New Testament: Does anyone doubt it's Jewish authorship? (prophets, priest, gospels)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Bottum line is that if Paul ever taught any Jews not to keep the laws, he deserves death and if somebody takes what he says to show him him teaching Jews not to keep the laws of Moses, they should rip all his words from the bible. Again, you are not understanding what Paul is teaching in Galatians and if is teaching Jews not to keep the laws, he deserved death.....
Paul never taught Jews not to keep the laws and what he said to Gentiles doesn't apply.......Acts 21 shows what Paul is without a doubt, he never stopped keeping the laws himself, and he had people circumcised.
You are cancelling out everything written of Paul showing the facts that he never left Judaism, he presents himself yo the priests and he went in and out of the Temple and this would not have been possible if Paul was really teaching Jews not to keep the law.......
Jesus said that whoever kept the laws to then teach others to keep the laws would be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, and so either Paul contradicts Jesus and doesn't deserve to be heard, or the same lies are believed. The same lies that killed Stephen, the same lies that almost killed Paul until he proves his innocence to the priests of Judaism, and they found him innocent and this would be impossible if Paul did what all the liars say he did.
I may be misunderstanding Galatians, but I don't think so. I could be wrong
But you can't prove that to me with Acts. I don't believe it any more than I believe Luke or any of the Gospels. They are reinventions of Jesus by post Pauline (but Paulinist) Christians, based on real events, and Luke's "Acts" is a reinvention of Paul's mission, based on his letters. I do not believe the conversion on the road to Damascus. Paul seem to have got it all chatting with Jesus over tea and buns in the third heaven, where Jesus apparently tells Paul what he had already worked out for himself through bad reasoning, quotemining the Torah and shifting the goalposts to get where he wants in Romans (his Thesis and I believe, his First Letter). I don't believe the counncil of jerusalem, nor the escape from Damascus because of a plot by the Jews (Paul says to escape the Nabatean Army who - he claims -were after him, which takes some believing). And I don't believe the hammock of wrigglies, even though I believe that Peter had not eaten anything not clean up to then, and Jesus (despite Mark) had never told him to.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-05-2018 at 08:47 PM..
Bottum line is that if Paul ever taught any Jews not to keep the laws, he deserves death and if somebody takes what he says to show him him teaching Jews not to keep the laws of Moses, they should rip all his words from the bible. Again, you are not understanding what Paul is teaching in Galatians and if is teaching Jews not to keep the laws, he deserved death.....
That seems a little extreme, since Jesus taught the Jews not to keep the laws, particularly dietary laws and the sabbath.
In any case, it's moot. Paul is most definitely dead. So is Moses, for that matter, if he ever existed. From internal evidence, Moses was a mash-up of various hero stories, similar to Heracles. The murderer who ran away to live with the Kenites is not the same guy who learned the priest business from his father-in-law, Jethro.
That seems a little extreme, since Jesus taught the Jews not to keep the laws, particularly dietary laws and the sabbath.
In any case, it's moot. Paul is most definitely dead. So is Moses, for that matter, if he ever existed. From internal evidence, Moses was a mash-up of various hero stories, similar to Heracles. The murderer who ran away to live with the Kenites is not the same guy who learned the priest business from his father-in-law, Jethro.
Jesus never taught what you say according to the NT...
Jesus never taught what you say according to the NT...
Healing on the sabbath? Luke 13:10-16
Ignore dietary laws?
Quote:
It is not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him; but it is what comes out of it.
Matthew 15:10
Quote:
Once again Jesus called the crowd to Him and said, “All of you, listen to Me and understand: Nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him; but the things that come out of a man, these are what defile him.”
Mark 7:15
Most of this discussion is nonsense. People seem to think that an observant Jew in the first century was the same as the poor OCD Jews that we sometimes see today. Being an observant Jew in the first century was like being an observant Republican today; follow the party line until it's inconvenient.
Frazer even dug up references that indicate first century Jews held ritual meals of pork and mice on special holy days. If a particular Jew didn't participate, he probably knew someone who did. Dietary tabus hold great religious significance, just like theophagy in Christianity. If you eat transubstantiated pig, are you really breaking kosher laws?
If you haven't read Frazer's The Golden Bough and Campbell's The Masks Of God tetralogy, your religious education has been sadly neglected.
Let's keep this simple. First and foremost the so called "new testament" was an invention of the Church of Rome with the intention of altering the direction of the true "Followers of The Way". They were NOT xtians. Let's be blunt here with historical FACTS not religious belief desire. jesus christ was NOT the Messiah's name in the FIRST place. There was NO "J" in Hebrew (Messiah was a Hebrew) and 2nd the name given by the Church of Rome "christ" was derived from "christos" a name used by the Romans to exalt their pagan gods.
