Posted on 11/19/2005 3:40:09 PM PST by Alouette
Excellent Answer!
And the theology of Jews for J is not "pure chr*stian theology;" it is Protestant theology. Historical chr*stianity (as practiced in the ancient liturgical churches for fifteen hundred years) is just as much a legal/ritual system as Judaism ever was (only with different rituals, different holidays, etc.). Historical chr*stians have never been "saved" but have spent their lives praying for forgiveness, confessing their sins, doing penance, etc., while trying to walk a tightrope over Hell, and this was the way all chr*stianity operated until Martin Luther. That being the case, what was the point of a new religion when there already was one? It's no wonder that Jews who convert to chr*stianity convert to Fundamentalist Protestantism; in addition to a more philo-Semitic worldview the hypocrisy is less blatant (ie, attacking the "works" of the Torah but defending the works of the "new law"). I've long said that liturgical chr*stianity preaches Protestantism to the Jews and Judaism to the Protestants, but liturgical chr*stians seem incapable of seeing or understanding this.
Please understand that I know you will respond by saying that today's Fundamentalist Protestantism represents "true original chr*stianity" supposedly restored after centuries of being obscured by "baptized heathenism," but this is simply a historical fiction, however dogmatically Protestants must hold it. I used to believe as you do, so there's no way I can go back to an error I have already forever disabused myself of.
I suggest we "agree to disagree."
I've been in the agree to disagree mode throughout this thread. That doesn't mean we can't understand each other.
You seem to think that because of your history you can speak for both Jews and Christians. If this thread is any example, you do not speak for either perfectly. That's fine. You speak for your own unique situation and perspective. I can respect that. But you are not accurately representing Chrisitanity, even though you seem so sure that you are.
First of all we don't hold Jesus in the same regards as Caesar, please figure that out.
And don't talk to me about holding a "grudge" when your religous leaders make statments like this :
"HOUSTON - The leader of the largest branch of American Judaism blasted conservative religious activists in a speech Saturday, calling them "zealots" who claim a "monopoly on God" while promoting anti-gay policies akin to Adolf Hitler's."
Just thumbing my nose back at them! And if you don't like it--too bad. :-)
Doesn't matter. I know all of that. But, THEY DID NOT KNOW, AND SOME STILL NOT.
They claimed he was "just a man". Therefore, in their own mind they CLAIMED the MONOPOLY! Its about : CLAIMS.
Besides, if those leaders are going to make statments like that...then back at them.
I thought you were being serious. Nor was I saying that Christians hold Jesus in the same regards as Caesar, as I think was evident from my statement. Also, the general consensus (unanimous near as I can figure) from the Jews in this thread is that the man who made that statement does not deserve to be our religious leader.
If it was just a joke, no problem. But given what happens when that old canard is ressurected and levied against Jews as a serious charge, I think you can understand my reaction.
Sorry for the overreaction if you were only joking.
What a stupid comment from you fellow leaders to bring on such a comment.
And yes, monopoly was claimed by their actions rather you like it or not.
Was not really a joke per say, however, I don't really feel that way toward the faith. It was somewhat of an over-reaction because I didn't not wait to read the word "reform" in the article. Reform was the key word and I would've passed on saying that. My mistake.
No, I don't really believe that of the faith, just the particular group of individuals who did that, at the time, long ago. Sorry, it's the ace-in-the-hat extreme statement to counter against something like that.
But at the same time, if you believe the way I do, it was all by desgin anyway. It was supposed to happen that way.
Ok. Fair enough, when you explain it that way. ;)
Making that statement, without a contextual explanation, is likely to make many Jews react quite strongly, just given its history.
And one more point on this...I was talking about the theology that says they can call themselves Jewish and Christian at the same time. I was not talking about faith versus works versus faith works (faith that works). Read that issue for yourself in the New Testament. It is thoroughly examined there. And the New Testament was written by Jews for Jesus, and they extensively quote the Old Testament. It was offensive to Jews who do not accept Christ as the Jewish Messiah THEN, and it is offensive to them now. It is not hard to see why. It's unresolvable. But Jews for Jesus see Jesus as the Messiah prophesied about in the OT -- THE JEWISH MESSIAH. That's how they see it, and it is pure Christian theology that Catholics and Protestants would agree on.
For example, I will let them speak for themselves and THOSE WHO ARE OFFENED BY THIS CAN JUST NOT FOLLOW THE LINKS:
Evidence that Jesus fulfilled prophecy
Over 300 Prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures concerning the Messiah
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.