U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Judaism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-15-2010, 12:11 PM
 
9,343 posts, read 16,944,218 times
Reputation: 4224

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
Can I take that as a 'no' then?
If your question was whether or not Gentiles, those who do not violate the 7 Noahide Commandments, are on a level playing field with the Children of Abraham and share in the Olam Ha-Ba, then my answer was "yes". (Gentiles who do violate any of the 7 Noahide Commandments are Pagans, and do not share in the Olam Ha-Ba.)

 
Old 08-15-2010, 12:17 PM
 
Location: South Wales, Yes, I'm, back!
16,017 posts, read 8,075,741 times
Reputation: 2669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Greenspan View Post
If your question was whether or not Gentiles, those who do not violate the 7 Noahide Commandments, are on a level playing field with the Children of Abraham and share in the Olam Ha-Ba, then my answer was "yes". (Gentiles who do violate any of the 7 Noahide Commandments are Pagans, and do not share in the Olam Ha-Ba.)
Thank you very much for that. Then that does put a different complexion on the matter indeed. If the Gentiles, by just observing 7 (pretty easy) commandments can get everything in the Olam Ha-Ba that the Hebrews could with 613 mitzvot to negotiate, then I can understand Paul's attitude a bit better.
 
Old 08-15-2010, 12:46 PM
 
9,343 posts, read 16,944,218 times
Reputation: 4224
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
Thank you very much for that. Then that does put a different complexion on the matter indeed. If the Gentiles, by just observing 7 (pretty easy) commandments can get everything in the Olam Ha-Ba that the Hebrews could with 613 mitzvot to negotiate, then I can understand Paul's attitude a bit better.
Quantity versus quality?
 
Old 08-15-2010, 01:00 PM
 
Location: South Wales, Yes, I'm, back!
16,017 posts, read 8,075,741 times
Reputation: 2669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Greenspan View Post
Quantity versus quality?
You'd better see what the Torah has to say about that.
 
Old 08-15-2010, 08:58 PM
 
Location: a nation in decline
10,348 posts, read 10,800,367 times
Reputation: 3963
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post


No, my boy. That is my whole argument.


I don't believe that Christians were forced out of synagogues. They would never be allowed into synagogues. That's clear from the wrangles of Paul with Peter over Jews eating with gentiles. Paul began his own version of Jewish Messianism (Christianity) adapted to the gentiles and they had their own gentile - type synagogues. I see the problem being with Jews (local and or sent by the apostles) to explain that, if they wanted to be God's people, share in the promise of Abraham and be saved, they had to convert and follow the Mosaic Law. That is what Paul is battling all the time.

Please do not call me your boy. I am neither a boy, nor am I yours.

When you say that Christians would never be allowed into synogogues, it shows something awry with your timeline. These believers were Jews and they attended their synagogue and continued to worship in their synogogues until it became clear to them that they were no longer welcome there because they accepted Jesus as Messiah.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post

As in all Christian fallacy...

... it does NOT in any way, justify the centuries of Jew- hating that is based on this Christian belief that the Jews killed Jesus.


And I cannot help but wonder: why only me? Out of the thousands of brilliant theologians who have studied the Bible, only I see this? What is going on? Tell me?
Do you believe yourself to be among these thousands of "brilliant theologians"?

If so, I am out of your class as I'm neither brilliant nor a theologian. I simply know what I know in my heart and spirit as Truth, and I continue to learn as I study the Bible.

Perhaps the fact that you are the only one out of the thusands of brilliant theologians, who sees what only you see, should tell you something.

You say..."as in all Christian fallacy..." Herein lies the crux of the problem hindering discussion. There is no possibility in seeing each others' points of view when one comes to the table (forum, in this case) with a premise, a strongly held belief, that Christianity and the Gospels are "Christian fallacy" and written by man.

The Christian believes God wrote the Bible, whether one wants to call it "guided", "inspired", or whatever, God was the controlling force it its writing.

