Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
To be sure,only those Jews who accepted Baptism in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit could be counted as "trinitarian." I think I have already said that only Christians could search the Scripture and find traces of the Holy Trinity in the Jewish Scripture. The Resurrection must be taken as a new revelation and if the great majority of Christians are gentiles< , then Jewish sacraments such as circumcision will not survive even as "sacramentals." As Paul says most clearly, the Law can no longer be regarded in the same light as before if Jesus rose from the dead and sent the Spirit to all the nations and not just the Jews(although the Jews remains as first-born?). You are right to say that the Jews were forced to choose between Christ and the Law, as both dispensions could not exist simultaneously, anymore than one can be a Christian and Muslim simultaneously. My point is simply that the Jewish nation, as represented by its leadership, and probably the majority of the people, firmly rejected Jesus as the Christ, and after a time disenfranchised Jewish Christians.
You quote me : Do you deny that the latter, who had been persecuted ever since they first claimed that Jesus was the Christ were formally excluded from the synagogues, barred from worshipping with "real" Jews so long as they did not reject their "false" Messiah?
You answer:
Nope, not in the least. But this is totally aside from the comment you made above, wherein you implied that it was the Jews who had established a 'new religion', when any reasonable reading of history demonstrates that the opposite was the case. The point is too ridiculous to even argue.
I am saying that the Jews shared responsiblity in making Christianity and Judaism into separate religions.
Do you think the Catholic Church should have the authority to "bar" from their worship services those who believe and promote heretical doctrine? Should the Catholic Church be forbidden from excommunicating dissenters? Or should no religious entity be allowed to determine its membership requirements?
Hellenist Christians seems early to have abandoned the Law entirely, but the attitude of Jewish Christians was hardly so clear cut. Let us not forget the circumcision party that Paul railed against. The Jewish leadership did in fact "bar" Jewish Christians from the national assembly thereby creating a rift between the two, thereby making it difficult or impossible for men like Paul to continue to call themselves Jews. More moderate men, were persecuted and even, like James, executed. Yes, I know the authorities were frightened and they turned on others besides the Christians. But I wish to charge that they share blame for the bad blood between Jews and the Christians. Like both sides during the Reformation, the Jewish authorities in the first century were in no mood for toleration and so they persecuted. Looking at the matter coldly, they ought not to be blamed more than any other government challenged by an active and growing sect that threatens the established order. Knowing what political pressures faced them, I feel nothing but pity for the priests who lashed out as they saw their world collapsing around them, or admiration for the rabbis who were trying to create a new order after the destruction of the Temple. I think any Christian ought to regard this as a great tragedy in so far as it lays the groundwork for even greater tragedies in the future.
The word "jurisdiction" is tricky. Does the Constitution grant the Supreme Court jurisdiction in matters of state law and if so to what extent? This had to be answered over time. Jurisdiction need not be established without cause, but once it is established then it tends to remain. Do you think that Nicholas I had no reason to take a position different from that of Pope Gregory? From Rome'spoint of view, Constantinople starts out in 380 as the new boy in town and from that point on, steadily acquires power that owe more to politics than to tradition.
And I say that disciples of Jesus who developed beliefs contrary to the teachings of Judaism (specifically, the divinity of Jesus) were responsible for splitting themselves off from Judaism. The Jews 'excommunicated' them, which was their right.
I think any Christian ought to regard this as a great tragedy in so far as it lays the groundwork for even greater tragedies in the future.
On this point we agree.
You can easily say you can. If you could establish it with other than fraudulent documents, the point would be moot. It is not. And History shows that you had to invoke forgeries to get anyone to buy the story. Tell me, Why doesn't the catholic Church have authority over Europe as a civil authority. I know how the story goes, just want to know if you can tell it.
Thanks, could you clarify what sacred writings foretell the coming of your Messiah?
Thanks for helping me out.
Has to be a beginning of the process. I knew how and when it happened for me.
The following texts are the ones Jews consider messianic in nature or relating to the end of days:
Isaiah 2, 11, 42; 59:20
Jeremiah 23, 30, 33; 48:47; 49:39
Ezekiel 38:16
Hosea 3:4-3:5
Micah 4
Zephaniah 3:9
Zechariah 14:9
Daniel 10:14
Thanks in advance.
