood sacrifice is required.
Why is blood sacrifice mentioned at all?


Again you cite a single line out of context. The chapter begins: And this is the thing that you shall do for them to sanctify them to serve Me. So this was a sacrifice only for Cohen-priests.
A priestly sin sacrifice. Do I really have to cite blood sacrifices that were offered for the sins of the people? You know Fenris, on a personal note, I get the impression that you are trying to distance yourself from anything that smacks of blood sacrifice. Is that the case? Is it because those sacrifices have been linked with Jesus?



Again, in Judaism there is no concept of vicarious atonement.
So you’re saying that within Judaism, animals were never used to make atonement for peoples sins?



The blood of the lamb was a sign. It did not provide atonement. Please read your bible more carefully.
Yes, I thought I admitted in my last post that you were right that the Passover lamb wasn’t a sin sacrifice. Again, I get the impression from you that according to Judaism, animals were never used to provide atomement.

Fenris, not get too far off the subject of the suffering Messiah idea, blood sacrifice and how Jews see it or anything related to this discussion, I’d like your opinion on something. Torah says that at some point, gentiles will come to worship the God of the Jews. When do you think that will happen?

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 03:27 PM
There was a time when Jews were the only monotheists int he world. They were separate from the rest of the world then, too.

I'm really not one for being popular. I'd rather do what I feel is right, regardless of what the rest of the world thinks of me.

Besides, does not the bible describe the Jews as "a people who dwells apart, and will not be reckoned among the nations"?


Numbers 23:9 is part of a parable. Israel was not to be nationalists. To be in the world but not of the world IOW.


Please explain.

I asked thinking perhaps you could explain.
Let me give a scripture and perhaps you can explain. Leviticus 16:16 (and scriptures pertaining to this), what do Jews do now instead of this?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 03:53 PM
Hi Fenris.Good morning!


I guess doubt after questiong would have been a better way of putting it.Same thing.



Is that because you were always told by those you respect that Jesus is not Messiah?Or maybe you understand it that way because you were always told that it was Jesus.;)



What did Maimonides think of Rashis interpretation?I don't know that he commented on it. Why, do you know something about it?



Then where did the idea of two Messiahs come from, one a sufferer and the other a King? As I said, it's aggadita, not fact. It was someone's sermon. I don't have to believe it as fact.


If their ears and eyes were closed, how would they know what the Prophet was talking about? Obviously not everyone's eyes and ears were. I mean, someone else copied down what he said, right? And the Great Assembly made the book part of the bible, right?

Most Jews being bad does not mean that all Jews were bad. The Golden Calf was only worshiped by 3000 people but all 600,000 had to pay the price.



I agree, although we can say that at least during Isaiahs time, there were Rabbis who didn’t understand what God was saying.I don't agree.


Don’t you think it’s possible that when the people looked for answers from those teachers, they were given the wrong ones?What, some secret conspiracy by the rabbis? :lol:



David Baron in a book titled “The Servant Of Jehovah”, pg.20. He said that when Rashi was younger and he believed an older interpretation of Is.53 that explained the text to be about MessiahDoes he have evidence for this fact? People can put anything in a book you know.




I must admit has been difficult to find out what the Talmud says about Messiah, since I can’t seem to find a copy of the Talmud….but since you seem to be astute of what it teaches, does it ever refer to Messiah as suffering, with respect to Is.53 or otherwise?In a peripheral way, perhaps. But as I have already said, every prophet suffered to a certain extent, and the messiah will be a prophet. So it's natural to assume that he'll suffer too. But there's a big difference between suffering because your mission is difficult and 'dying for the sins of mankind'.




Did Israel persecute almost all the prophets God sent to them? Yes. But there's a weird sort of convoluted logic here. 'Prophets suffered, Jesus suffered, therefore... Jesus was a prophet'.

I mean, adopting that logic leads to all sorts of weird conclusions.




That’s a very good question. Maybe by the time the Apostles were taught Torah, the interpretations were passed down to them by Rabbis who lived in Isaiahs day:Perhaps, but that once again proves my point: Jews and Christians read the bible differently.



Please understand that I’m not picking on Jews here. Within Christianity itself, false teachings have entered the Church by people who really didn’t love God. One of the atrocities that turns my stomach is the history of Jewish persecution at the hands of those who said they loved Jesus. Liars they were.Thank you for being honest.



I must say I haven’t done a very good job, but please give me some time. Who knows, you might even convince me that Jesus isn’t Messiah. That's not why I'm here. I just want to show that there is another way of reading scripture, one that is internally just as consistent as yours. Maybe even more so.



If the NT writers weren’t Jewish, that would mean gentiles wrote it. But why would gentiles even care about what Moses and the Prophets said? Why would non Jews look at Torah and decide to write stories about a Jew named Yeshua linking Him to it?Why does anyone invent a new religion? You could ask the same question to the Mormons or the Scientologists or the Moonies or Muslims or indeed any group that did the same thing.



Why is blood sacrifice mentioned at all? Why is flour sacrifice mentioned? Or atonement money? Or the use of prayer?

Because the are methods of atonement.



A priestly sin sacrifice.That's what the text says, yes.


Do I really have to cite blood sacrifices that were offered for the sins of the people?No, but you're going to have to cite the verse that says that it's the only way to atone. My bible lacks that verse.:lol:


You know Fenris, on a personal note, I get the impression that you are trying to distance yourself from anything that smacks of blood sacrifice. Is that the case?No. Ezekiel states that in the post-messianic world the temple will be rebuilt and there will again be sacrifice. But we don't have those things now. I simply state a fact, and one that was forseen. Hosea 3:4 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.


Is it because those sacrifices have been linked with Jesus? No. Although I do not see the linkage in any case.




So you’re saying that within Judaism, animals were never used to make atonement for peoples sins?They were part of the process. But animals are not humans. God abhors human sacrifice.




Fenris, not get too far off the subject of the suffering Messiah idea, blood sacrifice and how Jews see it or anything related to this discussion, I’d like your opinion on something. Torah says that at some point, gentiles will come to worship the God of the Jews. When do you think that will happen?

The post-messianic world. To wit: Thus says the Lord of Hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men from the nations of every language shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, "We will go with you; for we have heard that God is with you." (Zecharia 8:23)

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 03:59 PM
Numbers 23:9 is part of a parable. Israel was not to be nationalists. To believe this you really have to throw out a lot scripture though.


I asked thinking perhaps you could explain.
Let me give a scripture and perhaps you can explain. Leviticus 16:16 (and scriptures pertaining to this), what do Jews do now instead of this?
And he shall effect atonement upon the Holy from the defilements of the children of Israel and from their rebellions and all their unintentional sins.
Defilements: Refers to those who while they did not know they were unclean, entered the sanctuary
Rebellions: Refers to those who knowingly entered the sanctuary while unclean.
Unintentional sins: Just like it says.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 05:48 PM
To believe this you really have to throw out a lot scripture though.

I don't understand what you mean, but I won't dwell on it since it's not the topic of your thread.


And he shall effect atonement upon the Holy from the defilements of the children of Israel and from their rebellions and all their unintentional sins.
Defilements: Refers to those who while they did not know they were unclean, entered the sanctuary
Rebellions: Refers to those who knowingly entered the sanctuary while unclean.
Unintentional sins: Just like it says.

I understand what the text says. My question was, what do Jews do now instead of this?

The mercy seat was seen in/as part with heaven or God, right? A priest does this, right?
What do Jews do about this now?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 06:12 PM
I don't understand what you mean, but I won't dwell on it since it's not the topic of your thread.For example:

Genesis 26:3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore unto Abraham thy father; 4 and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands; and by thy seed shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves;

Genesis 28:13? 13 And, behold, the LORD stood beside him, and said: 'I am the LORD, the God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac. The land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.

Genesis 17: 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession;

And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are - northward, southward, eastward, and westward; for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever. And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth; then your descendants also could be numbered. Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you." (Genesis 13:14-17)

"He is the Lord our God; His judgments are in all the earth. He has remembered His covenant forever, the word which He commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac, and confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, to Israel for an EVERLASTING COVENANT, saying, "To you I will give the land of Canaan as the allotment of your inheritance ..." (Psalm 105:7-12)


I understand what the text says. My question was, what do Jews do now instead of this?

The mercy seat was seen in/as part with heaven or God, right? A priest does this, right?
What do Jews do about this now?Read the OP.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 06:58 PM
For example:

Genesis 26:3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore unto Abraham thy father; 4 and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands; and by thy seed shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves;

Genesis 28:13? 13 And, behold, the LORD stood beside him, and said: 'I am the LORD, the God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac. The land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.

Genesis 17: 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession;

And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are - northward, southward, eastward, and westward; for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever. And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth; then your descendants also could be numbered. Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you." (Genesis 13:14-17)

"He is the Lord our God; His judgments are in all the earth. He has remembered His covenant forever, the word which He commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac, and confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, to Israel for an EVERLASTING COVENANT, saying, "To you I will give the land of Canaan as the allotment of your inheritance ..." (Psalm 105:7-12)

I guess now that you've given all this scripture, you'll have to explain further. Cause I still don't see what your getting at.

From the beginning in Genesis, God gives the man He created all of creation (which I assume includes land). The man then eats from a tree and brings death. Did he loose all the land in that deal too? Because that is what you sound as tho happened. He lost it all (earth land? or Canaan?) and now God is giving it all to Abraham's descendent's, specifically Israel (the other sons just get to be part of that?).




Read the OP.

:confused Does that mean a priest and the sacrifice aren't necessary now, even tho commanded in the scriptures? ie. Exd 28:2 And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty.


Your Yom Kippur is similar to Christianity's Eucharist. But we have a High Priest and priests, and we have a sacrifice (shewbread on the altar, in front of the seven candles). What do you think Yom Kippur would be like in the Messianic age......

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 07:01 PM
I guess now that you've given all this scripture, you'll have to explain further. Cause I still don't see what your getting at.
OK, we've been down this path before and I'm not going to rehash the whole argument yet again.:giveup:



:confused Does that mean a priest and the sacrifice aren't necessary now, even tho commanded in the scriptures? They aren't necessary now because they can't perform their role now. They weren't necessary from 586BC until the second temple was built, for the same reason.


Your Yom Kippur is similar to Christianity's Eucharist. But we have a High Priest and priests, and we have a sacrifice (shewbread on the altar, in front of the seven candles). What do you think Yom Kippur would be like in the Messianic age......

In the messianic age there will again be a temple and sacrifice. Ezekiel talks about the subject at length.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 07:29 PM
OK, we've been down this path before and I'm not going to rehash the whole argument yet again.:giveup:

OK, but somebody is being redundant.


They aren't necessary now because they can't perform their role now. They weren't necessary from 586BC until the second temple was built, for the same reason.

What do you mean, "aren't necessary", "can't perform their role"? Jews don't have priests anymore or the priest isn't necessary? Bread can't perform it's "role"?

Exd 25:30 And thou shalt set upon the table shewbread before me alway.



In the messianic age there will again be a temple and sacrifice. Ezekiel talks about the subject at length.

Yes, we will have to talk about Ezekial some more in another thread. I'd like to talk at length with you about that. Maybe next week I'll start a thread on that subject.:)

threebigrocks
Feb 18th 2008, 08:27 PM
Exodous 20


40"See that you make them after the pattern for them, which was shown to you on the mountain.


A pattern was shown Moses on the mountian. Not an explination of what to do as with Noah and the Ark, but a pattern was shown him. For their to be a pattern - there must be an original from which the pattern was made.

What of the tabernacle if it wasn't the original, but only a pattern, a shadow, of the true? What would be the true tabernacle?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 08:46 PM
What do you mean, "aren't necessary", "can't perform their role"? Jews don't have priests anymore or the priest isn't necessary? There is no Temple and no Altar, so there is no sacrifice. In the future there will be a temple and an altar, and there will again be sacrifice.




Yes, we will have to talk about Ezekial some more in another thread. I'd like to talk at length with you about that. Maybe next week I'll start a thread on that subject.:)

Ok, sure.

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 08:48 PM
Exodous 20


A pattern was shown Moses on the mountian. Not an explination of what to do as with Noah and the Ark, but a pattern was shown him. For their to be a pattern - there must be an original from which the pattern was made.

What of the tabernacle if it wasn't the original, but only a pattern, a shadow, of the true? What would be the true tabernacle?
Moses was shown a blueprint of how to make the Tabernacle.

If you want to read into it that the blueprint was Jesus, it's a free country, I won't stop you. :lol:

RoadWarrior
Feb 18th 2008, 08:53 PM
There is no Temple and no Altar, so there is no sacrifice. In the future there will be a temple and an altar, and there will again be sacrifice.


Is it important to acknowledge that the sacrificial system could only be practiced in the temple in Jerusalem? That it would not be holy if it were done elsewhere?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 09:03 PM
Is it important to acknowledge that the sacrificial system could only be practiced in the temple in Jerusalem? That it would not be holy if it were done elsewhere?
Good question.

Prior to the building of the Temple, one could sacrifice anywhere. Once the Temple was built, sacrifice could only be performed there. It can be inferred from Deuteronomy 12:21 "If the place which the LORD your God chooses to put His name is too far from you, then you may slaughter of your herd and flock which the LORD has given you, as I have commanded you"
Which says that you can slaughter animals far from the Temple but not sacrifice them there.

There are a few technical issues that prevent sacrifice today. First of all, the Temple Mount is controlled by the islamic waqf who does not even allow prayer up there, much less sacrifice. We have no altar. We are all considered ritually impure and have no way of cleansing ourselves.

So we're still waiting.

RoadWarrior
Feb 18th 2008, 09:07 PM
Good question.

Prior to the building of the Temple, one could sacrifice anywhere. Once the Temple was built, sacrifice could only be performed there. It can be inferred from Deuteronomy 12:21 "If the place which the LORD your God chooses to put His name is too far from you, then you may slaughter of your herd and flock which the LORD has given you, as I have commanded you"
Which says that you can slaughter animals far from the Temple but not sacrifice them there.

There are a few technical issues that prevent sacrifice today. First of all, the Temple Mount is controlled by the islamic waqf who does not even allow prayer up there, much less sacrifice. We have no altar. We are all considered ritually impure and have no way of cleansing ourselves.

So we're still waiting.

Thanks Fenris. That brings another question to my mind. The Muslims today practice animal sacrifice in remembrance of the near-sacrifice of Isaac (except that they say it is Ishmael who was nearly sacrificed). Do they do that on the temple mount today?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 09:16 PM
Thanks Fenris. That brings another question to my mind. The Muslims today practice animal sacrifice in remembrance of the near-sacrifice of Isaac (except that they say it is Ishmael who was nearly sacrificed). Do they do that on the temple mount today?
Umm honestly I am not too familiar with Muslim practice. I do not believe that there is any Muslim sacrifice in Jerusalem, which is not an Islamic holy city in any case.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 09:31 PM
There is no Temple and no Altar, so there is no sacrifice. In the future there will be a temple and an altar, and there will again be sacrifice.


Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in contrast to what you told me in another thread about Elijah and the sacrifice he made. You said that was an exceptional situation. Isn't not having a temple in Jerusalem an exceptional circumstance.
In which case I don't see why your priests wouldn't still be offering the "continual" offering commanded.

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 09:37 PM
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in contrast to what you told me in another thread about Elijah and the sacrifice he made. You said that was an exceptional situation. Isn't not having a temple in Jerusalem an exceptional circumstance.A single exceptional circumstance is different from an ongoing inability to do something.

In any case, we have precedent since sacrifices were not offered in the time period between the first and second temples.

And we still run into the problem that we are all ritually impure. that means we cannot bring sacrifice and the priests cannot carry out the sacrifice.

Teke
Feb 18th 2008, 10:22 PM
A single exceptional circumstance is different from an ongoing inability to do something.

In any case, we have precedent since sacrifices were not offered in the time period between the first and second temples.

And we still run into the problem that we are all ritually impure. that means we cannot bring sacrifice and the priests cannot carry out the sacrifice.

Well you also have a precedence of the altar of shewbread with Samuel, and he didn't have "the temple". I also don't see any precedence for movable versus immovable altar or temple.

What is "ritually impure"? And what is needed to remedy that?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 10:28 PM
Well you also have a precedence of the altar of shewbread with Samuel, and he didn't have "the temple". I also don't see any precedence for movable versus immovable altar or temple. You are discussing legal fine points that I am unfamiliar with.


What is "ritually impure"? When one comes in close proximity with impure objects that impurity spreads to the person. There are several levels, the most severe being that from a dead person. Because the impurity spreads to fill the volume of an inside location of a body, anyone who has ever been in a hospital is probably impure from corpses in the morgue.


And what is needed to remedy that?For the impurity resulting from a dead person, the ashes of the red heifer.

We know that some volume of the ashes were hidden, along with Moses's staff, a sample of Manna, and other mysterious objects (The ark of the covenant?!)

RoadWarrior
Feb 18th 2008, 10:32 PM
...
We know that some volume of the ashes were hidden, along with Moses's staff, a sample of Manna, and other mysterious objects (The ark of the covenant?!)

And, in God's perfect timing, these will be revealed - to whom?

Fenris
Feb 18th 2008, 10:38 PM
And, in God's perfect timing, these will be revealed - to whom?
The messiah? Elijah the prophet?

No one really knows...

It's interesting, because the Talmud implies that they are hidden somewhere under the Temple Mount, but other sources say they are somewhere in the Jordan river valley.

RoadWarrior
Feb 18th 2008, 11:04 PM
The messiah? Elijah the prophet?

No one really knows...

It's interesting, because the Talmud implies that they are hidden somewhere under the Temple Mount, but other sources say they are somewhere in the Jordan river valley.

Fenris, you may already know this, but many Christians are anticipating this event. The rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem will be very significant to Christians, who are anticipating the return of the Messiah. Does that belief have a correspondence in the Jewish belief of today, anticipating the Messiah's appearance at the new temple?

At the moment, it seems like an impossibility, since the Muslims claim ownership of the temple mount. You said they do not consider Jerusalem a holy city, which confuses me a bit because they do consider the temple mount as holy - but for a different purpose. They say that is where Mohammed saw visions, I think they also believe it to be the mountain of the sacrifice of Abraham's son. It's been a while since I read those beliefs, so I might have them a bit askew. My point is that it is going to take a miracle for the Jews to be able to rebuild the temple, and have temple rituals and sacrifice again.

JesusisGod
Feb 19th 2008, 07:28 AM
Hi Fenris.

Good morning!
Good morn 2 u as well!


Same thing.
Then you have examined the NT and found it to be unreliable?


Or maybe you understand it that way because you were always told that it was Jesus.
When I was a child, I had a deep faith in the God of the Jews because of what I had been told about Jesus. I’m very wary of teachers now.


I don't know that he commented on it. Why, do you know something about it?
In a book titled “The Fifty Third Chapter Of Isaiah According To The Jewish Interpreters”, by Driver and Neubauer, ch.9, Rambams Letter to Yemen is cited where he says, “And Isaiah speaks similarly of when he [Messiah] will appear…as a root out of the dry earth…”


As I said, it's aggadita, not fact. It was someone's sermon. I don't have to believe it as fact.
Then you only have to believe Halacha as fact?


Obviously not everyone's eyes and ears were. I mean, someone else copied down what he said, right? And the Great Assembly made the book part of the bible, right?
The Jewish scribes are renowned for their faithfulness to copy correctly, but we’re not talking about Xeroxing here. We’re discussing blindness and deafness to what was copied. If God blinded the Rabbis, there is no way they could have interpreted His word correctly. Is there?


Most Jews being bad does not mean that all Jews were bad. The Golden Calf was only worshiped by 3000 people but all 600,000 had to pay the price.
So in your opinion, God punished the innocent along with the guilty?


I don't agree.
So when God says, “ Therefore, I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden”, The “wise men” and “geniuses” He refers to aren’t the Rabbis who were teaching them? Who do you think they were?


What, some secret conspiracy by the rabbis?
Far from it. The text calls the nation immoral, evildoers, laden with iniquity, who turned their backs on God. A conspiracy? No, just plain ignorance. Blindness and deafness were the result of Israels sins.


Why does anyone invent a new religion? You could ask the same question to the Mormons or the Scientologists or the Moonies or Muslims or indeed any group that did the same thing.
In their minds, they weren’t inventing a new religion. “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets wrote about…” Jn.1:45


Why is flour sacrifice mentioned? Or atonement money? Or the use of prayer?
Prayer isn’t difficult to understand. Money and flour? I’m not sure, but I’m a work in progress. You’re skirting the issue here though. The question is, why is blood sacrifice necessary? Mentioning other ways of atonement to trivialize blood sacrifice makes God look like a lunatic.


That's what the text says, yes.
Wow, that’s a first!


No, but you're going to have to cite the verse that says that it's the only way to atone. My bible lacks that verse.
I don’t have to cite anything. You seem to be saying that blood sacrifice isn’t necessary for the forgiveness of any sin, which means He commanded Moses to slaughter life unnecessarily. Is that right?


Does he have evidence for this fact? People can put anything in a book you know.
Yes I know and I don’t know what his source is to support the statement. You seem to be well versed when it comes to Rashi. Have you ever heard he changed his mind?


In a peripheral way, perhaps. But as I have already said, every prophet suffered to a certain extent, and the messiah will be a prophet. So it's natural to assume that he'll suffer too. But there's a big difference between suffering because your mission is difficult and 'dying for the sins of mankind'.
Time to pick your brain again:

Then, after the sixty two weeks, Messiah will be cut off…Da.9:26

What is your opinion of this verse?


Yes. But there's a weird sort of convoluted logic here. 'Prophets suffered, Jesus suffered, therefore... Jesus was a prophet'.

I mean, adopting that logic leads to all sorts of weird conclusions.
I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I wasn’t attempting to show that Jesus was the prophet Moses spoke of because He suffered. I was just wondering if the Rabbis and the people they taught killed the prophets who brought them the word they claimed to cherish. Interesting.


Perhaps, but that once again proves my point: Jews and Christians read the bible differently.
What I cited proves that there were Rabbis who couldn’t have known what they were talking about. The text says it flat out.


Thank you for being honest.
That’s ok. I just hope you know that the “Christians” who slaughtered the Jews had nothing to do with Jesus except use His name.


That's not why I'm here. I just want to show that there is another way of reading scripture, one that is internally just as consistent as yours. Maybe even more so.
Well, I’m not going to lie to you. I want you to believe in Jesus. I’m not sorry about it either.



No. Ezekiel states that in the post-messianic world the temple will be rebuilt and there will again be sacrifice. But we don't have those things now.
Was a stone temple required for the sacrifices that Moses taught the children of Israel?


I simply state a fact, and one that was forseen.
I think it has all been “forseen”.


Hosea 3:4 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.
What time frame do you think this falls into?


They were part of the process. But animals are not humans. God abhors human sacrifice.
Why did God tell Abram to offer Isaac?


The post-messianic world. To wit: Thus says the Lord of Hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men from the nations of every language shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, "We will go with you; for we have heard that God is with you." (Zecharia 8:23)

So after Messiah comes, the nations of the world will want to learn about the God of the Jews? How about before Messiah comes? Are there any prophecies that say the gentiles will want to hear about your God before the Messiah comes? Take me for instance. Well, lets take this website. Aw heck, lets imagine that there are people in every nation on earth today that have heard about God of the Jews and we’re pretty excited and want to know more about Him. Can you cite me one verse that says the nations of the world will want to worship the God of the Jews before the Messiah comes? Maybe I was just an early bird special.