To make the disciples and Paul into scheming, planning, conniving characters who wrote "fallacy" ignores the fact that there would have been no point to it. These Jews who had lived and walked and talked with Jesus, then Paul and others who worked with Paul in the ministries, they would not have risked -- actually ended up giving their lives -- for a fabricated "fallacy". When push comes to shove, would you die for a lie? But, if you knew what you knew with absolute conviction because of what you had seen and experienced yourself (such as the miracles, and the resurrection), you'd have to be a sorry individual indeed if you'd deny it to save your skin. None of them did. They held fast, and died for their faith, most of them in an excruciatingly painful way.

I will agree that people either misunderstood, or chose to misunderstand the scripture because it suited the purpose of their evil hearts and took it literally that Jews killed Jesus.

However, the true Christian understands and will tell you that we all killed Jesus. Jew and Christian and agnostic and atheist alike. It cannot be laid on the shoulders of the Jews beacuse they are not the only people who are sinful and need atonement for their sin. For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son that whoever believed on him would be saved. Note, it's for the world. It was God's plan that Christ die as a sacrificial passover lamb, therefore, the Jews did not "kill" Jesus. Christians understand this.

Paul was a Jew through and through, and had the spiritual wisdom to see and hear beyond the words on a physical scroll, and to understand him one must be able to do the same. Without spiritual eyes and ears, and without spiritual discernment, we are legalistically stuck in the law, a law that no one can keep 100%, which means we are screwed apart from the atoning death of Christ. Paul knew this as well as -- if not better - than anyone.

I won't address the rest of your post, because it is so full of conjecture designed to support your views that we must agree to disagree and part ways. I see only words and human understanding applied to the problem at hand, but not the necessary element of spiritual understanding that is so essential in this case.
 
Old 08-15-2010, 09:53 PM
 
9,343 posts, read 16,944,218 times
Reputation: 4224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Xavier LeSage View Post
I cnanot for the life of me understand why the Jewish faith cannot see Jesus and the messiantic messanger.
Traditional Judaism views the worship of Jesus of Nazareth as violating the Second Commandment's (Ex. 20:3-6) prohibition against idolatry (worshipping G-d in the form of a man would constitute idolatry).
 
Old 08-16-2010, 06:15 AM
 
Location: South Wales, Yes, I'm, back!
16,017 posts, read 8,075,741 times
Reputation: 2669
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
Please do not call me your boy. I am neither a boy, nor am I yours.
Ok Sunshine. Whatever you like.

Quote:
When you say that Christians would never be allowed into synogogues, it shows something awry with your timeline. These believers were Jews and they attended their synagogue and continued to worship in their synogogues until it became clear to them that they were no longer welcome there because they accepted Jesus as Messiah.
No they weren't. I am talking about Paul's Gentile converts. It may well be that Jesus' followers were excluded from synagogues because of their belief in Jesus as the messiah, but those are not the bods we are talking about. It is Paul's gentile converts to which the whole debate about whether they should comply with circumcision, kosher food laws and the rest of jewish ritual law or not relates. If you wish to debate this matter it would help if you understood what is being discussed.

Quote:
Do you believe yourself to be among these thousands of "brilliant theologians"?

If so, I am out of your class as I'm neither brilliant nor a theologian. I simply know what I know in my heart and spirit as Truth, and I continue to learn as I study the Bible.
Of course not! That's what astonishes me; that an ordinary bod, untrammelled by stringent qualifications, unhampered by orthodox training methods, in fact, dead ignorant, should find something so blindingly obvious and none of these other Bible- grubbers have whispered a word of it.

Quote:
Perhaps the fact that you are the only one out of the thusands of brilliant theologians, who sees what only you see, should tell you something.
It does indeed. The conclusion is that they - like you - put Faith ahead of fact and shut their eyes to unwelcome facts. I can only then ask why the unbelievers don't mention it. I can only suppose they don't bother to study the Bible. Their method is, I'm sorry to say, to pick up a discrepancy...let's google one..

1) How many generations were there between Abraham to David? Matthew 1:17 lists fourteen generations. Matthew 1:2 lists thirteen generations.