Now down to brass tacks. The so called "new testament" is a collection of "Letters" written by the Talmadim (you call them apostles) in which those letters were directly written to specific "Assemblies" (not churches) most of which ironically were Hellenized Jews who KNEW the Torah but were no longer observant. It was the Talmadim's intention to educate them regarding the Messiah Yahshua, of HIS significance of being the promised ONE and THE sacrifice for ALL sin if one were to accept HIM as the sacrifice. Also to continue on the teachings of Messiah which was pure Torah, removing the added mens rules and regulations carried on by the leader Pharisee party of that time, which of course persecuted Messiah as they wanted to retain their powers given by the Roman government. It was ALL political AND about Power. They considered Messiah a threat to their power.
The Talmadim (apostles) were indeed teaching pure Torah and the observance of it. If you read Shaul's (Paul's) writings any other way you're taking it purely from a Grecko-Roman mindset and NOT the Hebraic one it WAS. Shaul was a Torah scholar like NO other, hence his logical selection as the best one to reach back out to those that had gone away from Torah to bring them BACK. The irony is he taught more Hellenized Jews to come BACK to Torah then he did Gentiles. If you take your heads OUT of the altered distorted church teachings and take the language BACK to the Aramaic and Hebrew it was originally written in by 11 of the 12 Talmadim (apostles) who were actually Jews, and do your historical research (not church research which was altered for their intentions) you'll discover in a Jewish household Aramaic and Hebrew were taught and spoken others being considered an abomination. This is to say nothing of the fact there was NO such thing as "christianity" till the Church of Rome determined it so........pagan to the core removing ALL of the ways Messiah lived and taught HIMSELF. Go figure. But do I think this will be well accepted by those of the cemetery er um I mean seminary distorted teachings? Na........just wanted to put some truth out there to digest.
An interesting case for Messianic Judaism, and it might carry weight if it made any sense that laws, imperfect in themselves were a requirement for fulfilling the basic principle of concern for the well-being of everyone in any situation that is the heart of the message of Christ. I'm not particularly worried about whethewr Jesus was the architect (building on developing thought in Judaism) or whether Paul was. The point is that Paul did understand that it was that commitment to a way of life rather than any forms or laws that was and is important. Follow your traditions if you will, it is a rich heritage. Other people have different heritages, but have that all important commitment.
Most of this discussion is nonsense. People seem to think that an observant Jew in the first century was the same as the poor OCD Jews that we sometimes see today. Being an observant Jew in the first century was like being an observant Republican today; follow the party line until it's inconvenient.
Frazer even dug up references that indicate first century Jews held ritual meals of pork and mice on special holy days. If a particular Jew didn't participate, he probably knew someone who did. Dietary tabus hold great religious significance, just like theophagy in Christianity. If you eat transubstantiated pig, are you really breaking kosher laws?
If you haven't read Frazer's The Golden Bough and Campbell's The Masks Of God tetralogy, your religious education has been sadly neglected.
You are forgetting the different gospels were written by different people with different theologies. So Matthew has Jesus say ALL the laws are to be kept until the universe is no more. Matthew 15 is rewriting Mark 7:15 to refute it, to make this about eating with unwashed hands.
But agreed, there were different kinds of Jews who hate none Kosher. Peter certainly did, as Paul called him an hypocrite for it.
An interesting case for Messianic Judaism, and it might carry weight if it made any sense that laws, imperfect in themselves were a requirement for fulfilling the basic principle of concern for the well-being of everyone in any situation that is the heart of the message of Christ. I'm not particularly worried about whethewr Jesus was the architect (building on developing thought in Judaism) or whether Paul was. The point is that Paul did understand that it was that commitment to a way of life rather than any forms or laws that was and is important. Follow your traditions if you will, it is a rich heritage. Other people have different heritages, but have that all important commitment.
what you are calling "Messianic Judaism" is in fact evangelical Christianity.
through and through. deceptive and dishonest through and through.
it is a deceptive practice and it is a deceptive organization and it is not only denounced by all streams of Judaism it is also denounced by mainstream Crstianity as deceptive and dishonest.
An interesting case for Messianic Judaism, and it might carry weight if it made any sense that laws, imperfect in themselves were a requirement for fulfilling the basic principle of concern for the well-being of everyone in any situation that is the heart of the message of Christ. I'm not particularly worried about whethewr Jesus was the architect (building on developing thought in Judaism) or whether Paul was. The point is that Paul did understand that it was that commitment to a way of life rather than any forms or laws that was and is important. Follow your traditions if you will, it is a rich heritage. Other people have different heritages, but have that all important commitment.
That's fine, but I don't actually see Paul as very tolerant - not by today's standards. "Such and such behaviour is not to be done because I say so based on my opinion" I'd want to see some better justification than a string of denunciations and proscriptions on his say -so. And I certainly don't agree with his views on how women and slaves should behave - accepting ownership. No, Paul is no role model for my Atheist -Dogma Liberalism.
what you are calling "Messianic Judaism" is in fact evangelical Christianity.
through and through. deceptive and dishonest through and through.
it is a deceptive practice and it is a deceptive organization and it is not only denounced by all streams of Judaism it is also denounced by mainstream Crstianity as deceptive and dishonest.
And the point for BOTH of you is, in the words of J. B. Phillips, your God is too small.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