Fenris
Feb 19th 2008, 01:10 PM
Fenris, you may already know this, but many Christians are anticipating this event. The rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem will be very significant to Christians, who are anticipating the return of the Messiah. Does that belief have a correspondence in the Jewish belief of today, anticipating the Messiah's appearance at the new temple?Yes, certainly. The ingathering of the Jewish exiles that we are witnessing today is one part of messianic fulfillment; the rebuilding of the Temple is another; the restoration of the Davidic monarchy is another; world peace and acknowledgment of God is another.


At the moment, it seems like an impossibility, since the Muslims claim ownership of the temple mount. Yep.


You said they do not consider Jerusalem a holy city, which confuses me a bit because they do consider the temple mount as holy - but for a different purpose. I feel much of the reason they consider it holy is because it is holy to Jews.

My point is that it is going to take a miracle for the Jews to be able to rebuild the temple, and have temple rituals and sacrifice again.
Yes, I agree.

Fenris
Feb 19th 2008, 02:11 PM
Then you have examined the NT and found it to be unreliable?I have found it to be wrong of various historical facts, which does not bode well for it's religious proclamations.



When I was a child, I had a deep faith in the God of the Jews because of what I had been told about Jesus. I’m very wary of teachers now. Yet your comprehension is fixed.

If as a child you had read the OT and told nothing about Jesus, and then read the NT, would you have come to the same conclusions? :hmm:



In a book titled “The Fifty Third Chapter Of Isaiah According To The Jewish Interpreters”, by Driver and Neubauer, ch.9, Rambams Letter to Yemen is cited where he says, “And Isaiah speaks similarly of when he [Messiah] will appear…as a root out of the dry earth…”What the Rambam actually says:

As for the advent of the Messiah, nothing at all will be known about it before it occurs. The Messiah is not a person concerning whom it may be predicted that he will be the son of so and so, or of the family of so and so. On the contrary he will be unknown before his coming, but he will prove by means of miracles and wonders that he is the true Messiah. Scripture in allusion to his mysterious lineage says, "His name is the Shoot, and he will shoot up out of his place" (Zechariah 6:12). Similarly, Isaiah referring to the arrival of the Messiah implies that neither his father nor mother, nor his kith nor kin will be known, "For he will shoot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of the dry ground." (53:2).

In other words, he is using verse 2 to deduce that the messiah will appear unexpectedly. Nowhere does he say that the messiah will die for the sins of mankind. Since he lived after Rashi, and Rashi does not cite such a belief, this appears to be a personal deduction of his, not something that he had learned from others. And he's using this to give hope to the Yemenite Jews who were oppressed by the Muslims.



Then you only have to believe Halacha as fact? If your preacher gives a sermon with a story in it, are you required to believe that the story is true?



The Jewish scribes are renowned for their faithfulness to copy correctly, but we’re not talking about Xeroxing here. We’re discussing blindness and deafness to what was copied. If God blinded the Rabbis, there is no way they could have interpreted His word correctly. Is there?Is God a liar?

Psalms 119:165
Those who love Your Torah have great peace, and there is no stumbling for them.


So in your opinion, God punished the innocent along with the guilty?God has done that many times. The great flood, the destruction of Sodom, etc.

In this case it's not clear that the bystanders were innocent. See Leviticus 19:17 You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.
If the bystanders did nothing to rebuke them then they too bore some measure of guilt.



So when God says, “ Therefore, I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden”, The “wise men” and “geniuses” He refers to aren’t the Rabbis who were teaching them? Who do you think they were?
the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost- Not to the wise men. Their wisdom will be lost to the masses who don't believe in God and don't do as they should.

the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden- Not that the geniuses will forget what they knew. Their teachings will be hidden from those who don't believe in God and don't do as they should.


Far from it. The text calls the nation immoral, evildoers, laden with iniquity, who turned their backs on God. A conspiracy? No, just plain ignorance. Blindness and deafness were the result of Israels sins. Those references are only referring to the majority that particular generation that did, after all, see the destruction of the Temple. It doesn't mean that all Jews, forever and ever, are blind.



In their minds, they weren’t inventing a new religion. “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets wrote about…” Jn.1:45Muslims say pretty much the same thing. I suppose they too have not invented a new religion.



Prayer isn’t difficult to understand. Money and flour? I’m not sure, but I’m a work in progress. You’re skirting the issue here though. The question is, why is blood sacrifice necessary? Mentioning other ways of atonement to trivialize blood sacrifice makes God look like a lunatic. No, because you're missing a subtlety here. God desired animal sacrifice because that was what people did back then. He knew that if people didn't sacrifice animals to Him, they would do so to pagan Gods. So He took their desires and channeled them towards something positive.




I don’t have to cite anything. You seem to be saying that blood sacrifice isn’t necessary for the forgiveness of any sin, which means He commanded Moses to slaughter life unnecessarily. Is that right?See the OP. God Himself has said many many times that there are many ways of achieving forgiveness. Sacrifice is one; prayer is one; performing good deeds is one.

Why do you fixate on the sacrifice parts and blatantly ignore other verses in the bible?



Yes I know and I don’t know what his source is to support the statement. You seem to be well versed when it comes to Rashi. Have you ever heard he changed his mind?
Not that I'm aware of, but I'm sure you can find someone in a book who says he did. ;)


Time to pick your brain again:

Then, after the sixty two weeks, Messiah will be cut off…Da.9:26

What is your opinion of this verse?Daniel 9 is a long thread unto itself. The word in Hebrew isn't 'messiah', it's 'anointed one' as kings were, and probably refers to king Aggripa.



I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I wasn’t attempting to show that Jesus was the prophet Moses spoke of because He suffered. I was just wondering if the Rabbis and the people they taught killed the prophets who brought them the word they claimed to cherish. Interesting.The rabbis didn't kill anybody. Bad people hated the prophets who told them they were sinning. The rabbis were hated by the bad people for the same reason.



What I cited proves that there were Rabbis who couldn’t have known what they were talking about. No, it shows that Jews did not traditionally view the bible the way Christians do. Again, in the interest of coexistence I won't say that the Christians were wrong, only that their reading differed.



That’s ok. I just hope you know that the “Christians” who slaughtered the Jews had nothing to do with Jesus except use His name.
I am well aware.


Well, I’m not going to lie to you. I want you to believe in Jesus. I’m not sorry about it either.Don't be sorry about it. I came into your house here, I have to expect something like this to happen.:lol:




Was a stone temple required for the sacrifices that Moses taught the children of Israel?I don't think the Temple itself is required, but an altar is. There are several technical reasons why we do not sacrifice today.



I think it has all been “forseen”.

[/i]
What time frame do you think this falls into? From 70AD until the present day, of course.



Why did God tell Abram to offer Isaac?Good question.

In Abraham's day, the people routinely sacrificed their most prized possession, their own children, to their gods. It was therefore feasible for people to look down on Abraham. "Of course he follows this new god", they would day, "It's an easy religion. You just act nice. You don't have to sacrifice your own kids." Abraham had to prove to the world that he loved his God no less than they loved theirs. he had to demonstrate that he too was willing to sacrifice his own son for his God. Of course, God does not desire human sacrifice and stopped him...



So after Messiah comes, the nations of the world will want to learn about the God of the Jews? How about before Messiah comes? Are there any prophecies that say the gentiles will want to hear about your God before the Messiah comes? Take me for instance. Well, lets take this website. Aw heck, lets imagine that there are people in every nation on earth today that have heard about God of the Jews and we’re pretty excited and want to know more about Him. Can you cite me one verse that says the nations of the world will want to worship the God of the Jews before the Messiah comes? Maybe I was just an early bird special.
No early bird special. If you want to convert, now is the time to do it. In the post-messianic world it will no longer be possible.

threebigrocks
Feb 19th 2008, 04:09 PM
No early bird special. If you want to convert, now is the time to do it. In the post-messianic world it will no longer be possible.

Indeed, will not argue there at all, except your post messianic era and the Christian view aren't exactly the same, it will be the same events. We have here and now. We need to stand firmly in that hope or loose our foundation.

RoadWarrior
Feb 19th 2008, 04:27 PM
Umm honestly I am not too familiar with Muslim practice. I do not believe that there is any Muslim sacrifice in Jerusalem, which is not an Islamic holy city in any case.

We were traveling through Turkey at the beginning of Ramadan a few years ago. We observed the sacrifices, they don't have to do them in a specific place apparently. But in each village there was a place (a field or empty lot) where the slaughter happened, then the meat was taken to the homes of the people for a feast. Several families might join together to share one animal, and they gave some of it to poor families who could not afford it.

For a week or so before the day of sacrifice, there were sheep and goats for sale in a lot across from the hotel where we stayed, in Istanbul.

It was very touching to me that they were celebrating the Abraham story, until I learned that they thought it was about Ishamael. Then I was shocked and saddened. My travels in Turkey truly broke a lot of my old views and understandings apart.

RoadWarrior
Feb 19th 2008, 04:31 PM
Yes, certainly. The ingathering of the Jewish exiles that we are witnessing today is one part of messianic fulfillment; the rebuilding of the Temple is another; the restoration of the Davidic monarchy is another; world peace and acknowledgment of God is another.


This is interesting, to see how Jews and Christians are viewing the same events as fulfillment of messianic prophecy, yet we have a different take on it.

Could you elaborate a bit on how the Davidic monarchy is to be restored?

And, what is "world peace and acknowledgment of God" - how is that to be accomplished?

Thanks.

Fenris
Feb 19th 2008, 04:37 PM
It was very touching to me that they were celebrating the Abraham story, until I learned that they thought it was about Ishamael. Then I was shocked and saddened. My travels in Turkey truly broke a lot of my old views and understandings apart.
Heh. That's a pretty interesting story.

Fenris
Feb 19th 2008, 04:41 PM
This is interesting, to see how Jews and Christians are viewing the same events as fulfillment of messianic prophecy, yet we have a different take on it.Well, the agreement part is what's important.


Could you elaborate a bit on how the Davidic monarchy is to be restored?

And, what is "world peace and acknowledgment of God" - how is that to be accomplished?

Thanks.I really don't know. I'll quote the Jewish sage Maimonides on the subject:

All these and similar matters cannot be [clearly] known by man until they occur, for they are undefined in the words of the prophets. Even the Sages have no established tradition regarding these matters, beyond what is implied by the verses; hence there is a divergence of opinion among them.


In any case, neither the sequence of these events nor their precise details are among the fundamental principles of the faith. One should not occupy himself at length with the aggadot and midrashim that deal with these and similar matters, nor should he deem them of prime importance, for they bring one to neither the awe nor the love [of G‑d].


Similarly, one should not try to calculate the appointed time [for the coming of Moshiach]. Our Sages declared (Sanhedrin 97b): "May the spirits of those who attempt to calculate the final time [of Moshiach's coming] expire!" Rather, one should await [his coming] and believe in the general conception of the matter, as we have explained.

Teke
Feb 19th 2008, 08:37 PM
You are discussing legal fine points that I am unfamiliar with.
When one comes in close proximity with impure objects that impurity spreads to the person. There are several levels, the most severe being that from a dead person. Because the impurity spreads to fill the volume of an inside location of a body, anyone who has ever been in a hospital is probably impure from corpses in the morgue.
For the impurity resulting from a dead person, the ashes of the red heifer.

We know that some volume of the ashes were hidden, along with Moses's staff, a sample of Manna, and other mysterious objects (The ark of the covenant?!)

But these "legal fine points" are part of Christianity. The "ritual" cleansing of Christians occurs with baptism. In relation to "legal fine points" for instance, the day an Orthodox Christian is baptized, they remain clean and holy until evening. So if they pricked their finger and blood issued, the blood and whatever touched it would have to be given to the priest to be destroyed. It is (Hebrew) "kodesh".

"Kodesh" (1st instance in OT is the burning bush, where God tells Moses the ground is holy/kodesh) is what God makes holy (separated, consecrated....) Ashes of a red heifer aren't necessary.
You may wonder how this is possible. But consider, if God Himself touches anything, it becomes "kodesh" holy. Even though it may not remain so. In which case repentance is necessary.

Jesus, with God's divinity in human flesh, has brought "kodesh" to humanity.

Fenris
Feb 19th 2008, 08:57 PM
But these "legal fine points" are part of Christianity. The "ritual" cleansing of Christians occurs with baptism.
I am familiar with the practice and that too is borrowed from Judaism. Lesser impurity is removed by immersion in water.



"Kodesh" (1st instance in OT is the burning bush, where God tells Moses the ground is holy/kodesh) is what God makes holy (separated, consecrated....) Ashes of a red heifer aren't necessary.
You're mixing two topics.

Holy is not the same as 'not impure'. The Temple Mount is holy (Kadosh, because you seem to like Hebrew) because God made it so. People can be pure (Tahor in Hebrew) or impure (Tamay in Hebrew) based on what they have come in contact with.

The two topics are very different.


You may wonder how this is possible.I don't wonder at all. It's your belief. It isn't Judaism.


But consider, if God Himself touches anything, it becomes "kodesh" holy. Even though it may not remain so. In which case repentance is necessary. One does not need repentance for being impure. Coming in contact with a corpse isn't a sin; in some instances one is even obligated to do so. Once it has happened though, the person cannot enter the temple mount in that state. That would be a sin.


Jesus, with God's divinity in human flesh, has brought "kodesh" to humanity.

Uh, if you say so.

JesusisGod
Feb 20th 2008, 04:35 AM
Hi again Fenris.

I have found it to be wrong of various historical facts, which does not bode well for it's religious proclamations.
What historical facts might those be?

Yet your comprehension is fixed.
The way I view things changes from time to time. You’ve helped me a couple times already.


If as a child you had read the OT and told nothing about Jesus, and then read the NT, would you have come to the same conclusions?
I think I would have. I don’t believe in Jesus because of what I was told as a child. Now if Jesus had been presented to me in a negative way when I was young, that might have affected my decision to believe in Him. But there are Jewish people who were in that position who now believe in Him.

What the Rambam actually says:


As for the advent of the Messiah, nothing at all will be known about it before it occurs. The Messiah is not a person concerning whom it may be predicted that he will be the son of so and so, or of the family of so and so. On the contrary he will be unknown before his coming, but he will prove by means of miracles and wonders that he is the true Messiah. Scripture in allusion to his mysterious lineage says, "His name is the Shoot, and he will shoot up out of his place" (Zechariah 6:12). Similarly, Isaiah referring to the arrival of the Messiah implies that neither his father nor mother, nor his kith nor kin will be known, "For he will shoot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of the dry ground." (53:2).

In other words, he is using verse 2 to deduce that the messiah will appear unexpectedly. Nowhere does he say that the messiah will die for the sins of mankind. Since he lived after Rashi, and Rashi does not cite such a belief, this appears to be a personal deduction of his, not something that he had learned from others. And he's using this to give hope to the Yemenite Jews who were oppressed by the Muslims.
Ok. Now I saw something in your answer that might explain something in the NT. Rambam says the Messiahs mom and dad won’t be known. When Jesus told a crowd that He was the manna, they said,
Isn’t this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says I came from down from Heaven?
Was Rambams teaching that the Messiahs parents wouldn’t be known a widely held belief?

If your preacher gives a sermon with a story in it, are you required to believe that the story is true?
I’m not required to believe anything anyone says, and I very rarely ever do unless I check it out for myself. One example of this is where you pointed out to me that you didn’t know of any instance where Rambam changed his mind on Is.53. Just because I read that in a book doesn’t mean I believed it. I wouldn’t totally dismiss it either. But after consulting with you and then investigating a little further and not finding anything substantial, I gave more weight to your side than the books. This still doesn’t mean that he never changed his mind, but I’m not convinced that he did.



Is God a liar?


Psalms 119:165
Those who love Your Torah have great peace, and there is no stumbling for them.
No, God isn’t a liar and I do believe anyone who loves Torah can’t stumble. But what does Torah say?
“But it shall come about if you do not obey the Lord your God to observe to do all His commandments and statutes with which I charge you this day, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you.” De.28:15
You may not believe this, but only one Person who has ever lived never broke Torah.

God has done that many times. The great flood, the destruction of
Sodom, etc.
I guess we could use children who were too young to know the difference between right and wrong in those instances, but the Bible does say about the flood days,
God looked on the earth and behold it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. Ge.6:12
And about Sodom,
…I will not destroy it on account of the ten. Ge.18:32



In this case it's not clear that the bystanders were innocent. See Leviticus
19:17 You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.
If the bystanders did nothing to rebuke them then they too bore some measure of guilt.
I agree.



the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost- Not to the wise men. Their wisdom will be lost to the masses who don't believe in God and don't do as they should.

the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden- Not that the geniuses will forget what they knew. Their teachings will be hidden from those who don't believe in God and don't do as they should.
Yes, your way does make more sense. Now I’m thinking that the wise men and geniuses might not have been the established Rabbis,
For those who guide this people are leading them astray…Is.9:16

Those references are only referring to the majority that particular generation that did, after all, see the destruction of the
Temple. It doesn't mean that all Jews, forever and ever, are blind.
I know. Although during the temple days, Jesus did call the leaders “blind guides”. Mt.23:24 I don’t mean to sound like I’m picking on one culture. I believe within the church there are false teachings. It’s bound to happen to anybody, but I think it only really matters when the Jewish religion is corrupted.



Muslims say pretty much the same thing. I suppose they too have not invented a new religion.
Mohammed changed Torah. Jesus did not.

No, because you're missing a subtlety here. God desired animal sacrifice because that was what people did back then. He knew that if people didn't sacrifice animals to Him, they would do so to pagan Gods. So He took their desires and channeled them towards something positive.
I disagree with that. Not because I believe the sacrifices are symbolic of Jesus, but simply because I think if God told Moses not to sacrifice, he wouldn’t have.


See the OP. God Himself has said many many times that there are many ways of achieving forgiveness. Sacrifice is one; prayer is one; performing good deeds is one.


Why do you fixate on the sacrifice parts and blatantly ignore other verses in the bible?
I’m not ignoring them. It’s just that I know the NT better than Torah and it (the NT) speaks of Jesus as the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. Jn.1:29 This to me is the symbolism of Torah. I am reading more of Torah and I’m amazed by it.


Daniel 9 is a long thread unto itself. The word in Hebrew isn't 'messiah', it's 'anointed one' as kings were, and probably refers to king Aggripa.
So the text says,
"So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the king the prince there will be sixty nine weeks…"?? Da.9:25
Wow. There’s a revelation.


In Abraham's day, the people routinely sacrificed their most prized possession, their own children, to their gods. It was therefore feasible for people to look down on Abraham. "Of course he follows this new god", they would day, "It's an easy religion. You just act nice. You don't have to sacrifice your own kids." Abraham had to prove to the world that he loved his God no less than they loved theirs. he had to demonstrate that he too was willing to sacrifice his own son for his God. Of course, God does not desire human sacrifice and stopped him...
But God is the One who told Abraham to do it. God was testing him.
Now it came about after these things that God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham.” And he said, “Here I am.”
He said, “Take now your son, your only son whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.” Ge.22:1-2
But God said, “No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you will call his name Isaac, and I will establish my covenant with him for and everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.” Ge.17:19
That sure would be a hard promise to keep if Isaac was dead.
The NT version says that Abraham believed God would raise his promised son from the dead. (Hmm, that sounds familiar.)

No early bird special. If you want to convert, now is the time to do it. In the post-messianic world it will no longer be possible.
Couldn’t find a verse, huh?

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 01:23 PM
Hi again Fenris.Morning, yo.


What historical facts might those be?Oh, little things that add up. Confusing the Pharisees with the Saducees, having the high priest get involved in the working of the Sanhedrin, various anachronisms revealing the date of the NT to be later than claimed... I don't want to get into it because it's a whole thread unto itself.


The way I view things changes from time to time. You’ve helped me a couple times already.
Hmm. Could you elaborate?:hmm:


I think I would have. I don’t believe in Jesus because of what I was told as a child. Now if Jesus had been presented to me in a negative way when I was young, that might have affected my decision to believe in Him. Jesus wasn't presented to me in a negative light. He wasn't presented to me at all. When I read about him later in life, the Christian viewpoint did not mesh well with the Jewish interpretation of scripture.


But there are Jewish people who were in that position who now believe in Him.
Yes, but not religious Jews. In spite of what you may have been told.


Ok. Now I saw something in your answer that might explain something in the NT. Rambam says the Messiahs mom and dad won’t be known. When Jesus told a crowd that He was the manna, they said,
Isn’t this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says I came from down from Heaven?I'm not following...


Was Rambams teaching that the Messiahs parents wouldn’t be known a widely held belief?I think he means the messiah's family won't have been famous. Opinions vary on the subject, but it isn't a major point either way.


I’m not required to believe anything anyone says, and I very rarely ever do unless I check it out for myself. One example of this is where you pointed out to me that you didn’t know of any instance where Rambam changed his mind on Is.53. Just because I read that in a book doesn’t mean I believed it. I wouldn’t totally dismiss it either. But after consulting with you and then investigating a little further and not finding anything substantial, I gave more weight to your side than the books. This still doesn’t mean that he never changed his mind, but I’m not convinced that he did.OK, being intellectually honest is important. :)




No, God isn’t a liar and I do believe anyone who loves Torah can’t stumble.Then perhaps the rabbis are right?


But what does Torah say?
“But it shall come about if you do not obey the Lord your God to observe to do all His commandments and statutes with which I charge you this day, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you.” De.28:15And yet, all these curses did not affect every generation. In fact, the good prophecies in Deuteronomy 30 are being fulfilled in our lifetime. Obviously God does not expect perfection, but rather a good honest effort.


You may not believe this, but only one Person who has ever lived never broke Torah. 'Never broke Torah'? An interesting way of putting it... I find a couple of things wrong with this statement.

First, the whole entire torah does not apply to any one person. Some acts are to be done only by priests, or levites, or men, or women. So no one person can do everything because the torah was meant to be fulfilled by an entire community, not an individual.

Secondly, the torah is more than just a list of prohibitions. Much of it is things that we must do, not things that are prohibited. And once again, no one person can do all of it. It requires a community.


I guess we could use children who were too young to know the difference between right and wrong in those instances, but the Bible does say about the flood days,
God looked on the earth and behold it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. Ge.6:12
And about Sodom,
…I will not destroy it on account of the ten. Ge.18:32So nine good people might have perished in Sodom.




I know. Although during the temple days, Jesus did call the leaders “blind guides”. Mt.23:24 I don’t mean to sound like I’m picking on one culture. I believe within the church there are false teachings. It’s bound to happen to anybody, but I think it only really matters when the Jewish religion is corrupted. Why?




Mohammed changed Torah. Jesus did not. Sure Jesus did. He took 613 commandments and reduced it to 2. Major major change.


I disagree with that. Not because I believe the sacrifices are symbolic of Jesus, but simply because I think if God told Moses not to sacrifice, he wouldn’t have. But the people would have. The torah wasn't given to only holy people like Moses, but to flawed humans like myself.

let's use another example. Why didn't the torah outlaw slavery? It's obviously immoral to own another person. Ah, so the answer is because that's what people did back then. they owned slaves. So the torah instead said, if you choose to own a slave, you're going to have to treat them humanely. And gradually, as the other moral lessons of the torah spread through mankind, slavery was viewed for the immoral act that it is.



I’m not ignoring them. It’s just that I know the NT better than Torah and it (the NT) speaks of Jesus as the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. Jn.1:29 Right, but this is a point of faith, not fact. Jesus is the lamb of God because the NT says he is, not because it's an undisputed, empirical fact...

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 04:16 PM
I am familiar with the practice and that too is borrowed from Judaism. Lesser impurity is removed by immersion in water.



You're mixing two topics.