Contradictions of the Gospel

There we are. First one to pop up. This was posted here and a pretty good answer was made which required so much rummging through the OT that it would take a lot of work to find out whether it made sense or not. Discrepancy easily dismissed.

As I say, the method is to pick up a list of these and suggest: 'Well, that proves the Bible is rubbish'. Of course, the believers are going to argue that accepted history is full of mistakes and no one says that God is actually dictating every word. The point is that the gospels, flaws and all are (they say) recounting reasonable history.

So what I do say is that neither side has really bothered to start from no assumptions about what's true and what isn't, learn a bit of history and jewish thought and some rule of thumb logic, and do the work. It's not rocket science but no - one else seems to have done it.

Quote:
You say..."as in all Christian fallacy..." Herein lies the crux of the problem hindering discussion. There is no possibility in seeing each others' points of view when one comes to the table (forum, in this case) with a premise, a strongly held belief, that Christianity and the Gospels are "Christian fallacy" and written by man.

The Christian believes God wrote the Bible, whether one wants to call it "guided", "inspired", or whatever, God was the controlling force it its writing.
Well, there you are proving my point. First you misrepresent my position. I came to the conclusion that the gospels were a Christian fake based on a probable Jewish story after the work, not before. You are are trying to discredit the arguments I make by accusing me of bias. You then trot out what is known as 'weasel wording' to claim divine authority for the Bible but blaming any errors on man's fallible transcribing of it.

That is why neither side can make any progress: because the unbelievers think a discrediting of inerrancy will do. The believers take inerrancy to mean - not no mistakes (1), but true despite the mistakes.

I am not so much talking to you as, being a believer, I doubt you're even listening, but to those who seem to be unaware how deeply flawed the Gospels really are - way beyond easily - dismissed discrepancies about how many angels were at the tomb.

Quote:
To make the disciples and Paul into scheming, planning, conniving characters who wrote "fallacy" ignores the fact that there would have been no point to it. These Jews who had lived and walked and talked with Jesus, then Paul and others who worked with Paul in the ministries, they would not have risked -- actually ended up giving their lives -- for a fabricated "fallacy". When push comes to shove, would you die for a lie? But, if you knew what you knew with absolute conviction because of what you had seen and experienced yourself (such as the miracles, and the resurrection), you'd have to be a sorry individual indeed if you'd deny it to save your skin. None of them did. They held fast, and died for their faith, most of them in an excruciatingly painful way.
Oh, please, spare me both the complete blindness to the very evident twisting, chop -logic and mangling of Bible text that Paul did. and the tired old 'people would not die for a lie' argument. You don't need to take my word for it - look for yourself and compare Paul's take on OT text with what it actually says. The fact is that people will die in millions for their beliefs and those beliefs can't ALL be right. Some have to be 'A lie'.

Quote:
I will agree that people either misunderstood, or chose to misunderstand the scripture because it suited the purpose of their evil hearts and took it literally that Jews killed Jesus.
In view of the evangelists bending over backwards to pass the blame for Jesus' death onto the Jews, I fail to see how else the later readers could have been expected to take it.

Quote:
However, the true Christian understands and will tell you that we all killed Jesus. Jew and Christian and agnostic and atheist alike. It cannot be laid on the shoulders of the Jews beacuse they are not the only people who are sinful and need atonement for their sin. For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son that whoever believed on him would be saved. Note, it's for the world. It was God's plan that Christ die as a sacrificial passover lamb, therefore, the Jews did not "kill" Jesus. Christians understand this.
Then you evidently don't think Catholics are 'true' Christians since the Pope only 'forgave' them; he didn't get on his knees and beg forgiveness for 2,000 years of pogroms. And I can tell you that there are not a few posters here who definitely still think that the Jews did it. You can't bamboozle me.