-ksen
A book I just finished had a discussion of the early history of Islam. According to this author, Mohammed believed that he had received a revelation for the Arab peoples, who at that time were predominantly pagan. There were a few Christians and Jews in Arabia at the time, so Mohammed was familiar with them, although his knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures was pretty vague until he went to Medina and had a chance to study with the Jewish community there. The author made a distinction between the initial teachings of Islam about the status of other religions, and what developed over the course of a few hundred years of Arab imperialism. It seems that under Mohammed and the first four caliphs, Islam explicitly acknowledged the validity of the Jewish and Christian revelations, and did not force people of those faiths to convert. Only later did Islam begin to assert that theirs was the only "right" religion.
Muslims who are peaceful tend to hearken back to this early period of acceptance of other monotheistic religions. Islamic fundamentalism is actually a fairly recent phenomenon, historically speaking. It emerged most strongly under the Wahhabist sect 200 years ago. Historically, Islam has been much more diverse in its belief than is ordinarily portrayed in the western media. The literal interpretation of the Koran was only one of many strands of Islam. In past times, for example, various forms of Sufism, a mystical form of Islam which interprets the Koran in a much more nuanced sense, were followed by a majority of muslims.
The present state of Islam, and the predominance of fundamentalism, can probably be traced to the rise of the West and the eclipse of Islam as a world power. Rather than rising to the challenge posed by Europe, and striving for a comparable development of its own, the Islamic world retreated. Western culture values innovation, creativity and change, and these cultural values have driven the advancement of science and technology. And you can't simply mimic or copy creativity. As a whole, the Islamic world seems to have a cultural inferiority complex. Combine this with memories of former cultural greatness, lack of democratic institutions, and little separation between church and state, and you have the formula for the sort of fundamentalism that emerged.
So, in specific answer to your question: there are far too many muslims willing to engage in violence, and so today I would say that Islam on balance is not a peaceful religion. Of course Judaism and Christianity have periods of violence in their histories, too. Hopefully Islam will also come to understand that "Thou shalt not murder" means that God does not want us to kill others in His name.
These are the ones that are unanimously agreed to be messianic. There are other passages that some think are messianic, and some don't. For example, there is disagreement among Jews as to whether Genesis 3:15 is messianic or not. Since there is not agreement, and since the passage does not explicitly mention the messiah, it is not included on the list I gave above.
I guess if you're just cheering when you hear the news that 3,000 americans are dead that wouldn't make one violent.
| Monday, March 4, 2002 Saint Casimir - Commemoration |
||
|
Na'aman had great difficulty believing that his healing would come from an act as simple as taking a bath! It seemed too small, too insignificant. Yet, when he finally did as the prophet Elisha asked, he was dramatically and miraculously healed. A simple act of faith produced remarkable results!
How often do we look for some dramatic action that we must take or some elaborate process that we must go through in order to receive extraordinary blessings from God? The truth is that our Father already loves us and wants to help us. He wants to touch us with new life. He wants to heal and deliver us. We don't need to jump through hoops to receive his love. We don't need to persuade him to act powerfully in our lives. We only need to have simple faith and trust in him.
Like Na'aman, we may need to do no more than an ordinary task to experience God's extraordinary action. It may be something as small as being faithful to a prayer time each day. Or it may be a simple act of kindness to a coworker, friend, or family member. Any number of ordinary things that we do day after day, week after week, opens the door for God to do the extraordinary things he longs to do in our lives and in the lives of those we love.
God isn't looking for the spectacular. All he wants from us is faith and love. He simply wants us to trust him for all that we need. He is good, and he is faithful. As we come to him each day in the simple, "ordinary" things of our lives, we give him the opportunity to move mountains. Why not come to him today in great simplicity and humility? Trust him in the small things, and he will act in the big things. Ultimately, Christianity is all about his love and his grace. Receive that love and grace today.
"Father, I love you. You are my God, and I trust in you. Help me to be faithful to the simple things you ask of me each day."
----------
Have a great day, everyone! God bless.
AC
Thank you. That was very informative. What is your opionion regarding the type of Islam Louis Farakhann and his followers observe?
Probably not. Avs have Blake and Heduk out. Should be back soon. Nuggets are just a lost cause.
Well, Paul said that the Law was superfluous, and in fact that it could be detrimental to one's salvation to follow it, so many were probably not as observant as the non-Christian Jews.
There is also the small matter of believing that a man was God incarnate, which most Jews throughout history would find to be contrary to the Law.
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.