Holy is not the same as 'not impure'. The Temple Mount is holy (Kadosh, because you seem to like Hebrew) because God made it so. People can be pure (Tahor in Hebrew) or impure (Tamay in Hebrew) based on what they have come in contact with.

The two topics are very different.

Then explain yourself.
You haven't clarified the difference. Nor have you explained the significance of the red heifer ashes in relation to the difference.

The book of John is full of examples of Jewish practices and the signs done by the Messiah to clarify spiritual meaning for the Jews. ie. John 2:6 the six waterpots set aside for purification according to Jewish practice, is where the water He turned to wine came from.




One does not need repentance for being impure. Coming in contact with a corpse isn't a sin; in some instances one is even obligated to do so. Once it has happened though, the person cannot enter the temple mount in that state. That would be a sin.


What does one need for "being impure"?

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 04:48 PM
Then explain yourself.
You haven't clarified the difference. Nor have you explained the significance of the red heifer ashes in relation to the difference. Coming in close proximity with various objects renders one 'impure'. It's the state that one is in. It isn't a sin to be in such a state. It is a sin to come in contact with holy objects, or be on holy ground when in such a state.

One becomes pure by doing certain things based on the level of impurity. For a low level, one must completely immerse in water. For a high level, one must be sprinkled with the ashes of a red heifer that was sacrificed in the proscribed manner. The purpose for the red heifer is not known.



The book of John is full of examples of Jewish practices and the signs done by the Messiah to clarify spiritual meaning for the Jews. ie. John 2:6 the six waterpots set aside for purification according to Jewish practice, is where the water He turned to wine came from.I am unfamiliar with the refrence in John. It may not be tied to any Jewish practice.

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 05:24 PM
Coming in close proximity with various objects renders one 'impure'. It's the state that one is in. It isn't a sin to be in such a state. It is a sin to come in contact with holy objects, or be on holy ground when in such a state.

One becomes pure by doing certain things based on the level of impurity. For a low level, one must completely immerse in water. For a high level, one must be sprinkled with the ashes of a red heifer that was sacrificed in the proscribed manner.

What level of impurity would you say Moses was in at the burning bush. He only had to take off his shoes.


The purpose for the red heifer is not known.

How is this believed when it is not understood? Apparently there are many things about Judaism that you do not understand, yet you follow it.
While, what is called "cradle believers" (believing what their parents taught them), may not fully understand everything, someone of their affiliation does.


I am unfamiliar with the refrence in John. It may not be tied to any Jewish practice.

Those pots of water for Jewish purification (those scriptures clearly state it as part of Jewish practice) are a sure sign it's tied into Jewish practice. Or do you mean that current Jews don't practice purification.

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 05:30 PM
What level of impurity would you say Moses was in at the burning bush. He only had to take off his shoes.None.



How is this believed when it is not understood?The same bible is your holy book. Do you understand the significance of the red heifer?

We believe many things we don't understand. For example, we believe that God makes bad things happen to good people. We don't know why this is so, other than the fact that it's God's will.


Apparently there are many things about Judaism that you do not understand, yet you follow it.Well yes, sometimes that is the point. To do something that God asks of us even if we don't understand it. It proves that one is acting out of faith, not out of logic.


While, what is called "cradle believers" (believing what their parents taught them), may not fully understand everything, someone of their affiliation does.
What?


Those pots of water for Jewish purification (those scriptures clearly state it as part of Jewish practice) are a sure sign it's tied into Jewish practice. Or do you mean that current Jews don't practice purification.We do, but any object to be purified must be completely immersed in water. So a pot of water wouldn't be for purifying a person. They might have been for purifying small objects though. We still do that today too.

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 08:10 PM
None.


The same bible is your holy book. Do you understand the significance of the red heifer?

Only that it was unique. Perhaps a one of a kind. But then that is how we Christians relate Jesus.


We believe many things we don't understand. For example, we believe that God makes bad things happen to good people. We don't know why this is so, other than the fact that it's God's will.

Christians strive to understand. And yes, I have explained this concept of, why bad things happen to good people, it is a spiritual law in operation.
I didn't post that explanation in this thread, but in a thread in bible chat.



Well yes, sometimes that is the point. To do something that God asks of us even if we don't understand it. It proves that one is acting out of faith, not out of logic.

I agree that faith is necessary, but not without reason. Logic is faulty.


What?


IOW you were born into your religion, it doesn't matter whether you understand it or not. You just accept it. I understand you must honor your parents.

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 08:25 PM
Only that it was unique. Perhaps a one of a kind. But then that is how we Christians relate Jesus.You know, if I had a million dollars, I would have bet it that you would say that the red heifer is about Jesus. :lol:




Christians strive to understand. And yes, I have explained this concept of, why bad things happen to good people, it is a spiritual law in operation.
I didn't post that explanation in this thread, but in a thread in bible chat.Jews strive to understand too. But one must be humble enough to admit that not everything God says or does can be understood by our limited mind.



I agree that faith is necessary, but not without reason. Logic is faulty.Maybe yours is. Mine logic works just fine.



IOW you were born into your religion, it doesn't matter whether you understand it or not. You just accept it. I understand you must honor your parents.This canard again? :rolleyes:

Jews are Jews because we believe that God gave our ancestors a mission at Sinai- a mission that we are still obligated to do. We may not understand every aspect of what God wants us to do. That's ok.

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 08:50 PM
You know, if I had a million dollars, I would have bet it that you would say that the red heifer is about Jesus. :lol:

Well, I don't think everything is about Jesus. I do believe there is a reason behind it. My ref. to Jesus was a comparison.



Maybe yours is. Mine logic works just fine.

Then if it's working, where is your logical or reasonable explanation. Simply parroting something you were told doesn't explain. And hey, you opened this can of worms, so deal with the wigglers.:D

How about you explain why Jews not only make "atonement" but also must be purified. Like what are you purified from, if not sin.


This canard again? :rolleyes:

Not baseless judging from your responses.


Jews are Jews because we believe that God gave our ancestors a mission at Sinai- a mission that we are still obligated to do. We may not understand every aspect of what God wants us to do. That's ok.

Well after thousands of years, I would think you would all be experts on the subject. Or at least on what you wrote down. :P

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 09:15 PM
Well, I don't think everything is about Jesus. I do believe there is a reason behind it. My ref. to Jesus was a comparison.
Whatever you say. I still would have won the bet.



Then if it's working, where is your logical or reasonable explanation. Simply parroting something you were told doesn't explain. And hey, you opened this can of worms, so deal with the wigglers.:D
There is none that we can understand. Is it so hard to understand that God is smarter than we are?


How about you explain why Jews not only make "atonement" but also must be purified. Like what are you purified from, if not sin. You're looking at Judaism through a Christian lens. To you, everything is about being 'purified from sin'. If I get dirt on my hands, I need to clean them- but not from sin. If I touch something that is spiritually dirty, I need to clean myself- but not from sin.

I don't know how many times I have to say the same thing.



Not baseless judging from your responses.Whatever.



Well after thousands of years, I would think you would all be experts on the subject. Or at least on what you wrote down. :PWe surely are experts in knowing what God wants us to do. We don't always know why he wants us to do it though.

Since you like Hebrew, I'll throw another tidbit your way. :)

The Commandments in Hebrew are referred to by three different terms.

One is 'Mishpat', commonly translated as 'Judgment'. This refers to laws that are necessary for a civilization to survive, like prohibition against stealing or murder. These are logical and rational rules, and even other civilizations would understand and follow them.

The second is 'Edot', which we would translate as 'testimony'. This refers to things that God wants us to do to remember the things that He has done for us. Celebrating Passover to commemorate God's taking us out of Egypt is a fine example. These make sense to us, but we wouldn't do them unless God told us to.

The third is called 'Chukim', commonly translated as 'statutes'. These are commandments that do not have a rational cause, but we follow them anyway because God told us to. Examples of this include keeping Kosher and the purification by the ashes of the red heifer.

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 09:26 PM
Teke, I'll explain it like this:

If I joined the peace corps and went to the heart of Africa, I would find that people there have malaria. Now, I might have a pill that can cure malaria. Do I have to explain to the people there that Malaria is caused by a parasite and this pill works by interfering with the metabolic processes of one stage of the parasitic organism responsible for the disease? Do they even have to know that for the pill to work? Or does it work whether they understand it or not?

So to for God's orders. Some we understand and some we don't. But they spiritually elevate us in any case.


There are so may things we don't understand. There are gaps in our knowledge of every single scientific discipline. And those are just features of this universe God created for us. If we can't understand His creation, why should we expect to understand Him?

threebigrocks
Feb 20th 2008, 09:56 PM
Just a gentle reminder - please watch the edgy words. Pass the salt!

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 10:30 PM
You're looking at Judaism through a Christian lens. To you, everything is about being 'purified from sin'. If I get dirt on my hands, I need to clean them- but not from sin. If I touch something that is spiritually dirty, I need to clean myself- but not from sin.

I've asked questions about Judaism that I would think anyone would ask. I am not the sort to do just anything because someone told me to. No, God has never led me that way.

And I do not believe that "everything is about being purified from sin". I've already told you that we have the same view about that.

I do not understand your concept of impure. I do understand if you touch something dirty and need to wash your hands. But I also don't believe that creation is unclean/impure. I do believe it needs God's intervention.




We surely are experts in knowing what God wants us to do. We don't always know why he wants us to do it though.

Since you like Hebrew, I'll throw another tidbit your way. :)

The Commandments in Hebrew are referred to by three different terms.

One is 'Mishpat', commonly translated as 'Judgment'. This refers to laws that are necessary for a civilization to survive, like prohibition against stealing or murder. These are logical and rational rules, and even other civilizations would understand and follow them.

The second is 'Edot', which we would translate as 'testimony'. This refers to things that God wants us to do to remember the things that He has done for us. Celebrating Passover to commemorate God's taking us out of Egypt is a fine example. These make sense to us, but we wouldn't do them unless God told us to.

The third is called 'Chukim', commonly translated as 'statutes'. These are commandments that do not have a rational cause, but we follow them anyway because God told us to. Examples of this include keeping Kosher and the purification by the ashes of the red heifer.


I understand "keeping Kosher", it's a fast.
Guess the red heifer will remain a mystery.

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 10:34 PM
Teke, I'll explain it like this:

If I joined the peace corps and went to the heart of Africa, I would find that people there have malaria. Now, I might have a pill that can cure malaria. Do I have to explain to the people there that Malaria is caused by a parasite and this pill works by interfering with the metabolic processes of one stage of the parasitic organism responsible for the disease? Do they even have to know that for the pill to work? Or does it work whether they understand it or not?

So to for God's orders. Some we understand and some we don't. But they spiritually elevate us in any case.


There are so may things we don't understand. There are gaps in our knowledge of every single scientific discipline. And those are just features of this universe God created for us. If we can't understand His creation, why should we expect to understand Him?

A placebo would work just as effectively in that case.

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 10:44 PM
A placebo would work just as effectively in that case.
I don't know why I bother. You missed the whole point. :giveup:

Actions we do have spiritual ramifications we cannot sense. When we do a good deed, in addition to any obvious good effect it might have, it spiritually elevates the doer. Some acts have no obvious effect, but they still spiritually elevate the doer.

Does this make sense to you?

Fenris
Feb 20th 2008, 10:59 PM
I've asked questions about Judaism that I would think anyone would ask. I am not the sort to do just anything because someone told me to. No, God has never led me that way.That's fine. You are not a Jew though.




I do not understand your concept of impure. I do understand if you touch something dirty and need to wash your hands. But I also don't believe that creation is unclean/impure. I do believe it needs God's intervention.
It's in the bible, whether you understand it or not.




I understand "keeping Kosher", it's a fast. What?

Guess the red heifer will remain a mystery.yep

Teke
Feb 20th 2008, 11:04 PM
Actions we do have spiritual ramifications we cannot sense. When we do a good deed, in addition to any obvious good effect it might have, it spiritually elevates the doer. Some acts have no obvious effect, but they still spiritually elevate the doer.

Does this make sense to you?

Yes. This is similar to my view on why bad things happen to good people.

But this is not the same as the subject of the ashes. There must be some explainable aspect of that. Else why not any ashes, ashes are ashes right. Unless this is like blessing the water which the ashes are put in, before sprinkling the person. In that case I could understand. As every culture has their tradition of doing this in one form or another.
Guess I can chalk it up to an ethnic tradition.

I can only think of Christian ones to give examples of, sorry. For instance the Greeks have an ethnic tradition when performing baptisms, they oil the person from head to toe. This is an ancient tradition of their culture (preparation for death) which was carried into Christianity. Since baptism represents the death and resurrection of the person, they oil em up before their death (immersing them in water). Anyway, it is unique to the Greeks only. Not all Christian baptisms are performed in this manner.

RoadWarrior
Feb 20th 2008, 11:14 PM
Guess the red heifer will remain a mystery.

Is this the part that is mysterious?

Nu 19:1-10
19 Now the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 2 "This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord has commanded, saying: 'Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring you a red heifer without blemish, in which there is no defect and on which a yoke has never come. 3 You shall give it to Eleazar the priest, that he may take it outside the camp, and it shall be slaughtered before him; 4 and Eleazar the priest shall take some of its blood with his finger, and sprinkle some of its blood seven times directly in front of the tabernacle of meeting. 5 Then the heifer shall be burned in his sight: its hide, its flesh, its blood, and its offal shall be burned. 6 And the priest shall take cedar wood and hyssop and scarlet, and cast them into the midst of the fire burning the heifer. 7 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, he shall bathe in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp; the priest shall be unclean until evening. 8 And the one who burns it shall wash his clothes in water, bathe in water, and shall be unclean until evening. 9 Then a man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and store them outside the camp in a clean place; and they shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for the water of purification; it is for purifying from sin. 10 And the one who gathers the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until evening. It shall be a statute forever to the children of Israel and to the stranger who dwells among them.
NKJV

Joyfilled
Feb 21st 2008, 02:37 AM
Good question.


OK, first of all let's clarify something. Sacrifice did not atone for all sins. Animal sacrifice was only done for certain types of sins. A careful reading of Leviticus will demonstrate that one generally brought sacrifice only for inadvertent, accidental sins. When one sinned intentionally, sacrifice was not enough to remove that sin.

So now onto your question: why sacrifice?

First of all, we have to realize that the bible was not given in a vacuum. In many ways it was evolutionary and not revolutionary. It was give to people who lived in societies where sacrifice was how they worshiped their gods. So rather than forbidding it, God took an idolatrous practice and made it into a monotheistic practice. In this manner, God weaned the Jews of the religions they saw around them.

Of course, sacrifice also had a practical aspect in the atonement process. When one brought a sacrifice for sin, they had to lean on the animal and confess their sin. Now imagine what they were thinking as they did that: this animal is going to die for my sin. Maybe it should be me that dies, but God lets me put this animal in my place. Maybe I should be more careful not to sin in the future, lest it IS me that dies for the sin next time...

And so by bringing the sacrifice, it would lead the sinner to be more careful with their actions in the future.

In the balance, the sacrifice appears to be more for US than for God.

So why have a Day of Atonement every year if one's sins have already been taken away once and for all? And what if someone dies before the Day of Atonement? And also, how can a sin be atoned for if the sinner or someone else doesn't pay for it with his life? :confused

threebigrocks
Feb 21st 2008, 02:47 AM
I posted a warning on the previous page. Please everyone, the purpose of this thread is to gain a perspective of the Jewish faith. It is not to drill fenris. If you need to understand where I'm coming from - please go back and read the first couple pages of this thread. It has a very different tone to it. The topic is how Jews atone.

Fenris - maybe you could summarize.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 01:06 PM
Is this the part that is mysterious?


Yes, that's it.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 01:10 PM
But this is not the same as the subject of the ashes. There must be some explainable aspect of that. Else why not any ashes, ashes are ashes right. Unless this is like blessing the water which the ashes are put in, before sprinkling the person. In that case I could understand. As every culture has their tradition of doing this in one form or another.
Guess I can chalk it up to an ethnic tradition.

It isn't an 'ethnic tradition'. It is something that God commanded us to do. See the above passage cited by RoadWarrior.

JesusisGod
Feb 21st 2008, 01:11 PM
Hi threebigrocks.
[/quote]I posted a warning on the previous page. Please everyone, the purpose of this thread is to gain a perspective of the Jewish faith. It is not to drill fenris. If you need to understand where I'm coming from - please go back and read the first couple pages of this thread. It has a very different tone to it. The topic is how Jews atone.[/quote]
Sorry about that.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 01:14 PM
So why have a Day of Atonement every year if one's sins have already been taken away once and for all?
Jews don't believe that one's sins can be taken away once in for all. Life is a process. One strives, falls short, asks God for forgiveness, and tries again. It's all part of the process of self-improvement, of becoming a better person every day.


And what if someone dies before the Day of Atonement?
Ah.

Well, in the Talmud a rabbi said that one should atone the day before one's death. When someone asked him how one knows when that day is, he responded, "Exactly!".

So Jews ask God for forgiveness of our sins every day in our prayer.


And also, how can a sin be atoned for if the sinner or someone else doesn't pay for it with his life? :confused

Well, we all do pay with our lives eventually.

But not every sin requires the death penalty.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 01:16 PM
I posted a warning on the previous page. Please everyone, the purpose of this thread is to gain a perspective of the Jewish faith. It is not to drill fenris. If you need to understand where I'm coming from - please go back and read the first couple pages of this thread. It has a very different tone to it. The topic is how Jews atone.It's ok, really. :) There is a lot of ignorance on the topic, and the only way that's going to be cleared up is if questions are asked.


Fenris - maybe you could summarize.Well, I stand by my initial posts.

JesusisGod
Feb 21st 2008, 01:23 PM
Hi Fenris.

Sure Jesus did. He took 613 commandments and reduced it to 2. Major major change.
Just for the record, Jesus was asked,

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?”

He answered,

“You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it, love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Mt.24:36-40

Jesus said Torah is upheld by love for God and mankind.

cya.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 01:50 PM
Hi Fenris.Good morning!

[size=3][/color]
Just for the record, Jesus was asked,

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?”

He answered,

“You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it, love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Mt.24:36-40That's actually true, but it isn't complete.


Jesus said Torah is upheld by love for God and mankind.That's backwards. One shows their love of God and mankind by keeping the Torah.


cya. Later, 'gator.

Teke
Feb 21st 2008, 07:48 PM
It isn't an 'ethnic tradition'. It is something that God commanded us to do. See the above passage cited by RoadWarrior.

My point was that it is unique to/for the Jews. Not all people are required to do this.

Fenris
Feb 21st 2008, 08:54 PM
My point was that it is unique to/for the Jews. Not all people are required to do this.
Actually, almost all of the bible is unique to the Jews.

JesusisGod
Feb 23rd 2008, 10:51 PM
Hi Fenris.

Jesus wasn't presented to me in a negative light. He wasn't presented to me at all.
That sounds like an indictment in itself.


I'm not following...
You said that Rambam taught that when Messiah arrived, nobody would know who his parents were, and that this could mean that they wouldn’t be well known or famous. The 1st century Jews seemed to have this belief.

“However, we know where this Man is from, but whenever the Christ may come, no one knows where He is from.” Jn.7:27


Why?
Because Jesus said, “…salvation is from the Jews.” Jn.4:22

Fenris
Feb 25th 2008, 01:36 PM
Hi Fenris.Hallo.


That sounds like an indictment in itself.Really? Did you learn about Mohammed and Sidharta and Confucius and Joseph Smith? Or were those people irrelevant to the teachings of your religion?



You said that Rambam taught that when Messiah arrived, nobody would know who his parents were, and that this could mean that they wouldn’t be well known or famous. The 1st century Jews seemed to have this belief.If this is so obvious, as you say, why wasn't the Rambam a Christian?

JesusisGod
Feb 25th 2008, 09:57 PM
Hi Fenris.

Really? Did you learn about Mohammed and Sidharta and Confucius and Joseph Smith? Or were those people irrelevant to the teachings of your religion?
Only Mohammed and Joseph Smith were relevant because the others had no connection to the Bible, but I will admit that I didn't investigate Mo or Joe until later in life. (I have a very funny story about the Mormons I'll share with you sometime.)

The point I was trying to make is that Jesus is the most famous Person who ever lived. Did you really never hear anything about Him until you were an adult?

Fenris
Feb 25th 2008, 10:01 PM
Pretty much, yeah.

Judaism is complete without him.

Just like Christianity is complete without Mohamed or Joseph Smith.

JesusisGod
Feb 25th 2008, 10:10 PM
And what did you hear about Him?

Fenris
Feb 25th 2008, 10:12 PM
And what did you hear about Him?What did I hear about him from who?

JesusisGod
Feb 25th 2008, 10:32 PM
What did I hear about him from who?
From nobody I guess. As I said Fenris, you never heard anything about the most famous Person who ever lived until you were an adult, right? A person who claimed to be your Messiah. Quite an indictment indeed!

Fenris
Feb 25th 2008, 10:41 PM
From nobody I guess. As I said Fenris, you never heard anything about the most famous Person who ever lived until you were an adult, right?As I said, Judaism is complete without him.

His famousness is not a criteria for whether or not I had heard of him. To be honest, having studied the facts about Jesus as Jews perceive them, I see why I hadn't heard about him. He simply does not add anything to Judaism in the manner that religious Jews perceive it.



A person who claimed to be your Messiah. Many claimed to be the Jewish messiah. All fell short. See one list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messianic_claimants


Quite an indictment indeed!I don't know why you use this term. 'Indictment'? Is someone on trial?

JesusisGod
Feb 26th 2008, 12:14 AM
As I said, Judaism is complete without him.
If Jesus is the Messiah, Judaism isn't complete without Him, is it?


His famousness is not a criteria for whether or not I had heard of him.
Get real. Fame is why you know about a person that you or anyone else you know have or has never met.


To be honest, having studied the facts about Jesus as Jews perceive them, I see why I hadn't heard about him.
Monster shock here.


He simply does not add anything to Judaism in the manner that religious Jews perceive it.
You have simply believed what you were told by the "religious Jews" you've read without ever having taken an unpredjuiced view of Jesus. Isn't that right?


I don't know why you use this term. 'Indictment'? Is someone on trial?
An indictment just an indication of something. In this case, that you've never really taken look at Jesus without preconceived ideas about Him.

Fenris
Feb 26th 2008, 01:30 PM
If Jesus is the Messiah, Judaism isn't complete without Him, is it?
Judaism was complete without the messiah from the revelation at Sinai until 30AD. Why shouldn't it be complete without the messiah from 30AD until today?

Jews don't believe that Jesus was the messiah, since he didn't fulfill the prophecies as expected. So we're still waiting.



Get real. Fame is why you know about a person that you or anyone else you know have or has never met. Is all fame deserved?



You have simply believed what you were told by the "religious Jews" you've read without ever having taken an unpredjuiced view of Jesus. Isn't that right?Everyone is prejudiced. Even you.

In your religious education, you were told about Jesus before you ever read the Tanach. Would you believe in him if you read the Tanach first? Impossible to answer.



An indictment just an indication of something. In this case, that you've never really taken look at Jesus without preconceived ideas about Him.And neither have you.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 01:36 AM
Actually, almost all of the bible is unique to the Jews.

I cite it as a "tradition", because it is a liturgical practice only Jews (an ethnic group) require.

Why is the bible unique to the Jews, because of Israels history. Other than that, I would say the Jew is where most others are with the ancient text, some is understood, some is not.

tgallison
Feb 27th 2008, 02:54 AM
Good morning![/font][/color]

No. Ezekiel states that in the post-messianic world the temple will be rebuilt and there will again be sacrifice. But we don't have those things now. I simply state a fact, and one that was forseen. Hosea 3:4 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.
No. Although I do not see the linkage in any case.