Quote:
Paul was a Jew through and through, and had the spiritual wisdom to see and hear beyond the words on a physical scroll, and to understand him one must be able to do the same. Without spiritual eyes and ears, and without spiritual discernment, we are legalistically stuck in the law, a law that no one can keep 100%, which means we are screwed apart from the atoning death of Christ. Paul knew this as well as -- if not better - than anyone.
Paul was a flawed Jew. Flawed by an upbringing around gentiles. He says he sins against the law - though he blames the law for making him sin (no doubt by often breaking it) and devises a theology that the law was given so as to increase sin. His solution is to decriminalise the law by abolishing it. His writings are full of evasion, fudged reasoning and illogic; snarling, self - contradiction and, in the end, he, as a Jew, is still stuck with the law. He was not just a flawed Jew, he was a flawed person.

Quote:
I won't address the rest of your post, because it is so full of conjecture designed to support your views that we must agree to disagree and part ways. I see only words and human understanding applied to the problem at hand, but not the necessary element of spiritual understanding that is so essential in this case.
I see I have to tranlsate from Theist into English again: "I will not address the rest of your post because, other than innuendo, irrelevant appeals to Faith and bland false claims, I don't have much of an argument. I'll just have to hope that I can get away with 'Faith is better than fact' and the crafty old 'agree to differ' attempt to scrape a draw.".

I'll thank you for this at least; the dismal trotting out of tired old theist apologetics make me appreciate Our Lady of Velco, who at least has sufficient respect for me to debate with me on the material instead of pulling strawman ad Hom in lieu of any proper argument.

You thnk I'm being disrespectful? You reap what you sow. Velcro may disagree with me but she respects the work I have done; you don't. Your poisoning the well, red herrings, innuendo, appeals to faith and strawman fallacies show contempt, not only for the honestly intended arguments I put forward but for ME, in supposing that I'm so stupid that you can fool me with it.

That said, I am not in the least bit miffed - I don't do miff. And I am happy to engage you in rational debate. I refuse to believe that you are inacapable of it.

(1) though they often do try to claim there are no errors and, if challenged, try to explain them away and end up with 'Well, that's just YOUR opinion'.

Last edited by AREQUIPA; 08-16-2010 at 07:09 AM..
 
Old 08-16-2010, 08:20 AM
 
5 posts, read 4,332 times
Reputation: 11
Come on..Get off it!! Paul was a fighter for the Jews that had their own Jewish king under the Romans. He constantly bragged that he could wipe out the Christian community which, by the way, was in existance at that time. He was concidered the man for the job. He had more to lose by going with the Christians than by smiting them and becoming a hero with the Jewish elite. Paul took from Christ's teachings to help in forming the Christian religion of which Peter was Bishop of. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Jewish faith cannot see Jesus and the messiantic messanger. I have had friends in the Eastern religions proclaim to me that Catholics were nothing but modern day Jews. The questiom is if Christ was the promises made then like many humans in our pride we continue to proclaim ourselves right even thought the truth proves us wrong. FXL
 
Old 08-16-2010, 08:33 AM
 
9,343 posts, read 16,944,218 times
Reputation: 4224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Xavier LeSage View Post
I cannot for the life of me understand why the Jewish faith cannot see Jesus and the messiantic messanger.
Traditional Judaism views the worship of Jesus of Nazareth as violating the Second Commandment's (Ex. 20:3-6) prohibition against idolatry (worshipping G-d in the form of a man would constitute idolatry).
 
Old 08-16-2010, 08:46 AM
 
5 posts, read 4,332 times
Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Greenspan View Post
Traditional Judaism views the worship of Jesus of Nazareth as violating the Second Commandment's (Ex. 20:3-6) prohibition against idolatry (worshipping G-d in the form of a man would constitute idolatry).
Walter..are you related to Alan? I love listening to him.
My only comment to this is that if Traditional Judaism has it right...God help the Christians to recognize the truth but if the Traditional Christian (I referance the Catholic Church) has it right then God help those Jews to recognize the truth. The only way that any of the Jewish theologins can believe in the coming of a Messia is not throught the Torra but through the books of the prophets. Jesus fulfilled all the predictions for the first comming which most of Judaism refuses to look at.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Judaism

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top