Fenris Greetings

This is an old post and I apologize, but I was going through this thread and I would like to relate to you what Jesus the Christ said about this verse.

John 2:18-22 "Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his discipiles remembered that he had said this unto them: and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said."

So Jesus is saying he is the spiritual Temple made without hands, replacing the physical Temple. That the Temple is here now, and is made up of Jesus Christ, and those that are his.

And if you say where is the sacrifice, here it is quoted in the following scripture.

Romans 12:1 "I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.?

Hebrew 13:15 "By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name."

Isaiah 66:2-3 "For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the Lord: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word. He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a Dog's neck: he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered seine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed and idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations."

In Jesus Christ, terrell

JesusisGod
Feb 27th 2008, 12:56 PM
Judaism was complete without the messiah from the revelation at Sinai until 30AD. Why shouldn't it be complete without the messiah from 30AD until today?
If your religion is complete from Moses, why bother with the prophets after him? Aren't they part of Judaism, and don't they testify of Messiah? And even before Moses, isn't the coming of Messiah part of Jewish thought?


Jews don't believe that Jesus was the messiah, since he didn't fulfill the prophecies as expected. So we're still waiting.
Fenris, I have a question for you.

Puttting the unfulfilles prophecies of Messiah and the execution of Jesus on hold for a moment, would you say from your knowledge of Torah and the writings of the NT that the (alleged) character of Jesus fits the Messiah?


Is all fame deserved?
Absolutely not. Testimony should be examined.


Everyone is prejudiced. Even you.
That's true, but in our conversation, I have demonstrated the ability to admit when you are right and I am wrong, thereby losing my prejudice.


And neither have you.
You don't know how wrong you are about this. I have much to learn about the God of the Jews and His Messiah. And I can point to at least one instance where your bias led you to believe something about Jesus that isn't true.

"You are not to repeat false rumors..." Ex.23:1

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 01:02 PM
Fenris GreetingsGood morning.


This is an old post and I apologize, but I was going through this thread and I would like to relate to you what Jesus the Christ said about this verse.No apologies needed. I'll do my best.



So Jesus is saying he is the spiritual Temple made without hands, replacing the physical Temple. That the Temple is here now, and is made up of Jesus Christ, and those that are his.
Right, I understand that this is a cardinal Christian belief. It does not fulfill the Jewish expectation of the prophecy, however. Jews believe that when God says the messiah will rebuild the temple, it means temple and not 'temple'.


And if you say where is the sacrifice, here it is quoted in the following scripture.

Romans 12:1 "I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.?

Hebrew 13:15 "By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name."Well, if one reads Ezekiel he prophesies that there will be specific animal sacrifices in the new temple.


Isaiah 66:2-3 "For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the Lord: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word. He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a Dog's neck: he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered seine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed and idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations."I'm not sure where you're going with these verses...

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 01:21 PM
If your religion is complete from Moses, why bother with the prophets after him?
Read what the prophets say. They don't create new laws or new ideas. They only tell the Jews to follow the laws that God gave.


Aren't they part of Judaism, and don't they testify of Messiah?

And even before Moses, isn't the coming of Messiah part of Jewish thought?Yep. See Deuteronomy chapter 30.



Puttting the unfulfilles prophecies of Messiah and the execution of Jesus on hold for a moment, would you say from your knowledge of Torah and the writings of the NT that the (alleged) character of Jesus fits the MessiahPossibly... although many of his contemporaries quoted in the Mishna seem at least as holy.

But there have been many saintly men throughout Jewish history. In fact, tradition has it that in every generation there is one man who is capable of being the messiah. None of those men actualized that potential because we as a people were not worthy.



That's true, but in our conversation, I have demonstrated the ability to admit when you are right and I am wrong, thereby losing my prejudice.What an amusing thought.

You're prejudiced because you were taught from an early age that Jesus was the messiah as prophesized in the OT. Now you are not capable of reading those holy books without seeing the 'logical' connection between them and Jesus.

I'm prejudiced because I was taught from an early age that the Law is eternal and God's covenant with the Jews is unconditional and permanent. I was taught that the messiah will be a holy man who will lead the Jews back to Israel and cause us to follow the Law, rebuild the temple, and bring about world peace and universal knowledge of God. I read the NT and don't see any of that.

So you see, my friend, neither of us is capable of being completely intellectually honest here. The best we can hope for is to understand each other's position, even if we can't agree with it.



You don't know how wrong you are about this. I have much to learn about the God of the Jews and His Messiah. Ah, on this we are in agreement.


And I can point to at least one instance where your bias led you to believe something about Jesus that isn't true.

"You are not to repeat false rumors..." Ex.23:1Oh really? Do tell. When did I repeat false rumors?

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 02:51 PM
I cite it as a "tradition", because it is a liturgical practice only Jews (an ethnic group) require. Well, it's in the bible. God told us to do it.


Why is the bible unique to the Jews, because of Israels history. Other than that, I would say the Jew is where most others are with the ancient text, some is understood, some is not.I don't understand.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 03:10 PM
Well, it's in the bible. God told us to do it.

Granted historical text are subject to interpretation. I can only assume this means that Judaism follows a similar approach as Protestants and evangelicals of scripture only. The only problem with such an approach, alone, is it is without validity.


I don't understand.

That is what I have demonstrated.

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 04:00 PM
Granted historical text are subject to interpretation.
The procedure seems pretty straightforward to me.


I can only assume this means that Judaism follows a similar approach as Protestants and evangelicals of scripture only. The only problem with such an approach, alone, is it is without validity.
Uh, no, we have the Oral Law which is far longer and more detailed than the bible itself.


That is what I have demonstrated.What a clarifying answer.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 04:22 PM
The procedure seems pretty straightforward to me.



"Seems"...........Pro 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.

What seems to be and what is demonstrated as factual are two different things. The ashes of the red heifer may seem to be a means of purifying oneself to a more holier state, but that has not been proven by demonstration.

Christianity demonstrates the validity of Jesus Christ and His teachings by living examples. Ashes nor a book is necessary to do so.

Seeing is believing in the flesh.

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 04:40 PM
"Seems"...........Pro 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.
The procedure about the ashes doesn't 'seemeth right', it doesn't make sense at all. Still, the procedure is very straightforward.


What seems to be and what is demonstrated as factual are two different things. The ashes of the red heifer may seem to be a means of purifying oneself to a more holier state, but that has not been proven by demonstration. that's true, because purity and impurity are metaphysical concepts. They can't be perceived at all.


Christianity demonstrates the validity of Jesus Christ and His teachings by living examples. Ashes nor a book is necessary to do so.
That's a point of faith, not fact.


Seeing is believing in the flesh.
I haven't seen Jesus or ritual impurity.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 05:11 PM
Quote Teke:
Christianity demonstrates the validity of Jesus Christ and His teachings by living examples. Ashes nor a book is necessary to do so.

Quote Fenris:
That's a point of faith, not fact.
________________________________________

No, it's a fact.

Comparison wise.

I have seen those who have left all and followed Christ.
I have never seen those purified by red heifer ashes.

Which brings the Jew back to the book only. Be that scripture (OT) or oral tradition written down. These things are not living breathing witnesses.

Faith is active and alive. Without that fact, it is pointless.

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 05:17 PM
No, it's a fact.

Comparison wise.

I have seen those who have left all and followed Christ.
I have never seen those purified by red heifer ashes. That's because no one has been purified by those ashes for 1600 years. But so what? It's not a vital part of Judaism today.


Which brings the Jew back to the book only. Be that scripture (OT) or oral tradition written down. These things are not living breathing witnesses.The living, breathing witnesses are those who came before us, carrying down the oral tradition of the revelation at Sinai.


Faith is active and alive. Without that fact, it is pointless.

Jew also have faith. Millions have been slaughtered through the centuries for not forsaking it.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 05:35 PM
That's because no one has been purified by those ashes for 1600 years. But so what? It's not a vital part of Judaism today.

In essence this means it has no ontological reality.



Jew also have faith. Millions have been slaughtered through the centuries for not forsaking it.

You never cease to call to remembrance the slaughter of Jews at some point of history. How does that strengthen the case for Judaism? There are many of other nations who have been slaughtered throughout history. As a matter of fact, Christians have never stopped being slaughtered for their faith to this present day. But that doesn't seem to matter to Jews.

Is historical slaughter of people, in this case specifically Jews, a guideline in Judaism to strengthen faith. :confused

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 05:39 PM
In essence this means it has no ontological reality.
I don't know what that means.



You never cease to call to remembrance the slaughter of Jews at some point of history. How does that strengthen the case for Judaism? I use it as an example of faith, since you seem to feel that Jews don't have any.

Teke
Feb 27th 2008, 05:55 PM
I don't know what that means.


Ontology is "being".


I use it as an example of faith, since you seem to feel that Jews don't have any.

Oh, I believe God has given everyone a measure of faith. What they choose to put it in differs. ;)

For Christians, our Lord in His wisdom, gave us a Counselor known as the Holy Spirit (there is no contradiction of the laws of Torah BTW). When the Church first began, enlightenment by the Holy Spirit could be given by an elder such as the Apostles. This kind of guidance is not given to our times, nor are we worthy of such.

But the counsel of the Holy Spirit is given to us. ie. life by counsel
This must be tested by experience. Experience by being is ontological.

Fenris
Feb 27th 2008, 06:33 PM
Ontology is "being".Well, it has no 'being' now but it it will in the future. As will animal sacrifice.



Oh, I believe God has given everyone a measure of faith. What they choose to put it in differs. ;)I don't believe anyone chooses their faith. That's why God doesn't judge us on faith, but on action.

JesusisGod
Feb 28th 2008, 04:03 AM
Hi Fenris.

None of those men actualized that potential because we as a people were not worthy.
What does this mean? Do you believe Messiah will not come until Jews attain some type of worthiness that will allow his coming?


I was taught that the messiah will be a holy man who will lead the Jews back to Israel
Do you believe it is necessary for Messiah to lead Jews back or Israel, or do you think Jews will return on their own?


Oh really? Do tell. When did I repeat false rumors?
When I said Jesus never changed Torah and you responded,
"Sure Jesus did. He took 613 commandments and reduced it to 2. Major major change." Jesus never said there were only two commandments. In fact, He said,

"Until Heaven and earth pass, not one iota will perish from the law until all has been fulfilled. Therefore, anyone who breaks one of these least commandments and teaches men so will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does and teaches them will be called great..." Mt.5:18-19

Fenris
Feb 28th 2008, 01:10 PM
Hi Fenris.Morning.


What does this mean? Do you believe Messiah will not come until Jews attain some type of worthiness that will allow his coming?That is what the prophets said, yes.



Do you believe it is necessary for Messiah to lead Jews back or Israel, or do you think Jews will return on their own?
Well, Jews are returning to Israel even today. But since most of the world doesn't seem to accept Israel's right to exist, I would say that we aren't there yet.


When I said Jesus never changed Torah and you responded,
"Sure Jesus did. He took 613 commandments and reduced it to 2. Major major change." Jesus never said there were only two commandments. In fact, He said,

"Until Heaven and earth pass, not one iota will perish from the law until all has been fulfilled. Therefore, anyone who breaks one of these least commandments and teaches men so will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does and teaches them will be called great..." Mt.5:18-19Then why is it that Christians do not keep kosher, for example?

JesusisGod
Feb 28th 2008, 04:29 PM
Hi Fenris.

That is what the prophets said, yes.
Would you cite scripture to sustain this belief? I'd appreciate it very much.


Well, Jews are returning to Israel even today. But since most of the world doesn't seem to accept Israel's right to exist, I would say that we aren't there yet.
I only asked because if Jews do believe Messiah must lead them back to Israel and it's happening now, you might consider that Messiah has already come. It's why in our conversation I also mentioned that your prophets speak of a time when gentiles worldwide will come to know about your God. Most everyone does now and that is because of one particular Jew.

"I the LORD called you righteously. I took hold of your hand. I shaped you and made you a covenant for the people, to be a light to the Goyim, so that you can open blind eyes, free the prisoners from confinement, those living in darkness from the dungeon. I am LORD. That is My name. I yield My glory to no one else or My praise to any idol. See how the former predictions come true? And now new things do I declare. Before they sprout, I tell you of them." Is.42:6-9


Then why is it that Christians do not keep kosher, for example?
Your question is more profound than you realize and the answer is no less astonishing.

When God first began making Himself known to gentiles by teaching of Jews, a dispute arose between some Jews who believed in Jesus (some of who were Pharisees) and Paul (also a Jew of course). The Teachers believed it was necessary for the gentiles to keep all of Torah as Moses commanded and Paul did not, so they went to Jerusalem to ask the Apostles (who again, were all Jews) about the matter. This is what Simon said;

"Brothers, you know that God chose among us (the Jews) that the gentiles, by my mouth, should hear the good news and believe....and put no difference between us (the Jews) and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Therefore, why do you test God, to put a yoke around the necks of the gentiles, which neither our fathers or us were able to bear?" Acts 15:7,9-10

Fenris, to understand Simons reasoning, you must examine your own self and judge whether his words that you are unable to keep Torah are true or not.

In a post to Teke, you said,

I don't believe anyone chooses their faith. That's why God doesn't judge us on faith, but on action.

But what does Torah say about the father of your race?

"And he believed in the LORD, and He counted it to him for righteousness." Ge.15:6

All of the promises made to Abraham including his descendants were given to him by God because of his faith. Abrahams action was only a result of his faith. On the other hand, the covenant made with Israel at Sinai was meant teach the people to rely wholly on Gods mercy.

"Do not think...it is to reward my righteousness that Adonai has brought me to take possession of this land...It is not because of your righteousness or because your heart is upright...but to punish the wickedness of these nations....and to confirm the word which Adonai swore to...Abraham. Therefore, understand that it is not for your righteousness that Adonai your God is giving you this good land to possess." De.9:4-6

and again;

"None of the people aged twenty and over who came out of Egypt will see the land that I swore to Abraham...because they have not followed Me wholly...." Nu.32:11

This is why Jesus said,

"Don't think I'm going to accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you, Moses, in whom you trust." Jn.5:45

This is why the Bible says,

"I, yes I, Am LORD, and beside Me there is no deliverer. Is.43:11

Fenris
Feb 28th 2008, 05:01 PM
Hi Fenris.Hello.


Would you cite scripture to sustain this belief? I'd appreciate it very much.Deuteronomy 30:1 And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt bethink thyself among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee, 2 and shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and hearken to His voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul; 3 that then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the peoples, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee..





I only asked because if Jews do believe Messiah must lead them back to Israel and it's happening now, you might consider that Messiah has already come.
Yes, but after he came, as you believe, is when the Jews were dispersed. So the timing is all a bit off.:hmm:


It's why in our conversation I also mentioned that your prophets speak of a time when gentiles worldwide will come to know about your God. Most everyone does now and that is because of one particular Jew. Well, the problem is that billions of people worship that particular Jew as God. That's a really big stumbling block, from the Jewish perspective.

Aside from that, we don't have the other propesized events: universal peace, ingathering of the exiles, rebuilt temple, etc etc. Further, even a cursory reading of the prophets says that in the messianic era the Jews will be looked upon favorably, not despised by billions as we are today.


"I the LORD called you righteously. I took hold of your hand. I shaped you and made you a covenant for the people, to be a light to the Goyim, so that you can open blind eyes, free the prisoners from confinement, those living in darkness from the dungeon.And many Jews today still believe that this is our mission: to spread morality and knowledge of God's will through the world.




But what does Torah say about the father of your race?

"And he believed in the LORD, and He counted it to him for righteousness." Ge.15:6This is the most misquoted and out of context verse I've ever seen. Please take the time to read the entire chapter:

1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying: 'Fear not, Abram, I am thy shield, thy reward shall be exceeding great.' 2 And Abram said: 'O Lord GOD, what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go hence childless, and he that shall be possessor of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?' 3 And Abram said: 'Behold, to me Thou hast given no seed, and, lo, one born in my house is to be mine heir.' 4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying: 'This man shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.' 5 And He brought him forth abroad, and said: 'Look now toward heaven, and count the stars, if thou be able to count them'; and He said unto him: 'So shall thy seed be.' 6 And he believed in the LORD; and He counted it to him for righteousness.

In other words, God made him a specific promise about his lineage, and he trusted God that this would come to pass. This is a far cry from the blind faith that you're making it out to be.


All of the promises made to Abraham including his descendants were given to him by God because of his faith. Abrahams action was only a result of his faith. No! As we see in the above paragraph, God made the promise first, and Abraham believed it after it was promised to him.

See also Genesis 22: 15 And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven, 16 and said: 'By Myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, because thou hast done this thing...

God rewarded Abraham because he DID what God asked, not because of his mere belief.


On the other hand, the covenant made with Israel at Sinai was meant teach the people to rely wholly on Gods mercy.

It looks to me like the Covenant at Sinai was about God telling the Jewish people what actions He wanted them to take. You know, the Ten Commandments and all that?


"Do not think...it is to reward my righteousness that Adonai has brought me to take possession of this land...It is not because of your righteousness or because your heart is upright...but to punish the wickedness of these nations....and to confirm the word which Adonai swore to...Abraham. Therefore, understand that it is not for your righteousness that Adonai your God is giving you this good land to possess." De.9:4-6
Right, because God keeps His promises.



"None of the people aged twenty and over who came out of Egypt will see the land that I swore to Abraham...because they have not followed Me wholly...." Nu.32:11
Because God punishes bad actions.


This is why Jesus said,

"Don't think I'm going to accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you, Moses, in whom you trust." Jn.5:45Actually, the prophets accused the Jews too.


This is why the Bible says,

"I, yes I, Am LORD, and beside Me there is no deliverer. Is.43:11The verse right before has something interesting: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall any be after Me.

Teke
Feb 28th 2008, 09:29 PM
Well, it has no 'being' now but it it will in the future. As will animal sacrifice.


I don't believe anyone chooses their faith. That's why God doesn't judge us on faith, but on action.

Does all have to be temporal? Is this how you view God, The Eternal, The Immortal, Everlasting, All Mighty, Miraculous, Light of Light, Alpha and Omega....

Fenris, I just don't see how Judaism's theology can fill the depth of the human soul that longs for God. I scarcely see any theology whatsoever.

And yes God does judge us by faith (and faithfulness), as well as action and inaction. Abraham went to a land God led him to by faith, but it was Abraham's faith in God (an inaction/inward action) which God esteemed to give him a son of his flesh, even though Abraham was very old. It was God who did the miraculous in the promise of Isaac.

A state of being with God.

Faith is part of what God measures in His people. It is the Almighty who does the measuring and building of His temple. He has no need of temporal things.

Fenris
Feb 28th 2008, 09:46 PM
Does all have to be temporal? Is this how you view God, The Eternal, The Immortal, Everlasting, All Mighty, Miraculous, Light of Light, Alpha and Omega....God doesn't change. God is beyond time.
We aren't.


Fenris, I just don't see how Judaism's theology can fill the depth of the human soul that longs for God. I scarcely see any theology whatsoever. Judaism has plenty of theology. But it isn't about filling the human soul; It's about making the world a more Godly place.


And yes God does judge us by faith (and faithfulness), as well as action and inaction. Abraham went to a land God led him to by faith, but it was Abraham's faith in God (an inaction/inward action) which God esteemed to give him a son of his flesh, even though Abraham was very old. It was God who did the miraculous in the promise of Isaac. No, the bible is very explicit. It was Abraham's actions that God approved of.



Faith is part of what God measures in His people. It is the Almighty who does the measuring and building of His temple. He has no need of temporal things.No, but we do.

Teke
Feb 28th 2008, 10:03 PM
Judaism has plenty of theology. But it isn't about filling the human soul; It's about making the world a more Godly place.

Theology can't fill the human soul, only worship can do that.


No, the bible is very explicit. It was Abraham's actions that God approved of.


Is this to say that the more miraculous aspect of his life is less significant.:dunno:

Fenris
Feb 28th 2008, 10:05 PM
Theology can't fill the human soul, only worship can do that.Jews worship.



Is this to say that the more miraculous aspect of his life is less significant.:dunno:This is another one of your posts beyond my comprehension.

Teke
Feb 28th 2008, 10:08 PM
This is another one of your posts beyond my comprehension.

It is beyond your comprehension that Abraham and Sarah had a child when they were beyond their years to do so. :giveup:

Fenris
Feb 28th 2008, 10:13 PM
It is beyond your comprehension that Abraham and Sarah had a child when they were beyond their years to do so. :giveup:No, I don't understand how it addresses my post.

JesusisGod
Feb 29th 2008, 05:39 AM
Good morn Fenris.

Deuteronomy 30:1 And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt bethink thyself among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee, 2 and shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and hearken to His voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul; 3 that then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the peoples, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee..
I understand this to mean that God will gather Israel when they are obedient, but what I wondered about was how you view Messiah fitting into this.In a previous post you said,
I was taught that the messiah will be a holy man who will lead the Jews back to Israel.
Do Jews scattered worldwide become faithful and then Messiah appears and leads them back?


Yes, but after he came, as you believe, is when the Jews were dispersed. So the timing is all a bit off.
That was my point. If you were taught that Messiah is a holy man that leads the Jews back to Israel and this blessing is being fulfilled in our day, maybe the Messiah has already come. There are some crazy people who think your Messiah was raised from the dead.


Well, the problem is that billions of people worship that particular Jew as God. That's a really big stumbling block, from the Jewish perspective.
Well, I guess the jig is up (see screen name). I don’t pretend to know the nature of the Almighty. I doubt any of us do. But if the story of Mary’s pregnancy is true, Jesus would likely be God in the flesh, as God made all living organisms to produce after their own kind per Genesis 1.


Aside from that, we don't have the other propesized events: universal peace, ingathering of the exiles, rebuilt temple, etc etc. Further, even a cursory reading of the prophets says that in the messianic era the Jews will be looked upon favorably, not despised by billions as we are today.
Looking at all of these unfulfilled prophecies, I can see why the Jewish population rejects Jesus as Messiah especially if they don't believe God raises the dead.


And many Jews today still believe that this is our mission: to spread morality and knowledge of God's will through the world.
So Isaiah 42 says God gave Israel as a covenant to the gentiles?


In other words, God made him a specific promise about his lineage, and he trusted God that this would come to pass. This is a far cry from the blind faith that you're making it out to be.
I don’t know why you accuse me of taking this passage out of context. It says Abraham believed God and was accounted righteous because of it. He took Gods word and waited patiently for it to happen.


No! As we see in the above paragraph, God made the promise first, and Abraham believed it after it was promised to him.
I agree. God made the promise first. And....what?


See also Genesis
22: 15 And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven, 16 and said: 'By Myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, because thou hast done this thing...

God rewarded Abraham because he DID what God asked, not because of his mere belief.
Again, I agree, but Abraham obeyed an apparently insane command from God to sacrifice Isaac because he believed what God had previously told him concerning Isaac. ("I will establish My covenant with Isaac...and with his seed after him." Ge.17:19) This promise precedes Abrahams obedience as faith always precedes action. Abraham’s obedience stemmed from his trust in Gods word. Obedience is born of faith.


It looks to me like the Covenant at Sinai was about God telling the Jewish people what actions He wanted them to take. You know, the Ten Commandments and all that?
You’re right. Now which ones have you no need of Gods forgiveness? I need mercy for all ten.


Right, because God keeps His promises.
I want your thoughts on this Fenris. If God gives the land to the Jews based on His “promise” to Abraham and not because the Jews have an upright heart, why didn’t He allow anyone over twenty (except Joshua and Caleb) to enter the promised land?


Because God punishes bad actions.
But the land was given to Israel because of Gods promise to Abraham, not because Israel was good.


Therefore, understand that it is not for your righteousness that Adonai your God is giving you this good land to possess." De.9:6


Actually, the prophets accused the Jews too.
I was watching “Fiddler on the Roof” tonight and one of the characters said, “If God was on earth they’d break His windows.” I love that play. But seriously, I suppose when your Messiah does show up, He’ll probably have a very good understanding of the Prophets. Do you know if in the future, Messiah will teach Israel from the Prophets? I ask because if He does, the Jews might not like what He has to say and want to kill Him.


The verse right before has something interesting: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall any be after
Me.
Who else but the only God could redeem His people?

JesusisGod
Feb 29th 2008, 05:50 AM
Fenris,
How do Jews word this;

Bethlehem....out of you will come forth to Me the future ruler of Israel, whose origins are in the far past, back in ancient times. Mi.5:1-2

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 10:42 AM
Theology can't fill the human soul, only worship can do that.


Is this to say that the more miraculous aspect of his life is less significant.:dunno:
The miracles were a gift of God, nothing that Abraham did, what God did for him.

I agree with Fenris though, I'm not sure what you meant by this post?

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 10:43 AM
It is beyond your comprehension that Abraham and Sarah had a child when they were beyond their years to do so. :giveup:
Are you saying Fenris doesn't believe in miracles??? Or am I misunderstanding you?

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 10:45 AM
Anyway Fenris... to return to an earlier point of yours. You said that people don't choose their faith... actually the NT says that too. Faith is a gift of God, not something for anyone to boast about.

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 11:07 AM
Good morn Fenris.And to you.


I understand this to mean that God will gather Israel when they are obedient, but what I wondered about was how you view Messiah fitting into this.In a previous post you said,.
Do Jews scattered worldwide become faithful and then Messiah appears and leads them back?The exact order of events is unclear.



That was my point. If you were taught that Messiah is a holy man that leads the Jews back to Israel and this blessing is being fulfilled in our day, maybe the Messiah has already come. Well, since the beginning of the ingathering of the exiles is the only messianic prophecy being fulfilled, I would say we are still waiting for the rest...



Well, I guess the jig is up (see screen name). I don’t pretend to know the nature of the Almighty. I doubt any of us do. But if the story of Mary’s pregnancy is true, Jesus would likely be God in the flesh, as God made all living organisms to produce after their own kind per Genesis 1.This runs counter to Jewish theology and probably a bigger stumbling block than the question of whether the messiah has come yet: Is the messiah a man or a divine being?



Looking at all of these unfulfilled prophecies, I can see why the Jewish population rejects Jesus as Messiah especially if they don't believe God raises the dead. God will raise the dead. Just not yet...



So Isaiah 42 says God gave Israel as a covenant to the gentiles?No, God gave the Jews a mission.



I don’t know why you accuse me of taking this passage out of context. It says Abraham believed God and was accounted righteous because of it. He took Gods word and waited patiently for it to happen.
No, it says that he believed God's specific promise to him.


I agree. God made the promise first. And....what?And what did Abraham do to deserve this promise? He did what God told him to do.



Again, I agree, but Abraham obeyed an apparently insane command from God to sacrifice Isaac because he believed what God had previously told him concerning Isaac.
The command seems insane now, but you have to understand that human sacrifice was par for the course in that era. It was really Abraham's way of demonstrating that he loved his God no less than the pagans loved theirs.


("I will establish My covenant with Isaac...and with his seed after him." Ge.17:19) This promise precedes Abrahams obedience as faith always precedes action.
Not always. Sometimes we aren't sure but do the right thing anyway.




You’re right. Now which ones have you no need of Gods forgiveness? I need mercy for all ten.That may well be, but the Jewish perspective is that God does not expect perfection. He only expects us to do the best we are individually capable of.



I want your thoughts on this Fenris. If God gives the land to the Jews based on His “promise” to Abraham and not because the Jews have an upright heart, why didn’t He allow anyone over twenty (except Joshua and Caleb) to enter the promised land?
Because the generation that left bondage in Egypt was not capable of fending and fighting for itself. It was only a generation born in freedom that was so capable.


But the land was given to Israel because of Gods promise to Abraham, not because Israel was good.Right, and the land is still our inheritance. We just have to behave properly for God to give it to us.





I was watching “Fiddler on the Roof” tonight and one of the characters said, “If God was on earth they’d break His windows.” I love that play. But seriously, I suppose when your Messiah does show up, He’ll probably have a very good understanding of the Prophets. Do you know if in the future, Messiah will teach Israel from the Prophets? I ask because if He does, the Jews might not like what He has to say and want to kill Him.
You know, Jews are the only people in the world who took their harshest critics and turned their words into holy books. So please, stop with the 'Jews kill the prophets' nonsense already.


Who else but the only God could redeem His people?Moses did, and he wasn't God.

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 11:13 AM
Fenris,
How do Jews word this;

Bethlehem....out of you will come forth to Me the future ruler of Israel, whose origins are in the far past, back in ancient times. Mi.5:1-2Obviously messianic. It doesn't mean that the messiah will be born in Bethlehem though. His lineage will come from Bethlehem, through king David.

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 11:14 AM
Anyway Fenris... to return to an earlier point of yours. You said that people don't choose their faith... actually the NT says that too. Faith is a gift of God, not something for anyone to boast about.If faith is a gift from God, how can God punish one for believing the wrong thing?

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 11:30 AM
That's where it gets tricky!

Now, I'm probably going to step on some folks toes here, so bear with me...

We both agree, I'm sure, that God knows what is in our hearts. If someone has never heard of the God of Israel, or of Jesus, then God won't condemn them for lack of knowledge. God knows if the individual in their heart was seeking for Him. Jesus says, "knock and the door shall be opened." Let's say someone is looking for God, sincerely, honestly seeking... God knows that, and He'll honour that prayer by giving them a revelation of Who He is. This may not be what Bible believing Christians expect it to be... but God speaks to His people in language that we can understand.

God doesn't punish people for having the wrong faith... He punishes us because we're sinners. But God is God, and He will answer honest prayer despite any obstacle we perceive.

I personally cannot believe that the devout and faithful Jews who died with the name of God on their lips throughout the last two thousand years are in hell. I can't believe Anne Frank is in hell. I can't believe Bruno Kaufmann (a grand uncle of a friend of mine) is in hell. I believe that if someone loves the law - not seeking to be saved by it, but entering into it with gratitude for what God did and does, then they are seeking God's face.

And God will honour that.

Right... everyone can now tell me I'm a heretic. :rolleyes: Sorry!

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 11:32 AM
Right... everyone can now tell me I'm a heretic. :rolleyes: Sorry!
That would be a shame... you expressed a nice idea that unfortunately runs counter to some people's understanding of Christianity.

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 11:38 AM
I was thinking of something you said in your thread about who you believe Jesus to be... you said that you don't believe He intended to set up a new religion. Actually, I agree with you. Some might say that He intended to reform Judaism... But I may be in the wrong thread...

Actually, no. Because if He is the passover sacrifice (as I obviously believe He is) then He becomes our atonement for sin.

By the way... I've been watching a video about the temple being rebuilt. It's not far off, is it!

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 11:44 AM
I was thinking of something you said in your thread about who you believe Jesus to be... you said that you don't believe He intended to set up a new religion. Actually, I agree with you. Some might say that He intended to reform Judaism... But I may be in the wrong thread...
Well, even the prophets did not intend to reform Judaism. They just wanted it followed in the manner that God had already proscribed.



Actually, no. Because if He is the passover sacrifice (as I obviously believe He is) then He becomes our atonement for sin.I don't want to pick nits, but the passover sacrifice was not a sin sacrifice.


By the way... I've been watching a video about the temple being rebuilt. It's not far off, is it!
I certainly hope not!

For certain, we are witnessing the beginning of the messianic era with the end of the Jewish diaspora.

daughter
Feb 29th 2008, 11:50 AM
No, that's not nitpicking. It's a fact... the Passover was a memorial. "Do this in memory of me." You're right... Christians are not saved by taking communion either. It's a memorial supper.

You do make me think!

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 12:08 PM
I'm just glad to be contributing.

JesusisGod
Feb 29th 2008, 04:07 PM
Hi Fenris.

Well, since the beginning of the ingathering of the exiles is the only messianic prophecy being fulfilled, I would say we are still waiting for the rest...
I agree. You may know this, Fenris, as your knowledge of Bible texts is very good, but in case you don’t, Jesus is no longer a baby in a manger or a mangled body on a cross, as many people think of Him. One (alleged) Jew that (it is said) knew Jesus during His ministry, claimed Jesus had been transformed into a person that scared the hell out of him.

“And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as a dead man.” Re.1:17

In your mind, isn’t it at all possible that it is this Messiah that will defend Israel?


This runs counter to Jewish theology and probably a bigger stumbling block than the question of whether the messiah has come yet: Is the messiah a man or a divine being?
Whoever He is, I think we both agree that nothing is too hard for God, but to understand why the (alleged) Jew cited above fainted at the sight of Him, the Messiah described Himself this way:

“Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I live, and was dead, and see, I am alive eternally.” Re.1:17-18

There are people who relate these words to this:

“Thus says Adonai, Israels King and Redeemer, Adonai-Tzya’ot, “I am the First and the Last and beside Me there is no God. Is.44:6

Fenris, there is something else I need the Jewish perspective on. God calls Himself Israels “King”, even though Israel wanted a king like the other nations:

“…make us a king to judge us, like all the nations…..Adonai said, “They don’t want Me to be King over them.” 1 Sa.8:5,7

Even though God allowed Israel to have human kings, God says;

“I will be your King…” Ho.3:10

The thing I’m wondering about from a strictly Jewish way of think is this:

“A Psalm of David. Adonai said to my Lord, “Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

The NT says Jesus asked the Pharisees how Messiah would be the Son of David if David calls Him Lord, but the Pharisees gave Him no answer:

“While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about Messiah….whose Son is He?” They answered, “The Son of David.” Jesus replied, “How then does David call Him Lord…..If David calls Him Lord, how is Messiah His Son?” And no man was able to answer Him a word…” Mt.22:41-46

Fenris, how do the Teachers explain this?


God will raise the dead. Just not yet...
I guess with the exception of One Jew, we agree.


No, God gave the Jews a mission.
Fenris, what I’m asking you is this. Is Isaiah 42:6 describing Israel, or Messiah as the covenant?


No, it says that he believed God's specific promise to him.
Ok. Abraham believed God specific promise:

“….your heir will be a child from your own body….Abraham believed God, and He credited it to him as righteousness.” Ge.15:4,6


And what did Abraham do to deserve this promise? He did what God told him to do.
Abraham obeyed God (Ge.22) AFTER he was deemed righteous by reason of his belief. Therefore, Abraham did nothing to be adjudged righteous by God except believe Him. You have it backwards. Abrahams action FOLLOWED his trust.


The command seems insane now, but you have to understand that human sacrifice was par for the course in that era. It was really Abraham's way of demonstrating that he loved his God no less than the pagans loved theirs.
What you are saying makes no sense, because if Abrahams reason for sacrificing Isaac was to show his love for God, his mindset would have been immoral, as God truly abhors human sacrifice. Look at the text in its entirety. Abraham acted on his “righteous belief” that God would cause his descendants to be like the stars in number, which would come from Isaac. Abrahams action testifies that he believed God would raise his son from the dead.


Not always. Sometimes we aren't sure but do the right thing anyway.
It doesn’t matter if we aren’t sure what to do, Fenris. That isn’t the point. The point is, we act out of belief that we are doing the right thing. Action always follows faith.
Belief first, deeds second.


That may well be, but the Jewish perspective is that God does not expect perfection. He only expects us to do the best we are individually capable of.
This is a contradiction. “That may well be” means you agree that we need of Gods mercy, but “God does not expect perfection” means we don’t need Gods mercy.


Because the generation that left bondage in Egypt was not capable of fending and fighting for itself. It was only a generation born in freedom that was so capable.
That’s not what God said. God said the reason they couldn’t enter was because:

“…they have not followed Me wholly.” Nu.32:11

No where in Torah does it say they barred from entering because they couldn’t defend themselves. So if (according to you) under Moses, God didn’t expect perfection, why didn’t He let them in?


Right, and the land is still our inheritance. We just have to behave properly for God to give it to us.
Another contradiction Fenris. “Right” means you agree that God didn’t give you the land because you are good. “We just have to behave properly” means God will give you the land when you are good.

I know you don’t believe this, but for what it’s worth,

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith, apart from the deeds of the law.” Ro.3:28 (The subject of the faith this Jew speaks of is Messiah.)


You know, Jews are the only people in the world who took their harshest critics and turned their words into holy books. So please, stop with the 'Jews kill the prophets' nonsense already.
Ok, I won’t mention it again. I would like you to know though that I never meant to imply that the Jews who killed the prophets are any worse than I am. I want you to know that I believe your Messiah did something for me (and all people, especially His own) that I couldn’t do for myself. I hope someday you come to that realization.


Moses did, and he wasn't God.
I can’t believe you said that. God forgive.

Fenris
Feb 29th 2008, 04:42 PM
Hi Fenris. Hi.



I agree. You may know this, Fenris, as your knowledge of Bible texts is very good, but in case you don’t, Jesus is no longer a baby in a manger or a mangled body on a cross, as many people think of Him. One (alleged) Jew that (it is said) knew Jesus during His ministry, claimed Jesus had been transformed into a person that scared the hell out of him.

“And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as a dead man.” Re.1:17

In your mind, isn’t it at all possible that it is this Messiah that will defend Israel?Well, he didn't.



Whoever He is, I think we both agree that nothing is too hard for God, but to understand why the (alleged) Jew cited above fainted at the sight of Him, the Messiah described Himself this way:

“Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I live, and was dead, and see, I am alive eternally.” Re.1:17-18

There are people who relate these words to this:

“Thus says Adonai, Israels King and Redeemer, Adonai-Tzya’ot, “I am the First and the Last and beside Me there is no God. Is.44:6
Uh, ok.


Fenris, there is something else I need the Jewish perspective on. God calls Himself Israels “King”, even though Israel wanted a king like the other nations:

“…make us a king to judge us, like all the nations…..Adonai said, “They don’t want Me to be King over them.” 1 Sa.8:5,7

Even though God allowed Israel to have human kings, God says;

“I will be your King…” Ho.3:10
Will, we have a king and we have a King.


The thing I’m wondering about from a strictly Jewish way of think is this:

“A Psalm of David. Adonai said to my Lord, “Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

The NT says Jesus asked the Pharisees how Messiah would be the Son of David if David calls Him Lord, but the Pharisees gave Him no answer:

“While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about Messiah….whose Son is He?” They answered, “The Son of David.” Jesus replied, “How then does David call Him Lord…..If David calls Him Lord, how is Messiah His Son?” And no man was able to answer Him a word…” Mt.22:41-46

Fenris, how do the Teachers explain this?Very simple.

If it is read in Hebrew it implies something completely different.

Who wrote this Psalm? king David. Who did he write it for? The Levites to sing at the Temple.

Ok, now let's look at the text in Hebrew.

A Psalm of David. God (YH-VH) said to my master (Adonee), “Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool."

In other words, the Levites singing the Psalm are talking about God speaking to king David.

Very simple, see?




Fenris, what I’m asking you is this. Is Isaiah 42:6 describing Israel, or Messiah as the covenant?
Hmm. Rashi says that verses 1-5 are referring to the Jewish people, but verse 6 is about Isaiah himself.



Abraham obeyed God (Ge.22) AFTER he was deemed righteous by reason of his belief. Therefore, Abraham did nothing to be adjudged righteous by God except believe Him. You have it backwards. Abrahams action FOLLOWED his trust.he obeyed God before, too.



What you are saying makes no sense, because if Abrahams reason for sacrificing Isaac was to show his love for God, his mindset would have been immoral, as God truly abhors human sacrifice. Look at the text in its entirety. Abraham acted on his “righteous belief” that God would cause his descendants to be like the stars in number, which would come from Isaac. Abrahams action testifies that he believed God would raise his son from the dead.No, his action testifies to his contemporaries that just as they were willing to sacrifice their sons to their god, he was willing to do the same thing. If he wasn't, they would talk about how easy his religion was, how easy it was for him to follow his god, who did not ask for truly difficult things...



It doesn’t matter if we aren’t sure what to do, Fenris. That isn’t the point. The point is, we act out of belief that we are doing the right thing. Action always follows faith.
Belief first, deeds second.Some people do the right things for the wrong reasons. We believe God still counts those good deeds. One can have doubt, after all...



This is a contradiction. “That may well be” means you agree that we need of Gods mercy, but “God does not expect perfection” means we don’t need Gods mercy.
God created us. He knows what we are capable of, and he knows that we are imperfect. yet he gave us along list of deeds He requires- not because He expects us to do them perfectly. Rather,, even if we do them imperfectly, it still brings us closer to Him.


That’s not what God said. God said the reason they couldn’t enter was because:

“…they have not followed Me wholly.” Nu.32:11

No where in Torah does it say they barred from entering because they couldn’t defend themselves.
Their griping, especially when the spies gave a scary report, is what made God deny them entry.


So if (according to you) under Moses, God didn’t expect perfection, why didn’t He let them in?
Because actions have consequences. Moses made a mistake, and he still had to pay for it.


Another contradiction Fenris. “Right” means you agree that God didn’t give you the land because you are good. “We just have to behave properly” means God will give you the land when you are good. No contradiction. God specifically states that the only reason we have been entrusted with our mission and with the land of Israel is because He loved the patriarchs. We still have to do our part to deserve His blessings.


I know you don’t believe this, but for what it’s worth,

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith, apart from the deeds of the law.” Ro.3:28 (The subject of the faith this Jew speaks of is Messiah.)I am aware of this phrase. It is a decidedly non-Jewish concept.



Ok, I won’t mention it again. Thank you. It does not advance the discussion.



I can’t believe you said that. God forgive.


No need for God to forgive. God expects us to do our part in this world.

JesusisGod
Mar 1st 2008, 04:06 PM
Top O’ the Morn to you Fenris.

Well, he didn't.
It was only a “what if” question.


Will, we have a king and we have a King.
Yes, I think, unlike other nations, it was Gods plan all along to be Israels King. If Jesus was the personification of God on Earth, that would make perfect sense.


Very simple.

If it is read in Hebrew it implies something completely different.

Who wrote this Psalm? king David. Who did he write it for? The Levites to sing at the Temple.

Ok, now let's look at the text in Hebrew.

A Psalm of David. God (YH-VH) said to my master (Adonee), “Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool."

In other words, the Levites singing the Psalm are talking about God speaking to king David.

Very simple, see?
Yes, that makes sense to me except for one thing. According to the NT text, the Pharisees were unable to answer Jesus. This infers that they viewed David as speaking about Messiah, not himself. Do you know how the ancient sages regarded this passage. It seems that whoever wrote Matthew had some type of knowledge of Jewish thinking and to have Jesus ask something for which there was a very simple answer would be stupid, don’t you think? I mean, if it was common knowledge that David was calling himself “my Lord”, why were the Pharisees stumped?


Hmm. Rashi says that verses 1-5 are referring to the Jewish people, but verse 6 is about Isaiah himself.
After seeing his people slaughtered by “Christians”, I don’t blame Rashi interpreting Torah in a way that has nothing to do with Jesus.


No, his action testifies to his contemporaries that just as they were willing to sacrifice their sons to their god, he was willing to do the same thing. If he wasn't, they would talk about how easy his religion was, how easy it was for him to follow his god, who did not ask for truly difficult things...
Ok. You stick with an interpretation that God Himself tempts people to commit immoral acts just so other could say, “Wow Abe, your God is like our gods.”


Some people do the right things for the wrong reasons. We believe God still counts those good deeds.
I was trying to think of an instance where someone did the right thing for the wrong reason and God spoke about it, but I couldn’t think of one off the top of my head. I believe motive matters to God.


God created us. He knows what we are capable of, and he knows that we are imperfect. yet he gave us along list of deeds He requires- not because He expects us to do them perfectly.
Fenris, what do you think of this:

You will therefore love the Lord your God, and sometimes keep his….commandments….You will therefore keep some commandments….to love the Lord your God with part of your heart and part of your soul…De.11:1,8,13(???)

Is that what you believe Torah says? God doesn’t expect perfection from His people?


Their griping, especially when the spies gave a scary report, is what made God deny them entry.
God doesn’t expect perfection, but if you complain, you’re outdoors?


Because actions have consequences. Moses made a mistake, and he still had to pay for it.
Well, there is a contradiction here that we can’t seem to resolve:

“Therefore, understand that it is not for your righteousness that Adonai your God is giving you this good land to possess." De.9:4-6

"None of the people aged twenty and over who came out of Egypt will see the land that I swore to Abraham...because they have not followed Me wholly...." Nu.32:11

How can we reconcile these words of God?


No contradiction. God specifically states that the only reason we have been entrusted with our mission and with the land of Israel is because He loved the patriarchs.
Yes, that’s exactly right!!!


We still have to do our part to deserve His blessings.
No, that’s exactly wrong. If the only reason you have been entrusted with the land of Israel is that God loved the patriarchs, you don’t have to do anything. Love of the patriarchs + nothing else.


I am aware of this phrase. It is a decidedly non-Jewish concept.
Is the Jewish concept, “I am deemed just because I follow the law.”??


No need for God to forgive. God expects us to do our part in this world.

I don’t think doing our part is reason to take credit for something God did.

And Moses told his father-in-law all that the LORD had done….Ex.18:8

daughter
Mar 1st 2008, 04:19 PM
No, that’s exactly wrong. If the only reason you have been entrusted with the land of Israel is that God loved the patriarchs, you don’t have to do anything. Love of the patriarchs + nothing else.
The land is the inheritance of Israel because God loved (and loves) the Patriarchs... but the prophets did say that Israel would be scattered for transgression, then gathered back in when they returned to God. Sorry, I can never remember quotes with their references very well... but I was just reading Jeremiah, and he said exactly that.

At the very least it implies that Israel has to "get right with God" to enter into the fullness of the blessing. And chaotic though the times are, isn't Israel doing just that?

JesusisGod
Mar 1st 2008, 05:30 PM
Hi daughter.

The land is the inheritance of Israel because God loved (and loves) the Patriarchs... but the prophets did say that Israel would be scattered for transgression, then gathered back in when they returned to God. Sorry, I can never remember quotes with their references very well... but I was just reading Jeremiah, and he said exactly that.

At the very least it implies that Israel has to "get right with God" to enter into the fullness of the blessing.
Yes daughter, that's true. The question is, how does the Bible say one gets right with God?


And chaotic though the times are, isn't Israel doing just that?
As long as Israel rejects Jesus, the answer is no.

daughter
Mar 2nd 2008, 09:41 AM
But don't you think that Israel is increasingly seeking God's face, and that if they are seeking they shall find?

Fenris
Mar 2nd 2008, 05:22 PM
Top O’ the Morn to you Fenris.And to you.



Yes, I think, unlike other nations, it was Gods plan all along to be Israels King. If Jesus was the personification of God on Earth, that would make perfect sense.Perhaps. But Jesus was never a king. He was never even annointed as a king, which is what the word 'messiah means: annointed.



Yes, that makes sense to me except for one thing. According to the NT text, the Pharisees were unable to answer Jesus. This infers that they viewed David as speaking about Messiah, not himself. Do you know how the ancient sages regarded this passage. It seems that whoever wrote Matthew had some type of knowledge of Jewish thinking and to have Jesus ask something for which there was a very simple answer would be stupid, don’t you think? I mean, if it was common knowledge that David was calling himself “my Lord”, why were the Pharisees stumped?
My opinion? The whole tale was invented. Anyone who can read Hebrew would have been able to discern the meaning of the line instantly.


After seeing his people slaughtered by “Christians”, I don’t blame Rashi interpreting Torah in a way that has nothing to do with Jesus.The fact is, you have no Jewish sources that interpret it otherwise.



Ok. You stick with an interpretation that God Himself tempts people to commit immoral acts just so other could say, “Wow Abe, your God is like our gods.”No, our God is better than the other gods, because at the last moment He says He does not desire human sacrifice.



I was trying to think of an instance where someone did the right thing for the wrong reason and God spoke about it, but I couldn’t think of one off the top of my head. I believe motive matters to God.Does motive matter to a person being helped by a good deed?



Fenris, what do you think of this:

You will therefore love the Lord your God, and sometimes keep his….commandments….You will therefore keep some commandments….to love the Lord your God with part of your heart and part of your soul…De.11:1,8,13(???)If God expects us to be perfect, why did He invent repentance?


Is that what you believe Torah says? God doesn’t expect perfection from His people?Show me where it says that He does expect perfection.



God doesn’t expect perfection, but if you complain, you’re outdoors? God doesn't expect perfection, but one does pay for their mistakes.



Well, there is a contradiction here that we can’t seem to resolve:

“Therefore, understand that it is not for your righteousness that Adonai your God is giving you this good land to possess." De.9:4-6

"None of the people aged twenty and over who came out of Egypt will see the land that I swore to Abraham...because they have not followed Me wholly...." Nu.32:11

How can we reconcile these words of God? How do you reconcile them?




No, that’s exactly wrong. If the only reason you have been entrusted with the land of Israel is that God loved the patriarchs, you don’t have to do anything. Love of the patriarchs + nothing else.If we don't have to do anything else, why does God warn us that if we don't do what He says, we will be exiled?



Is the Jewish concept, “I am deemed just because I follow the law.”??

No, the Jewish concept is to do the best we can, because God values our efforts.


I don’t think doing our part is reason to take credit for something God did.

And Moses told his father-in-law all that the LORD had done….Ex.18:8



If God could do it all by Himself, why did He use Moses?

JesusisGod
Mar 2nd 2008, 06:57 PM
Hi daughter.


But don't you think that Israel is increasingly seeking God's face, and that if they are seeking they shall find?
Anyone that truly seeks for God will be directed to Jesus. That was Gods plan from Genesis, so if that's happening today, then yes.

JesusisGod
Mar 3rd 2008, 01:30 AM
Hi Fenris.

Perhaps. But Jesus was never a king. He was never even annointed as a king, which is what the word 'messiah means: annointed.
Not your King anyway. Messiah was anointed with the Spirit as Torah says.

“The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because the LORD has anointed Me to preach…” Is.61:1


My opinion? The whole tale was invented. Anyone who can read Hebrew would have been able to discern the meaning of the line instantly. The fact is, you have no Jewish sources that interpret it otherwise.
R. Yudan said in the name of R. Hama: In the time-to-come, when the Holy One, blessed be He, seats the lord Messiah at His right hand, as is said The Lord saith unto my lord: "Sit thou at My right hand" (Ps. 110:1), and seats Abraham at His left, Abraham's face will pale, and he will say to the Lord: "My son's son sits at the right, and I at the left!" Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, will comfort Abraham, saying: "Thy son's son is at My right, but I, in a manner of speaking, am at thy right":
Midrash on Psalms


No, our God is better than the other gods, because at the last moment He says He does not desire human sacrifice.
How silly is this idea getting that God wanted the heathens to think He was great by telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? Then, Abraham comes back with Isaac? The heathen would have said, “What’s wrong Abe, can’t your God make up His mind?”


Does motive matter to a person being helped by a good deed?
Of course not, but we’re not discussing the receiver of the good deed, but the giver.

“But to Cain and his offering, He had no respect.” Ge.4:5



If God expects us to be perfect, why did He invent repentance?
So that mankind would have an avenue of escape from the covenant of life or death Moses enjoined to you.

“I call Heaven and Earth to record this day that I have set before you life and death…” De.30:19



Show me where it says that He does expect perfection.
“You will love the Lord your God, with ALL your heart and with ALL your soul and with ALL your might.” De.6:5

“And it will be our righteousness, if we observe to do ALL these commandments….” De.6:25

“You will be perfect before the Lord your God.” De.18:13


God doesn't expect perfection, but one does pay for their mistakes.
No, God does expect perfection and One did pay for their mistakes.



How do you reconcile them? De.9:4-6 Nu.32:11
Israel inherits the land not for their own righteousness, but is expelled if they are not righteous. What is righteousness? Righteousness = perfection.


If we don't have to do anything else, why does God warn us that if we don't do what He says, we will be exiled?
Read Romans 10


No, the Jewish concept is to do the best we can, because God values our efforts.
Yes He does, but if you don’t listen to what Moses was saying, you won’t have to worry about God valuing any of your efforts.


If God could do it all by Himself, why did He use Moses?
Because it pleased God to save people through the foolishness of preaching.

Fenris
Mar 3rd 2008, 01:54 PM
Hi Fenris.Good morning.


Not your King anyway. Messiah was anointed with the Spirit as Torah says.

“The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because the LORD has anointed Me to preach…” Is.61:1If you wish to believe that, that's fine. But I am sure you can see how a Jewish person would view it with some skepticism. "What, he was anointed with the holy spirit?! He's supposed to be anointed with oil, by the Sanhedrin!"



R. Yudan said in the name of R. Hama: In the time-to-come, when the Holy One, blessed be He, seats the lord Messiah at His right hand, as is said The Lord saith unto my lord: "Sit thou at My right hand" (Ps. 110:1), and seats Abraham at His left, Abraham's face will pale, and he will say to the Lord: "My son's son sits at the right, and I at the left!" Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, will comfort Abraham, saying: "Thy son's son is at My right, but I, in a manner of speaking, am at thy right":
Midrash on PsalmsI have absolutely no idea where you're quoting this from. I've never seen it before. If any rabbi believed this, why didn't he become Christian?



How silly is this idea getting that God wanted the heathens to think He was great by telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? Then, Abraham comes back with Isaac? The heathen would have said, “What’s wrong Abe, can’t your God make up His mind?”You missed the whole point.

OK, let's say that God never told Abraham to sacrifice his son. What are Abraham's pagan neighbors going to say? "Your new religion is easy. Your God doesn't ask for difficult challenges."



Of course not, but we’re not discussing the receiver of the good deed, but the giver.
Ok, let's talk about the doer. If one picks up the habit of doing good deeds, even for the wrong reason, are they becoming a better person?



So that mankind would have an avenue of escape from the covenant of life or death Moses enjoined to you.

“I call Heaven and Earth to record this day that I have set before you life and death…” De.30:19 Right, so God knows we won't be perfect. He has given us a way to make up for our lack of perfection.

If your father gives you a long list of chores to do, do you do it as best you can? Or do you do nothing and throw yourself at his mercy?




“You will love the Lord your God, with ALL your heart and with ALL your soul and with ALL your might.” De.6:5

“And it will be our righteousness, if we observe to do ALL these commandments….” De.6:25That doesn't mean perfectly. No one has ever been perfect. Nor do I see it anywhere as an obligation. As I said, the whole point of being good is a process of self-improvement. We are all born selfish and self-centered, and it is only through the examination of one's behavior and comparison to the ideal that one can improve.

I perceive the whole "We are doomed because we can't be perfect" line of thought very depressing and ultimately self-defeating.


“You will be perfect before the Lord your God.” De.18:13
My translation says "Thou shalt be whole-hearted with the LORD thy God." No where in the OT does God ask for us to be perfect.



No, God does expect perfection and One did pay for their mistakes.Where? Better, why all-loving God create imperfect creatures and then demand they do something that they aren't capable of?



De.9:4-6 Nu.32:11
Israel inherits the land not for their own righteousness, but is expelled if they are not righteous.No, they are expelled when their sins become numerous and they don't ask forgiveness.


What is righteousness? Righteousness = perfection.That's a Christian definition, not a Jewish one.



Read Romans 10If you have a point to make, quote it. I'm not doing research to prove your point.



Yes He does, but if you don’t listen to what Moses was saying, you won’t have to worry about God valuing any of your efforts.Well, what was Moses saying?

Why did God waste so much space in the bible giving rules that can't be followed? That will ultimately be discarded? Why didn't God say at Sinai "You guys will always fall short."?



Because it pleased God to save people through the foolishness of preaching.Or maybe God values human effort and human struggles.

I'll quote someone who wasn't a man of God, but who understood the concept:

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat"

Theodore Roosevelt

JesusisGod
Mar 5th 2008, 03:35 PM
Hi Fenris.

If you wish to believe that, that's fine. But I am sure you can see how a Jewish person would view it with some skepticism. "What, he was anointed with the holy spirit?! He's supposed to be anointed with oil, by the Sanhedrin!"
I do believe what Isaiah 61 says about Messiah, don’t you? But where does Torah say He will be anointed with olive oil? Is olive oil more important to Jews than the Spirit of God?


I have absolutely no idea where you're quoting this from. I've never seen it before.
From “A translation of the Midrash on the Psalms, pg.261, by the Jewish scholar William Braude.

If any rabbi believed this, why didn't he become Christian?
I don’t know. Maybe the Rabbis didn’t like what the Messiah was telling them. Maybe they loved the positions they held more than they loved God. Maybe their pride is what led them to have Him executed.



You missed the whole point.

OK, let's say that God never told Abraham to sacrifice his son. What are Abraham's pagan neighbors going to say? "Your new religion is easy. Your God doesn't ask for difficult challenges."
No my friend, it is you missing the point God and Abraham were making big time. Look at the text. The reason God told him to sacrifice Isaac had nothing to do with what the pagans thought.


Ok, let's talk about the doer. If one picks up the habit of doing good deeds, even for the wrong reason, are they becoming a better person?
No. Millions are motivated to do good deeds for the wrong reasons. Wealth is one. “Send in your money brothers and sisters, and God will open the windows of Heaven and pour you out a blessing!” Fame is another:

“The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat…..but all their works they do to be seen of men…” Mt.23:2,5

Some are motivated by what Messiah taught:

“Let your light shine before men so that they see your good works and glorify your Father in Heaven.” Mt.5:15


Right, so God knows we won't be perfect. He has given us a way to make up for our lack of perfection.
Yes He certainly has. He chose to redeem people to Himself by Himself:

“…for the transgression of my people He was beaten.” Is.53:8 (Yes, I know….Is.53 is about Israel, but try inserting Israel where Messiah is spoken of and you’ll see that the text makes no sense. ie: “…because He (Israel or Messiah?) had done no violence, or was any deceit found in his mouth.” Is.53:9


If your father gives you a long list of chores to do, do you do it as best you can? Or do you do nothing and throw yourself at his mercy?
I’m not saying we shouldn’t do the best we can. I’m saying we aren’t redeemed by works. Only God can redeem people.


That doesn't mean perfectly.
How do you judge perfection?

No one has ever been perfect.
Jesus was. Jesus said:

“Which of you can convict Me of any offence?” Jn.8:46

Be my guest Fenris. Find one thing Jesus did wrong against Moses and I’ll renounce Him right along with you.


Nor do I see it anywhere as an obligation.
You are obliged because Moses said:

“…choose…” De.30:19 You are ordered to choose keeping the whole law (life) or not (death).


We are all born selfish and self-centered, and it is only through the examination of one's behavior and comparison to the ideal that one can improve.
That’s true, but salvation isn’t granted because we are good, but because God is.


I perceive the whole "We are doomed because we can't be perfect" line of thought very depressing and ultimately self-defeating.
If you were in the very presence of your Maker, you would be singing a different tune:

“…I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up…Then I said, “Woe is me for I am destroyed, because I am a man of unclean lips…for I have seen the Lord of hosts…” Is.6:1,5


My translation says "Thou shalt be whole-hearted with the LORD thy God." No where in the OT does God ask for us to be perfect.
You know Fenris, in a previous post somewhere, you accused Teke of arguing “semantics”, but you’re doing the same thing here. What more do we have than our whole heart?


Where? Better, why all-loving God create imperfect creatures and then demand they do something that they aren't capable of?
To destroy the pride of mankind:

“Do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for in Your sight no man living will be justified.” Ps.143:2


If you have a point to make, quote it. I'm not doing research to prove your point.
It’s your decision.


Well, what was Moses saying?
Moses was preaching Jesus:

“…we use great plainness of speech, unlike Moses, who wore a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not intently see the end of what is abolished. Their minds are blinded, for until this day the veil remains, untaken away in the reading of the old covenant, which has ceased in Messiah. But to this day when Moses is read, the veil is upon their hearts. When they turn to the Lord, the veil is removed.”
2 Co.3:12-16


Why did God waste so much space in the bible giving rules that can't be followed? That will ultimately be discarded? Why didn't God say at Sinai "You guys will always fall short."?
God does want us to obey Him.

“O that there was such a heart in them that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always…” De.5:29

God did tell them they were always falling short. Forty years worth. That’s why they died in the wilderness. Me and you are in the wilderness now too, so we better get it right.


Or maybe God values human effort and human struggles.
He does, Fenris, but that is not Gods salvation. No one can look on Gods presence and live. The face of the Eternal would cause us to die, so God chose certain people to bring forth His word. Moses, the other prophets etc. Finally, God came in the Person of Jesus.


I'll quote someone who wasn't a man of God, but who understood the concept:
Yes, understand Gods ways from someone who wasn’t a man of God.

Fenris
Mar 5th 2008, 04:22 PM
Hi Fenris.Good morning.


I do believe what Isaiah 61 says about Messiah, don’t you?Please stop doing this. Don't make me look things up. If you want to make a point about Isaiah 61, or any other part of the bible, please quote it.


But where does Torah say He will be anointed with olive oil?
Some examples: 1 samuel 9:16 'To-morrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be prince over My people Israel

1 Kings 1: 39 And Zadok the priest took the horn of oil out of the Tent, and anointed Solomon. And they blew the ram's horn; and all the people said: 'Long live king Solomon.'
...
45 And Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet have anointed him king in Gihon

2 Kings 9: 3 Then take the vial of oil, and pour it on his head, and say: Thus saith the LORD: I have anointed thee king over Israel.
...
6 And he arose, and went into the house; and he poured the oil on his head, and said unto him: 'Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel: I have anointed thee king over the people of the LORD, even over Israel.

2 Kings 11:12 Then he brought out the king's son, and put upon him the crown and the insignia; and they made him king, and anointed him; and they clapped their hands, and said: 'Long live the king.'




Is olive oil more important to Jews than the Spirit of God?No, but it doesn't take the place of it either.

Jesus wasn't anointed. Therefore, he wasn't a king.



From “A translation of the Midrash on the Psalms, pg.261, by the Jewish scholar William Braude. never heard of him. His name doesn't sound Jewish either.

I don’t know. Maybe the Rabbis didn’t like what the Messiah was telling them. Maybe they loved the positions they held more than they loved God. Maybe their pride is what led them to have Him executed.Maybe he didn't fulfill the prophecies as expected. Did you ever consider that?




No my friend, it is you missing the point God and Abraham were making big time. Look at the text. The reason God told him to sacrifice Isaac had nothing to do with what the pagans thought.Then why? You tell me.



No. Millions are motivated to do good deeds for the wrong reasons. Wealth is one. “Send in your money brothers and sisters, and God will open the windows of Heaven and pour you out a blessing!
How is it a good deed to send money to a rich man? :lol:
Here's a better example: a rich man donating money to the poor so that people think of him favorably. Is it ulterior motivation? Yes. Does it help the poor? Yes.

” Fame is another:

“The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat…..but all their works they do to be seen of men…” Mt.23:2,5I don't agree that this was their motivation, but even if it was, so what?


Some are motivated by what Messiah taught:

“Let your light shine before men so that they see your good works and glorify your Father in Heaven.” Mt.5:15That is a higher motivation, but not everyone can do that. And that's ok.



Yes He certainly has. He chose to redeem people to Himself by Himself:That's a point of faith, not fact.


Yes, I know….Is.53 is about Israel, but try inserting Israel where Messiah is spoken of and you’ll see that the text makes no sense. ie: “…because He (Israel or Messiah?) had done no violence, or was any deceit found in his mouth.” Is.53:9The Jews through the ages had done nothing to deserve things like the pogroms or the Holocaust. So yes, they had 'done no violence'.



I’m not saying we shouldn’t do the best we can. I’m saying we aren’t redeemed by works. Only God can redeem people.Then all of human existence is trivial. According to you, we are here to make one choice. That's it.



How do you judge perfection?No one is perfect.


Jesus was. Jesus said:

“Which of you can convict Me of any offence?” Jn.8:46

Be my guest Fenris. Find one thing Jesus did wrong against Moses and I’ll renounce Him right along with you.Uhm, the NT was written by people who believed Jesus to be God. I don't go looking for facts in there.

But if you're going to tell me that he didn't deserve to be executed, I'll agree with you.



You are obliged because Moses said:

“…choose…” De.30:19 You are ordered to choose keeping the whole law (life) or not (death).No, you're putting in words that aren't there.



That’s true, but salvation isn’t granted because we are good, but because God is.What is 'salvation' and where does the bible discuss God giving it out for mere belief?



If you were in the very presence of your Maker, you would be singing a different tune:

“…I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up…Then I said, “Woe is me for I am destroyed, because I am a man of unclean lips…for I have seen the Lord of hosts…” Is.6:1,5 And does God purify him with a sacrifice?



You know Fenris, in a previous post somewhere, you accused Teke of arguing “semantics”, but you’re doing the same thing here. What more do we have than our whole heart? Why do you assume it means 'perfect'? Because it fits your theology.



To destroy the pride of mankind:So a loving God created us in order that we feel bad about ourselves?





Moses was preaching Jesus:

“…we use great plainness of speech, unlike Moses, who wore a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not intently see the end of what is abolished. Their minds are blinded, for until this day the veil remains, untaken away in the reading of the old covenant, which has ceased in Messiah. But to this day when Moses is read, the veil is upon their hearts. When they turn to the Lord, the veil is removed.”
2 Co.3:12-16Uhm, right. The old covenant is ceased. Even though God states it is permanent and the law is forever.



God does want us to obey Him.I agree



God did tell them they were always falling short. Forty years worth. That’s why they died in the wilderness. Me and you are in the wilderness now too, so we better get it right.
All of mankind falls short. But that's ok. God judges us by what we are capable of, not what He is capable of.


He does, Fenris, but that is not Gods salvation. What does that word mean?


No one can look on Gods presence and live. The face of the Eternal would cause us to die, so God chose certain people to bring forth His word. Moses, the other prophets etc. Finally, God came in the Person of Jesus.But I thought no one could see god and live?



Yes, understand Gods ways from someone who wasn’t a man of God. So what? His argument has no validity?

JesusisGod
Mar 6th 2008, 06:44 AM
Hello Fenris.

Please stop doing this. Don't make me look things up. If you want to make a point about Isaiah 61, or any other part of the bible, please quote it.
I already did.


Some examples: 1 samuel 9:16 'To-morrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be prince over My people Israel
No my friend. Where does Torah say that Messiah must be anointed with olive oil?
And speaking of being anointed with oil by the priest:

“The scepter will not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes…” Ge.49:10

How do you suppose any priest is going to anoint the Messiah since no one today can prove they’re from the tribe of Judah? And when did the Jews start losing their tribal identity?


never heard of him. His name doesn't sound Jewish either.
Oh, he was a Jew alright. He was a Rabbi. No matter.


Maybe he didn't fulfill the prophecies as expected. Did you ever consider that?
Maybe He fulfilled some now and will handle the rest when He returns. Did you ever consider that? Rashi believe in Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, didn’t he?


Then why? You tell me.
Here’s why:

And Abram said, “You have given me no son and one born in my house is my heir.”

The LORD said, “That will not be your heir, but one born of you will be your heir.” Then the LORD brought him outside and said, “Look at the stars. So will your posterity be in number.”

And he believed the LORD, and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. Ge.15:3-6

Now here’s the second part.

And God said, “Sarah will bear you a son and you will call him Isaac, and I will confirm an everlasting covenant with him and his children after him.” Ge.17:19

Now here’s the third part.

Now it came to pass that God tested Abraham…Ge.22

God made a promise and Abraham believed Him. Abraham believed that God would raise his promised son from the dead.

The promise led to belief which came to a partial fulfillment (Isaac is here, but no grandchildren yet) and was then tested. The faith Abraham exhibited is astounding! Then God told him all the families of the earth would be blessed because of him, and you know what? I am blessed!


Here's a better example: a rich man donating money to the poor so that people think of him favorably.
That’s fine, as long as the rich man doesn’t expect anything from God.


I don't agree that this was their motivation, but even if it was, so what?
So mans honor of himself is foolishness to God.



The Jews through the ages had done nothing to deserve things like the pogroms or the Holocaust. So yes, they had 'done no violence'.
The holocaust was unimaginably terrible Fenris, but your belief that no Jews during that time were violent or deceitful couldn’t be true.


That's a point of faith, not fact.
Since we’ve never personally met any Biblical character, it’s all faith.


Then all of human existence is trivial. According to you, we are here to make one choice. That's it.
I wouldn’t call serving God trivial, but as for the choice, yes, it’s Gods way or death.


No one is perfect.
Jesus is.


Uhm, the NT was written by people who believed Jesus to be God. I don't go looking for facts in there.
But you will from Teddy Roosevelt, right?


No, you're putting in words that aren't there.
בּחר
“Bachar” is translated in my Bible as “choose.” It’s the same word Joshua used when he said, “…choose this day whom you will serve…” Jos.24:15


What is 'salvation'
Salvation is deliverance. Ultimately our salvation will be from death. God is the only One who could save us from it.

“He will swallow up death in victory…” Is.25:8 That’s what Jesus did.


and where does the bible discuss God giving it out for mere belief?
There isn’t anything mere about belief my friend. Have you forgotten Abrahams belief and how God tested it? And, Abraham was granted eternal life for his belief.


And does God purify him with a sacrifice?
Of course. Isaiah believed in Jesus:

“And He said, “It is too little that You should be My Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel. I will also give You as a light to the nations, to be My salvation to the end of the earth.” Is.49:6


Why do you assume it means 'perfect'? Because it fits your theology.
No. I think it means perfect because if you keep the whole law, you are perfect, for the law is perfect.

“The law of the LORD is perfect…” Ps.119:7


So a loving God created us in order that we feel bad about ourselves?
A loving God created us with the capability of feeling bad so there are things to feel bad about. Pride in self is what got Satan knocked down. The Bible says,

“The LORD of hosts has purposed it, to stain the pride of all glory, to bring all the honored of the earth into contempt.” Is.23:9


Uhm, right. The old covenant is ceased. Even though God states it is permanent and the law is forever.
Uhm, not exactly. The old covenant has ceased “in Messiah.” That is, the condemnation Moses enjoined to you has ceased for me and anyone who believes in Jesus, but not for you. Understand? It is permanent for those who reject Jesus. Messiah didn’t die for His own sins, but for mine and yours too. He’s the atonement.


All of mankind falls short.
Correct.

But that's ok. God judges us by what we are capable of, not what He is capable of.
Wrong. Jews will be judged by the law of Moses. Moses is going to kill you babe.


But I thought no one could see god and live?
No one can see God and live, but I am are speaking here of God incarnate, what the church has feebly tried to explain about the nature of God as the “trinity.” Jesus is half human, but even since He left this earth, He underwent some type of (excuse my ignorance) metamorphosis. The NT that you despise says He will return in flaming fire. I do believe this is how He gave the law to Moses.


So what? His argument has no validity?
Not according to what the Bible says of Gods salvation.

Fenris
Mar 6th 2008, 02:00 PM
Hello Fenris.Hi.



No my friend. Where does Torah say that Messiah must be anointed with olive oil?What does the word 'messiah' mean?

And speaking of being anointed with oil by the priest:

“The scepter will not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes…” Ge.49:10

How do you suppose any priest is going to anoint the Messiah since no one today can prove they’re from the tribe of Judah?There are people alive today who can trace their lineage back to king David.


And when did the Jews start losing their tribal identity? Mostly after the destruction of the first temple. A couple of exceptions: The levites and cohen-priests can trace their lineage, and people who can trace their lineage back to king David. Although most Jews today are from the tribe of Judah.



Oh, he was a Jew alright. He was a Rabbi. No matter.Strange that I have not heard of him, then.



Maybe He fulfilled some now and will handle the rest when He returns. Did you ever consider that? Of course. But that too would be unexpected. Also unprohecied.


Rashi believe in Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, didn’t he?If such a thing were to happen, and there's no guarantee on that, it would be two people from two different tribes.



Here’s why:

And Abram said, “You have given me no son and one born in my house is my heir.”

The LORD said, “That will not be your heir, but one born of you will be your heir.” Then the LORD brought him outside and said, “Look at the stars. So will your posterity be in number.”

And he believed the LORD, and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. Ge.15:3-6Right, he trusted that God would give him a child, even though he was old.


Now here’s the second part.

And God said, “Sarah will bear you a son and you will call him Isaac, and I will confirm an everlasting covenant with him and his children after him.” Ge.17:19Right, and that covenant is still in effect, we believe.


Now here’s the third part.

Now it came to pass that God tested Abraham…Ge.22

God made a promise and Abraham believed Him. Abraham believed that God would raise his promised son from the dead.

The promise led to belief which came to a partial fulfillment (Isaac is here, but no grandchildren yet) and was then tested. The faith Abraham exhibited is astounding! Then God told him all the families of the earth would be blessed because of him, and you know what? I am blessed!
You believe that blessing refers to Jesus. We believe it refers to all the Jews.


That’s fine, as long as the rich man doesn’t expect anything from God. It isn't about expecting things from God. The rich man did a good deed and helped the poor. Does his motivation really matter?



So mans honor of himself is foolishness to God.True, but again, so what?




The holocaust was unimaginably terrible Fenris, but your belief that no Jews during that time were violent or deceitful couldn’t be true.Violent or deceitful? Perhaps. Deserving of genocide?



Since we’ve never personally met any Biblical character, it’s all faith.Yep. And we have faith regardless of any evidence. Which is exactly why we can't prove any points to each other.



I wouldn’t call serving God trivial, but as for the choice, yes, it’s Gods way or death.So all human existence boils down to: Choose Jesus, or not choose Jesus. Our daily struggles mean nothing.



Jesus is.Perfect as in not transgressing on any of the laws? What about the positive commandments? Did he do all of those too?



But you will from Teddy Roosevelt, right?I don't need faith to believe that Roosevelt existed and that he made this statement.



בּחר
“Bachar” is translated in my Bible as “choose.” It’s the same word Joshua used when he said, “…choose this day whom you will serve…” Jos.24:15 It doesn't say "Choose between keeping the law perfectly or choose death." What its really saying is "follow God to the best of your ability, or follow your own base desires". It's not all or nothing as you make it out to be.



Salvation is deliverance. Ultimately our salvation will be from death. God is the only One who could save us from it.

“He will swallow up death in victory…” Is.25:8 That’s what Jesus did.Last I checked people are still dying.



There isn’t anything mere about belief my friend. Have you forgotten Abrahams belief and how God tested it?For his belief? Or for his actions?


And, Abraham was granted eternal life for his belief.We know this how?



Of course. Isaiah believed in Jesus:

“And He said, “It is too little that You should be My Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel. I will also give You as a light to the nations, to be My salvation to the end of the earth.” Is.49:6That's funny. My bible says : 6 Then flew unto me one of the seraphim, with a glowing stone in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar; 7 and he touched my mouth with it, and said: Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin expiated.

Look, no sacrifice! And his sin was taken away!



No. I think it means perfect because if you keep the whole law, you are perfect, for the law is perfect.

“The law of the LORD is perfect…” Ps.119:7No one individual can keep the whole law. The entire law doesn't even apply to any one individual.



A loving God created us with the capability of feeling bad so there are things to feel bad about. Pride in self is what got Satan knocked down. The Bible says,

“The LORD of hosts has purposed it, to stain the pride of all glory, to bring all the honored of the earth into contempt.” Is.23:9I don't understand what it is that you're saying here.



Uhm, not exactly. The old covenant has ceased “in Messiah.” That is, the condemnation Moses enjoined to you has ceased for me and anyone who believes in Jesus, but not for you. Understand? It is permanent for those who reject Jesus. Messiah didn’t die for His own sins, but for mine and yours too. He’s the atonement.Right, but again, this is a point of faith and not fact. For sure, this concept was unknown to first-century Jews. It's really more of a pagan concept. That doesn't make it wrong, of course, but it isn't Jewish either.



Wrong. Jews will be judged by the law of Moses. Moses is going to kill you babe.Ah, I feel otherwise. God, in His infinite wisdom and infinite mercy, will judge me on my fulfillment based on what I was individually capable of. I'll retell a hasidic tale about Rabbi Zusha:

"When I die and come before the heavenly court, if they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not as great as Abraham?' I will not be afraid. I will say that I was not born with Abraham's intellectual capabilities. And if they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not Moses?' I will say that I did not have Moses' leadership abilities. But when they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not Zusha?' for that I will have no answer."

Or in more banal terms, imagine two people are running the 100 meter dash. One finishes in 10 seconds and the other finishes in 30 seconds. Who won? The one who finished in ten seconds but is an olympic runner? Or the one who finished in 30 seconds but was born with polio and didn't even walk until he was 20?

God judges us on how far we've come, not where we are.



No one can see God and live, but I am are speaking here of God incarnate, what the church has feebly tried to explain about the nature of God as the “trinity.” Jesus is half human, but even since He left this earth, He underwent some type of (excuse my ignorance) metamorphosis. The NT that you despise says He will return in flaming fire. I do believe this is how He gave the law to Moses.
Uh huh.


Not according to what the Bible says of Gods salvation.You mean what you believe the bible to say...

JesusisGod
Mar 7th 2008, 02:04 PM
Good morn Fenris.

What does the word 'messiah' mean?
Messiah means “anointed one”….period.


So all human existence boils down to: Choose Jesus, or not choose Jesus.
Yes. It’s the type of choice God gave you in Moses, only in Jesus you’re going to live, because He fulfilled the law.

“Don’t think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Mt.5:17


Our daily struggles mean nothing.
What we plant in this life will be manifested at the resurrection.


Perfect as in not transgressing on any of the laws? What about the positive commandments? Did he do all of those too?
I don’t know what you mean by “positive”. If someone loves God, how are the commandments negative?


I don't need faith to believe that Roosevelt existed and that he made this statement.
Having never met him, you most certainly do need faith to believe he existed. In fact, Fenris, the second you die, anyone who never met you will need a measure of faith to believe you ever existed, from the stone cutter who scribes your marker onward. Because you see, my friend, your existence from that point will require the testimony of others.


Last I checked people are still dying.
Messiah is the first fruits. As death entered the world through Adam, life entered through One Man. Life passes to us based on our faith in Him.


For his belief? Or for his actions?
Abrahams faith was attested to by his actions. This is why James said,

“Wasn’t Abraham justified by works when he offered Isaac on the altar? See how faith cooperates with his work and by works faith is fulfilled.” Ja.2:21

It’s the way God designed it. Faith first, then action.


We know this how?
Listen carefully:

“And Abram believed in the LORD, and He counted it to him for righteousness. And He said, I am the LORD that brought you out of the land of Ur…to give you this land to inherit. And Abram said, Lord God, how will I know I will inherit it?.....And God said to him, Know for sure that your children will be a stranger in a land that is not theirs…..and you will go to your fathers in peace…”Ge.15:7-8,13,15

God told Abraham that he was going to die before the promise was fulfilled. That was the covenant God made with Abraham. How would God keep His promise unless He raised him from the dead?

“These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and confessed that they were strangers on the earth.” He.11:13

The promise to you is the Kingdom of Messiah. Better than anything you can imagine Fenris.

I’ll have to get back to you.

Fenris
Mar 7th 2008, 04:56 PM
Good morn Fenris.Hi.


Messiah means “anointed one”….period.
Right. Now, isn't it reasonable for a Jewish person to reject Jesus as the 'anointed one' since he was, in fact, never anointed?


Yes. It’s the type of choice God gave you in Moses, only in Jesus you’re going to live, because He fulfilled the law.
Judaism sees the everyday struggle between good and evil as meaningful. And I don't accept this concept 'fulfilled the law'.




What we plant in this life will be manifested at the resurrection. But only if we make that one important choice...right?



I don’t know what you mean by “positive”. If someone loves God, how are the commandments negative?
A positive commandment: Give charity. A negative commandment: don't east pork.




Messiah is the first fruits. As death entered the world through Adam, life entered through One Man. Life passes to us based on our faith in Him.And yet people are still dying...



Abrahams faith was attested to by his actions. This is why James said,

“Wasn’t Abraham justified by works when he offered Isaac on the altar? See how faith cooperates with his work and by works faith is fulfilled.” Ja.2:21

It’s the way God designed it. Faith first, then action.So if one is one of the unlucky ones who don't have faith, they shouldn't do the right thing anyway?



Listen carefully:

“And Abram believed in the LORD, and He counted it to him for righteousness.
Right, he believed that God would give him a son.

Teke
Mar 7th 2008, 05:44 PM
No one individual can keep the whole law. The entire law doesn't even apply to any one individual.



On this we agree. :D

Does this mean you understand how Christians keep the law, even though they are not Jews?

Fenris
Mar 7th 2008, 08:58 PM
On this we agree. :D

Does this mean you understand how Christians keep the law, even though they are not Jews?Nope.


blah blah 15 characters.

tgallison
Mar 8th 2008, 12:23 AM
Nope.


blah blah 15 characters.

Fenris Greetings

[quote]That's funny. My bible says : 6 Then flew unto me one of the seraphim, with a glowing stone in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar; 7 and he touched my mouth with it, and said: Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin expiated.

Look, no sacrifice! And his sin was taken away![quote]


Psalm 2:12 "Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him."

In Jesus Christ, terrell

JesusisGod
Mar 8th 2008, 07:04 AM
Hi Fenris.

Of course. But that too would be unexpected. Also unprohecied.
It has all been told. The only reason it’s unexpected to you is that you don’t understand it.


If such a thing were to happen, and there's no guarantee on that, it would be two people from two different tribes.
Rashi and other sages knew of a suffering Messiah, beside the Warrior Messiah. They just didn’t know He would be the same Person. Torah says nothing about the suffering Messiah being from the tribe of Joseph. What if the prophets were telling you Messiah was going to die and come back as King to settle all accounts? Is your biggest problem with Jesus that He hasn’t fulfilled some prophecies yet?


You believe that blessing refers to Jesus. We believe it refers to all the Jews.
I believe it’s both, although not all Jews.


It isn't about expecting things from God. The rich man did a good deed and helped the poor. Does his motivation really matter?
God tries the heart so motive matters to Him.


True, but again, so what?
So your idea that God is going to bless you (now or someday) for selfish motives isn’t true.


Violent or deceitful? Perhaps. Deserving of genocide?
Perhaps? Then Isaiah 53 isn’t about the nation of Israel. In fact there is so much in Isaiah 53 that doesn’t fit the nation of Israel at all that whoever proposed Israel as the focus of the prophecy must have been a real Jesus hater.


Yep. And we have faith regardless of any evidence.
Blind faith? How foolish is that? One of the reasons I believe in the God of the Jews is because of what your prophets said about Jesus.


That's funny. My bible says : 6 Then flew unto me one of the seraphim, with a glowing stone in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar; 7 and he touched my mouth with it, and said: Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin expiated.

Look, no sacrifice! And his sin was taken away!
No sacrifice on the altar in Heaven? Excuse me, but the sacrifices Moses ordered are patterns of what is in Heaven. The altar in Heaven has a perpetual sacrifice on it, and whatever touches it is holy:

“And you will sanctify them (that is, the altar of burnt offering and the vessels), that they may be most holy. And whatever touches them will be holy.” Ex.30:29

Now, whose blood do you suppose in on Heavens altar?


No one individual can keep the whole law. The entire law doesn't even apply to any one individual.
The portions of law that apply to them.

I don't understand what it is that you're saying here.
I’m saying all of mans pride (which includes pride in self) and all of mans honor (which includes honoring self) contrary to what you believe is contemptible to God.


Right, but again, this is a point of faith and not fact.
I doubt the Jews who were following Jesus felt it was a point of faith when they said, “Hey, didn’t they just kill You a few days ago?”


Ah, I feel otherwise. God, in His infinite wisdom and infinite mercy, will judge me on my fulfillment based on what I was individually capable of. I'll retell a hasidic tale about Rabbi Zusha:

"When I die and come before the heavenly court, if they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not as great as Abraham?' I will not be afraid. I will say that I was not born with Abraham's intellectual capabilities. And if they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not Moses?' I will say that I did not have Moses' leadership abilities. But when they ask me, 'Zusha, why were you not Zusha?' for that I will have no answer."
Too bad this story doesn’t have anything to do with what Moses said. You may feel that Moses was telling people to do what you were capable of, but this is what Moses actually said:

“And Moses and with elders of Israel commanded the people saying, Keep all the commandments which I command you this day.” De.27:1.

There are too many places to list where Moses ordered the people this way, but you can’t point to one place where Moses said, “Do only what you’re individually capable of.”

The reason God gave you the law was to expose sin. There was no code up to that point. The law makes us aware of the fact that we’re sinners who are incapable of being just before God.


Or in more banal terms, imagine two people are running the 100 meter dash. One finishes in 10 seconds and the other finishes in 30 seconds. Who won? The one who finished in ten seconds but is an olympic runner? Or the one who finished in 30 seconds but was born with polio and didn't even walk until he was 20?

God judges us on how far we've come, not where we are.
You know something Fenris? What you just said has nothing to do with what Moses said. Nothing.


You mean what you believe the bible to say...
No, what the Bible plainly says. Torah says over and over that God is your salvation, not the sweat Teddy told you about.


Right. Now, isn't it reasonable for a Jewish person to reject Jesus as the 'anointed one' since he was, in fact, never anointed?
No, it isn’t. I think it would be reasonable for a Jewish person to know that anointing someone with olive oil is only a ritual act. Is Isaiah 61:1 messianic or not? The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me because the LORD has anointed Me to preach…” In other words, I have been anointed with the Spirit of God to preach. From reading this, I think it’s reasonable for a Jewish person to know that Messiah would be anointed with the Spirit of God. Do you agree or not? And if someone who possessed the wisdom of the ages came along and started doing miracles, I wouldn’t expect any reasonable Jew to say, “Yeah, but did you ever have oil poured on your head?”


But only if we make that one important choice...right?
That’s right. Salvation is because God is good, not because we are.


A positive commandment: Give charity. A negative commandment: don't east pork.
Does feeding thousands, healing the sick and raising the dead fall into the positive category?


And yet people are still dying...
True, and Messiah hasn’t delivered Israel yet, has He?


So if one is one of the unlucky ones who don't have faith, they shouldn't do the right thing anyway?
I don’t believe in luck.

Fenris
Mar 9th 2008, 03:48 PM
Psalm 2:12 "Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him."

It says "Embrace purity", not 'kiss the son'. The word in question is 'Bar', which means 'purity' in Hebrew. It means 'son' in Aramaic, a language that did not exist in king David's time.

daughter
Mar 9th 2008, 03:55 PM
What was the word for "son" in King David's time? (I'm assuming it was "Ben", which is Hebrew for son, so far as I know...)

Fenris
Mar 9th 2008, 04:06 PM
Hi FenrisMorning.


It has all been told. The only reason it’s unexpected to you is that you don’t understand it.Possibly. Although reading the gospel one gets the impression that the apostles were not fluent in Hebrew. So maybe they didn't understand. maybe.



Rashi and other sages knew of a suffering Messiah, beside the Warrior Messiah. They just didn’t know He would be the same Person. Torah says nothing about the suffering Messiah being from the tribe of Joseph. What if the prophets were telling you Messiah was going to die and come back as King to settle all accounts? Is your biggest problem with Jesus that He hasn’t fulfilled some prophecies yet?Actually, no. My biggest problem is that you claim Jesus was God.



God tries the heart so motive matters to Him. So you say.



So your idea that God is going to bless you (now or someday) for selfish motives isn’t trueSo you say.



Perhaps? Then Isaiah 53 isn’t about the nation of Israel. In fact there is so much in Isaiah 53 that doesn’t fit the nation of Israel at all that whoever proposed Israel as the focus of the prophecy must have been a real Jesus hater.I have demonstrated how it certainly could be the Jewish people. In any case Isaiah refers to the Jewish people as God's servant several times in his book. See my sig for one such example. So for you to say with certainty that it isn't all the Jewish people is disingenuous.



Blind faith? How foolish is that? One of the reasons I believe in the God of the Jews is because of what your prophets said about Jesus. Which is only true because you believe that it is....



No sacrifice on the altar in Heaven? Excuse me, but the sacrifices Moses ordered are patterns of what is in Heaven. The altar in Heaven has a perpetual sacrifice on it, and whatever touches it is holy:

“And you will sanctify them (that is, the altar of burnt offering and the vessels), that they may be most holy. And whatever touches them will be holy.” Ex.30:29

Now, whose blood do you suppose in on Heavens altar?How do we know there's an altar in heaven?



The portions of law that apply to them. ok, then Jesus couldn't have 'fulfilled' the whole law, because it couldn't all apply to him.



I doubt the Jews who were following Jesus felt it was a point of faith when they said, “Hey, didn’t they just kill You a few days ago?”Well, he only appeared to those who already believed in him. Hmm?



Too bad this story doesn’t have anything to do with what Moses said. You may feel that Moses was telling people to do what you were capable of, but this is what Moses actually said:

“And Moses and with elders of Israel commanded the people saying, Keep all the commandments which I command you this day.” De.27:1.

There are too many places to list where Moses ordered the people this way, but you can’t point to one place where Moses said, “Do only what you’re individually capable of.”

The reason God gave you the law was to expose sin. There was no code up to that point. The law makes us aware of the fact that we’re sinners who are incapable of being just before God. Regardless, we are commanded to do the law forever.



You know something Fenris? What you just said has nothing to do with what Moses said. Nothing.No, it has to do with judging people fairly. My view of God says He does. Your view of God says He doesn't.



No, what the Bible plainly says. Torah says over and over that God is your salvation, not the sweat Teddy told you about.No, it says God will save us if we obey the Law...



No, it isn’t. I think it would be reasonable for a Jewish person to know that anointing someone with olive oil is only a ritual act. Is Isaiah 61:1 messianic or not? The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me because the LORD has anointed Me to preach…” In other words, I have been anointed with the Spirit of God to preach. From reading this, I think it’s reasonable for a Jewish person to know that Messiah would be anointed with the Spirit of God. Do you agree or not? And if someone who possessed the wisdom of the ages came along and started doing miracles, I wouldn’t expect any reasonable Jew to say, “Yeah, but did you ever have oil poured on your head?”If it wasn't important that he be anointed, why is he referred to as ANOINTED?



Does feeding thousands, healing the sick and raising the dead fall into the positive category?Umm, it' not a Mitzvah to raise the dead. :lol:



True, and Messiah hasn’t delivered Israel yet, has He?Still waiting...

2Witnesses
Mar 9th 2008, 05:44 PM
I've been asked several times how Jews atone today without sacrifice.

First I'm going to post some biblical verses that demonstrate that sacrifice is not mandatory for receiving God's forgiveness. Then I'll post a short list of how Jews atone today.

Some verses:

Asking for forgiveness

"Then the LORD said, 'I do forgive, just as you have asked.'"
Numbers 14:20

Obedience to God

1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams.

Prayer

Hosea 14:1 O Israel, return unto The Lord thy G-d; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. [2] Take with you words, and return unto the Lord: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and accept that which is good: so will we render [as] bullocks [the offering of] our lips.


and

Proverbs 15:8 The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright [is] His delight. [9] The way of the wicked [is] an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness. (KJV)

and

2 Chronicles 6:24 And if thy people Israel be put to the worse before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee; and shall return and confess thy name, and pray and make supplication before thee in this house; [25] Then hear thou from the heavens, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest to them and to their fathers.

and

2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Feeling remorseful

Psalms 51:16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [17] The sacrifices of G-d [are] a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O G-d, thou wilt not despise. (KJV)

Song

Psalms 69:30 I will praise the name of G-d with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. [31] [This] also shall please the LORD better than an ox [or] bullock that hath horns and hoofs. (KJV)


Practicing mercy

Proverbs 16:6 By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil. (KJV)

and

Daniel 4:27 Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity. (KJV)

Just because He feels like it

Micah 7:18 Who is a G-d like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy. [19] He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea. [20] Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (KJV)

Money

Exodus 30:16 And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.

Turning from evil

Jonah 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed G-d, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. [6] For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. [7] And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: [8] But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto G-d: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. [9] Who can tell if G-d will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? [10] And G-d saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and G-d repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Yom Kippur

Leviticus 23:27 Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement; it shall be a holy gathering to you; and you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the Lord. [28] And you shall do no work in that same day; for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the Lord your G-d.



In light of these verses, repentance process is as follows:

* Ceasing to commit the forbidden act
* Regretting what he or she has done
* Confessing before God
* Firmly resolving never to repeat those actions
* If possible, bring sacrifice

But sacrifice alone is meaningless without the other four steps.

Confession of one's sins does not 'atone'. Atonement is confessing Yeshua. But confession is recognized by God.

The blood was shed because the 'life of the flesh is in the blood.' And it was meant to look forward to the death of one who could atone fro sin.

2Witnesses

Fenris
Mar 9th 2008, 08:20 PM
Confession of one's sins does not 'atone'. Atonement is confessing Yeshua. That's a point of faith, not fact.


The blood was shed because the 'life of the flesh is in the blood.' And it was meant to look forward to the death of one who could atone fro sin.

2Witnesses
Perhaps, but sacrifice did not atone for every sin.

Teke
Mar 9th 2008, 09:06 PM
Confession of one's sins does not 'atone'. Atonement is confessing Yeshua. But confession is recognized by God.



The lip service of proclaiming that Jesus is Lord is not all that is necessary for salvation. Faith without works is nothing. And we are not to put the Trinity in a secondary manner to Jesus. The Father reveals the Son to whom He wills. One who simply proclaims that the Son has been revealed to them, but doesn't keep the commandments, is not of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

2Witnesses
Mar 9th 2008, 09:35 PM
That's a point of faith, not fact.

Perhaps, but sacrifice did not atone for every sin.

Fenris,

Thanks for your reply. But the sacrifice, the offering, was supposed, in my statement of faith, point to the offering of Messiah; to Isa. 53. So of course the blood of bulls did not cleanse the soul, else they would have ceased to be offered.

I believe, and I know many do not, in the fallen state of mankind. And that redemption is a matter of believing on the One God sends to deal with this issue.

The Covenant of the Law was given, not to save anyone, but to put out they needed a savior. Of course there was a righteousness according to the Law. But it saved no one from sin. In fact, Isaiah says, our righteousness is a a women's filthy rag.

Salvation is by faith in the One God sent to truly atone. And this is a statement of faith, and fact.

2Witnesses

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 12:17 PM
Fenris,

Thanks for your reply. But the sacrifice, the offering, was supposed, in my statement of faith, point to the offering of Messiah; to Isa. 53. So of course the blood of bulls did not cleanse the soul, else they would have ceased to be offered.Well, we would both agree that there are other ways of atonement besides the blood of bulls. What we disagree on are the alternate methods.



The Covenant of the Law was given, not to save anyone, but to put out they needed a savior. Of course there was a righteousness according to the Law. But it saved no one from sin. In fact, Isaiah says, our righteousness is a a women's filthy rag.No, he was speaking of the Jews of his generation, not all people for all time.


Salvation is by faith in the One God sent to truly atone. And this is a statement of faith, and fact.



It isn't a 'fact', since it can't be proved to someone who doesn't believe it. hence, it is a statement of faith.

tgallison
Mar 10th 2008, 01:21 PM
It says "Embrace purity", not 'kiss the son'. The word in question is 'Bar', which means 'purity' in Hebrew. It means 'son' in Aramaic, a language that did not exist in king David's time.

Fenris Greetings

Proverbs 31:2 "What, my purity? and what, the purity of my womb? and what, the purity of my vows?

terrell

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 02:09 PM
Fenris Greetings

Proverbs 31:2 "What, my purity? and what, the purity of my womb? and what, the purity of my vows?

terrellProverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes all contain loan words from later languages. If they were penned by Solomon, they were obviously edited at a later date. For example, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes both contain the word 'Pardes', a Persian word meaning 'Orchard'. The word dates to no earlier than the 6th Century BC.

Also, David used the Hebrew word for 'son' ('Ben') in verse 7. Why wouldn't he use the same word in verse 12?!

tgallison
Mar 10th 2008, 02:23 PM
Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes all contain loan words from later languages. If they were penned by Solomon, they were obviously edited at a later date. For example, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes both contain the word 'Pardes', a Persian word meaning 'Orchard'. The word dates to no earlier than the 6th Century BC.

Also, David used the Hebrew word for 'son' ('Ben') in verse 7. Why wouldn't he use the same word in verse 12?!

Fenris

Why did God choose to take upon himself our iniquity? There are a lot of questions I cannot answer, but I believe the answer to this one is love. (agape-chashaq)

terrell

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 02:44 PM
Fenris

Why did God choose to take upon himself our iniquity?
terrell
What verse are you referring to?

tgallison
Mar 10th 2008, 03:51 PM
What verse are you referring to?

Fenris greetings

Isaiah 53:5 "All we like sheep have gone astray: we have turned every one to his own way: and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."

Isaiah 29:13 "Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:"

terrell

2Witnesses
Mar 10th 2008, 04:12 PM
Well, we would both agree that there are other ways of atonement besides the blood of bulls. What we disagree on are the alternate methods.

No, he was speaking of the Jews of his generation, not all people for all time.


It isn't a 'fact', since it can't be proved to someone who doesn't believe it. hence, it is a statement of faith.

Fenris,

I have 'faith' that it, His atonement for us, is a fact. You have faith there was a person called Moshe, who led Israel from Egypt. Prove this to be a fact.

But I do believe Moses. I believe he was inspired of God to refer to another prophet that the people were to listen to. I believe that prophet to be Jesus. And I believe the Law of Moses pointed to Him as atonement for the sins of the people. And that David sang of Him. And Isaiah 53 prophecied of Him. And that Abraham saw His day and blessed God.

We can discuss our 'beliefs', but only God can open the eyes and ears, giving one a heart to receive. And since I feel I am correct in my beliefs, and you are in error, I pray God opens your heart.

And who knows, perhaps He will through something I say! But if you feel I have nothing to offer, perhaps pride lies at the door.

2Witnesses

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 04:13 PM
Fenris greetings

Isaiah 53:5 "All we like sheep have gone astray: we have turned every one to his own way: and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."
Nowhere does this say the subject who the sin is laid on is God. You believe that it is, but that isn't the only possible way to read it.

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 04:16 PM
Fenris,

I have 'faith' that it, His atonement for us, is a fact. You have faith there was a person called Moshe, who led Israel from Egypt. Prove this to be a fact.I can't. That's why it is called faith.


But I do believe Moses. I believe he was inspired of God to refer to another prophet that the people were to listen to. I believe that prophet to be Jesus. And I believe the Law of Moses pointed to Him as atonement for the sins of the people. And that David sang of Him. And Isaiah 53 prophecied of Him. And that Abraham saw His day and blessed God.Right. You believe all these things to be so.


We can discuss our 'beliefs', but only God can open the eyes and ears, giving one a heart to receive. And since I feel I am correct in my beliefs, and you are in error, I pray God opens your heart.And I believe that you are wrong in your beliefs. But I also believe that it's ok to be wrong, as long as you are leading a moral life.


And who knows, perhaps He will through something I say! But if you feel I have nothing to offer, perhaps pride lies at the door.
It isn't pride that leads the Jews to a different conclusion. It's simply a different reading of scripture. An older reading, I have to point out.

tgallison
Mar 10th 2008, 04:24 PM
Nowhere does this say the subject who the sin is laid on is God. You believe that it is, but that isn't the only possible way to read it.

Fenris I believe it, because I have met God, and have been overwhelmed by his goodness.

In Jesus Christ, terrell

2Witnesses
Mar 10th 2008, 04:32 PM
I can't. That's why it is called faith.

Right. You believe all these things to be so.

And I believe that you are wrong in your beliefs. But I also believe that it's ok to be wrong, as long as you are leading a moral life.

It isn't pride that leads the Jews to a different conclusion. It's simply a different reading of scripture. An older reading, I have to point out.

Fenris,

You say 'moral life' is good enough. You might fine otherwise. But time will tell. If you say you live by the Law, you will be judged by the Law. But of course, you look to God's mercy in this. And so do I. But to me that mercy is Yeshua; that it is not by my acts of righteousness, but by His grace to me in Yeshua. I receive that grace by faith. To you, this is the 'stone of stumbling.'

Though you may have an 'older reading', this does not make it a correct reading.

2Witnesses

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 04:46 PM
Fenris I believe it, because I have met God, and have been overwhelmed by his goodness.

In Jesus Christ, terrellI am happy for you.

It proves nothing to me though.

Fenris
Mar 10th 2008, 04:49 PM
Fenris,

You say 'moral life' is good enough. You might fine otherwise. But time will tell. If you say you live by the Law, you will be judged by the Law. But of course, you look to God's mercy in this. And so do I. But to me that mercy is Yeshua; that it is not by my acts of righteousness, but by His grace to me in Yeshua. I receive that grace by faith. To you, this is the 'stone of stumbling.'Yes, that sums up our differences succinctly.


Though you may have an 'older reading', this does not make it a correct reading.

It doesn't make it wrong either.

JesusisGod
Mar 10th 2008, 11:15 PM
Hi Fenris.

Possibly. Although reading the gospel one gets the impression that the apostles were not fluent in Hebrew. So maybe they didn't understand. maybe.

It’s possible the gospels were originally written in Hebrew and transcribed into Greek by someone who never met the Apostles.



Actually, no. My biggest problem is that you claim Jesus was God.
That’s because you were always told that God isn’t a man, which of course is true. I won’t lie to you Fenris. I have very little knowledge of the nature of God. I believe He could have Himself birthed into the world if that was His desire.



I have demonstrated how it certainly could be the Jewish people. In any case Isaiah refers to the Jewish people as God's servant several times in his book. See my sig for one such example. So for you to say with certainty that it isn't all the Jewish people is disingenuous.
I don’t think I’m being disingenuous. Is.53:12 in your view says the Jews made intercession for the transgressors. Did Israel pray to God on behalf of the Nazis? It is my understanding that the Jews tried them (and rightfully so) as war criminals. On the other hand, Jesus (it was said) forgave those who put Him to death.



Which is only true because you believe that it is....
Look at the fulfillment of what they said. Without Jesus, why would millions of gentiles all over the world care about the God of the Jews? Your prophets said your messiah would tell us about Him.


How do we know there's an altar in heaven?
Well, leaving out what the NT says (again), I guess I assumed since Isaiah saw the Lord high and lifted up, he was reporting from the heavenlies



Well, he only appeared to those who already believed in him. Hmm?
That’s exactly what motivated them to face their own murders. If the death of Jesus was the end of the story, we wouldn’t be having this conversation because I wouldn’t know anything about your God. This website wouldn’t exist.



Regardless, we are commanded to do the law forever.
Yes, we are.


No, it has to do with judging people fairly. My view of God says He does. Your view of God says He doesn't.
My view says God has made a new covenant with you that supercedes that of Moses, because you cannot live up to what Moses demanded:

“Behold, the days come says the LORD, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which covenant of Mine they broke…” Je.31:31-32

Fenris, why does God want to make a new covenant with you if Moses is all you need?



No, it says God will save us if we obey the Law...
Yes it does. Now tell me…..have you violated the law?



If it wasn't important that he be anointed, why is he referred to as ANOINTED?
Because He was anointed by God with the Spirit, not a man with a cruse of crushed olives.



Umm, it' not a Mitzvah to raise the dead.
Well, maybe Jesus was just showing off.



Still waiting...
So is Jesus.

2Witnesses
Mar 11th 2008, 11:19 AM
Yes, that sums up our differences succinctly.



It doesn't make it wrong either.


And Fenris,

It does not make my 'newer reading' wrong either! But actually, I feel my reading has been known and believed by a faithful remnant.

2Witnesses

Fenris
Mar 11th 2008, 12:02 PM
Hi Fenris.Good morning.


It’s possible the gospels were originally written in Hebrew and transcribed into Greek by someone who never met the Apostles.
I've heard that said, but we have absolutely no evidence of that. Where are the Hebrew copies of the NT?

In any case, whoever wrote the NT quoted the Greek version of the Tanach and not the Hebrew. We know this because the Greek version had errors which made it into the NT.



That’s because you were always told that God isn’t a man, which of course is true. I won’t lie to you Fenris. I have very little knowledge of the nature of God. I believe He could have Himself birthed into the world if that was His desire. This conflicts with Jewish beliefs and Jewish understanding of scripture.




I don’t think I’m being disingenuous. Is.53:12 in your view says the Jews made intercession for the transgressors. Did Israel pray to God on behalf of the Nazis? It is my understanding that the Jews tried them (and rightfully so) as war criminals. Jews didn't try them as war criminals, the allies did.

Jews pray for the welfare of the nations in which we reside, even when they treat us badly. You obviously didn't know that.




Look at the fulfillment of what they said. Without Jesus, why would millions of gentiles all over the world care about the God of the Jews?I would argue they still don't. Jesus was not the God of the Jews.


Your prophets said your messiah would tell us about Him.And he will, when he comes.



Well, leaving out what the NT says (again), I guess I assumed since Isaiah saw the Lord high and lifted up, he was reporting from the heavenliesDon't assume.




That’s exactly what motivated them to face their own murders. If the death of Jesus was the end of the story, we wouldn’t be having this conversation because I wouldn’t know anything about your God. This website wouldn’t exist. I don't understand what you are saying.





My view says God has made a new covenant with you that supercedes that of Moses, because you cannot live up to what Moses demanded:And I say God doesn't expect us to.


“Behold, the days come says the LORD, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which covenant of Mine they broke…” Je.31:31-32A new covenant, not a new law.

Further, God explicitly states that He will never break His covenant with us, no matter how bad we are.


Fenris, why does God want to make a new covenant with you if Moses is all you need?Because in the messianic era the world will be different. It hasn't happened yet, but when it does, you'll know.;)




Yes it does. Now tell me…..have you violated the law?Yep. And that's ok, because God created repentance.




Because He was anointed by God with the Spirit, not a man with a cruse of crushed olives.So he wasn't anointed, he was 'anointed'. Just like messianic prophecy hasn't been fulfilled, it's been 'fulfilled'. Metaphorically. Spiritually. Whatever.



Well, maybe Jesus was just showing off.:lol:




So is Jesus.


Again, a point of faith and not fact.

Fenris
Mar 11th 2008, 12:04 PM
It does not make my 'newer reading' wrong either!
I never said it does. But I don't think you'll suffer for believing the wrong thing.


But actually, I feel my reading has been known and believed by a faithful remnant.
Well, you have to believe that.

JesusisGod
Mar 12th 2008, 04:56 AM
Hi Fenris.

I've heard that said, but we have absolutely no evidence of that.
Of course there’s evidence. It is just evidence you won’t accept. But the idea that the Apostles couldn’t speak their native tongue because of a Greek who lived hundreds of years later is rather silly reasoning, don’t you think?



Where are the Hebrew copies of the NT?
None survive, the same way no original manuscripts of Torah survive. For all we know, Moses could have originally penned the Torah in hieroglyphs.



In any case, whoever wrote the NT quoted the Greek version of the Tanach and not the Hebrew. We know this because the Greek version had errors which made it into the NT.
You mean whoever copied the NT.



This conflicts with Jewish beliefs and Jewish understanding of scripture.
Yes it does, but no one understands everything that is written. Not even your sages agreed all the time. Why is it impossible that Jesus existed in another form before He lived in a body on earth?



Jews didn't try them as war criminals, the allies did.
Tell that to Adolf Eichmann. Not that I mind, you see, but your interpretation of Isaiah 53 doesn’t hold up.



Jews pray for the welfare of the nations in which we reside, even when they treat us badly. You obviously didn't know that.
I’m sure some Jews do that. My point is not all Jews do, and since they don’t, Is.53 doesn’t describe Israel. Have you ever heard of the Avengers? They were Jews who had served in the British Army and later formed themselves into a group who hunted Nazis (hence the name). They killed them on the spot. Ever heard of Simon Wiesenthal? Hundreds of Jews have testified against thousands of Nazis for crimes against humanity. So please Fenris, don’t tell me Israel makes intercession for those who persecute her. Is.53 does not describe Israel.




I would argue they still don't.
You can argue all you want. The whole gentile world knows about your God because of Jesus Fenris, just as the prophets said, and no body is going to top that.



Jesus was not the God of the Jews.
Do you think you could accept Jesus as the word of God made into flesh? (This isn’t a “trick” question. I don’t believe one has to believe Jesus is God to be saved. I only maintain one has to believe in Him.)



And he will, when he comes.
So the fact that Jesus and His disciples (all Jews) introduced the God of the Jews to what now amounts to billions of gentiles means nothing to you? Funny that the prophets never mentioned this, isn’t it?



Don't assume.
That’s good advice. You know, my friend, you assume your ancient Rabbis knew it all and it seems to me you are so indoctrinated by them that when the truth is staring you in the face you won’t accept it.



I don't understand what you are saying.
Then I will make it as plain as I can. You seem to think the fact that Jesus only appeared to His disciples after His resurrection leads to suspect reliability of truth, but the opposite is true. The fact that the Apostles continued in their faith of Him after His execution is indication that God raised Him from the dead. They originated the claims about Him. If they were in any way mistaken about Him after He was killed there would have been no reason to continue, because their lives were not enhanced from an earthly perspective by knowing Messiah. Q: why is this gentile (me) talking to this Jew (you) about the Hebrews God? A: Because Messiah has come. Dude, wake up.



And I say God doesn't expect us to.
So you say, but I have shown you many scriptures to the contrary. You have offered none to support what you say.



A new covenant, not a new law.
The law is a covenant unlike the covenant God made with Abraham four hundred years earlier. Abes covenant leads to the promised land. Moses covenant leads to damnation.



Further, God explicitly states that He will never break His covenant with us, no matter how bad we are.
Is that why everyone that came out of Egypt (except Joshua and Caleb) died in the wilderness?



Because in the messianic era the world will be different. It hasn't happened yet, but when it does, you'll know.
Jeremiah 31 says Israel broke the covenant Moses gave them, but you suppose you are able to do what your ancestors couldn’t.



Yep. And that's ok, because God created repentance.
Have you repented the way Moses commanded?

daughter
Mar 12th 2008, 09:33 AM
Hey JesusisGod.

Couple of things I was considering, reading your last post. You say that Moses's covenant leads to damnation, the implication being that everyone who died in the wilderness was doomed.

Just because God was angry with the Israelites in the desert doesn't mean that they were all damned. Moses himself was punished by God because of his anger, and God said to him that he would die on the wrong side of the Jordan and not enter into the land of promise... yet Moses did set foot in the promised land. He stood on the mountain of transfiguration with Jesus and Elijah. The laws of Moses did not lead to his damnation, but to his salvation, and he stood with his saviour even though he'd failed to keep the law perfectly, because our saviour is a God of love.

Sometimes I think we have too simplistic a reaction to God. Just because Paul talks about the law as leading to condemnation and death, that doesn't mean it's all the law is for. Fenris said in another post that the law was not some divine "gotcha" from God - God isn't some spiteful stern task master in the sky who is trying to catch us out.

When we fall short in the face of the law, yes, we realise that we're imperfect humans, that God is perfect, holy, that He alone is righteous and just.

But that doesn't mean that God will damn us eternally for our failures. He is looking for reasons to save us, not for reasons to cast us out. When Israel worshipped the calf in the desert, God was angry with them, and rightly so... He could have destroyed them then, and it would have been quite within His rights to do so.

But Moses - far from leading to damnation - interceded for his people. As God always knew he would. God didn't want to damn Israel, that's why He raised up a righteous man like Moses. He was looking for a way to save people, someone who could be righteousness and faithfulness for them (for us.) In this, as many other things, Moses was a type of Christ. If Moses is an intercessor before the Father, if like Christ he said, "kill me, but save the people", doesn't it seem a bit harsh to say he brings damnation?

Yes, we are saved through Jesus, I do believe that. And yes, He kept the law, He was and is the embodiment of the law, and through Him we can keep the law.

But the law itself is not a bad thing.

Moses says to Israel, "I set before you today, a blessing and a curse, life and death. Choose life."

The law is not just a curse, it is a blessing. It is not just death, it is life. You say to Fenris that he trusts his ancient rabbis. Sometimes I think protestant Christianity trusts Luther's reading of the New Testament a bit too literally. It made sense to him at the time... he was reacting away from a set of rules that were indeed death to him. But perhaps in flinching too far away from the law he didn't do himself or later Christians many favours. Remember, he wanted to get rid of the book of James, among other books, (Revelation, Ruth, Esther!) and I think he's the source of the "law" phobia that permeates modern Christianity.

Perhaps we should remember and trust that God was always a God of mercy. He does not change, whether we are in the Wilderness or the City, the Land of Slavery, or the Land of Promise. Even if the vernacular in which He speaks to us changes, God is always the same.

Fenris
Mar 12th 2008, 01:07 PM
Hi Fenris.Morning.




Of course there’s evidence. It is just evidence you won’t accept. But the idea that the Apostles couldn’t speak their native tongue because of a Greek who lived hundreds of years later is rather silly reasoning, don’t you think?Jews spoke Aramaic at the time, not Hebrew. Obviously you didn't know that.




None survive, the same way no original manuscripts of Torah survive. For all we know, Moses could have originally penned the Torah in hieroglyphs. The Torah is some 1300 years older. In any case, saying that none survive doesn't mean that they ever existed.




You mean whoever copied the NT.If it was copied with errors, it can hardly be considered the exact words of God. What other mistakes crept in?



Y
es it does, but no one understands everything that is written. Not even your sages agreed all the time. Why is it impossible that Jesus existed in another form before He lived in a body on earth?Because it conflicts with Jewish understanding of what God is.




Tell that to Adolf Eichmann. Not that I mind, you see, but your interpretation of Isaiah 53 doesn’t hold up.
Justice had to be done. In any case, he was the only one. Nice citing the exception as the rule. :rolleyes:



I’m sure some Jews do that. My point is not all Jews do, and since they don’t, Is.53 doesn’t describe Israel. Again, cite the exception as the rule.
Have you ever heard of the Avengers? They were Jews who had served in the British Army and later formed themselves into a group who hunted Nazis (hence the name). They killed them on the spot. Ever heard of Simon Wiesenthal? Hundreds of Jews have testified against thousands of Nazis for crimes against humanity. So please Fenris, don’t tell me Israel makes intercession for those who persecute her. Is.53 does not describe Israel.Jews pray for the countries in which we live, whether they treat us good or bad. But I see your mind is made up already, and nothing I tell you is going to change it.





You can argue all you want. The whole gentile world knows about your God because of Jesus Fenris, just as the prophets said, and no body is going to top that.fine, lets say that is so. What about the rest? The world peace? the rebuilt temple? the exiles in gathered?




Do you think you could accept Jesus as the word of God made into flesh? (This isn’t a “trick” question. I don’t believe one has to believe Jesus is God to be saved. I only maintain one has to believe in Him.)I don't even know what that means.




So the fact that Jesus and His disciples (all Jews) introduced the God of the Jews to what now amounts to billions of gentiles means nothing to you?All part of God's master plan.


Funny that the prophets never mentioned this, isn’t it?Daniel 11:35 Some of the wise men will stumble, to purge, to refine,
and to clarify, until the appointed time, for it is yet to come



That’s good advice. You know, my friend, you assume your ancient Rabbis knew it all and it seems to me you are so indoctrinated by them that when the truth is staring you in the face you won’t accept it.
And you assume that they were wrong, even though they had an unbroken chain of tradition back to Moses.



Then I will make it as plain as I can. You seem to think the fact that Jesus only appeared to His disciples after His resurrection leads to suspect reliability of truth, but the opposite is true. The fact that the Apostles continued in their faith of Him after His execution is indication that God raised Him from the dead. Huh? :confused


They originated the claims about Him. If they were in any way mistaken about Him after He was killed there would have been no reason to continue, because their lives were not enhanced from an earthly perspective by knowing Messiah.People believe all sorts of things, that doesn't make them true.


Q: why is this gentile (me) talking to this Jew (you) about the Hebrews God? A: Because Messiah has come. Dude, wake up.How do we know he has come? Why are so many prophecies unfulfilled?




So you say, but I have shown you many scriptures to the contrary.No, you haven't.


You have offered none to support what you say.Two verses:
First we have Ecclesiastes 7:20 Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins.

And yet we have

Now should these three men be in its midst-[namely] Noah, Daniel, and Job-they would save themselves with their righteousness, says the Lord God. - Ezekiel 14:14

So obviously one can be righteous even of they sin. How about that.




The law is a covenant unlike the covenant God made with Abraham four hundred years earlier.No, law and covenant are two different things.


Abes covenant leads to the promised land.And more.



Moses covenant leads to damnation.
God's revelation at Sinai changed the world. He gave the Jews a document that shows one how to lead a moral and spiritual life and to make the world a holy place.

If it leads to damnation, show me where. Not in the NT, in the Tanach.



Is that why everyone that came out of Egypt (except Joshua and Caleb) died in the wilderness? How did that break the covenant? People die to this day.




Jeremiah 31 says Israel broke the covenant Moses gave them, but you suppose you are able to do what your ancestors couldn’t.
It doesn't mean that they tried and failed; they didn't even try. The people in that age were willfully bad. And still:

Leviticus 26: 44 And yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break My covenant with them; for I am the LORD their God. 45 But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God.



Have you repented the way Moses commanded?
Yep.

Fenris
Mar 12th 2008, 01:08 PM
But the law itself is not a bad thing.

Moses says to Israel, "I set before you today, a blessing and a curse, life and death. Choose life."

The law is not just a curse, it is a blessing. It is not just death, it is life.
Amen, sister. What a great post!