Matthew 27:50 "And Jesus again crying with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51 And behold the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top even to the bottom, and the earth quaked, and the rocks were rent."
The import of of the taring of the temple veil was probably not fully understood until the destruction of the temple took place as prophesied by Christ.
Rabbinical Judaism is based on the post-Messianic Talmud scripture.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to call into question your qualifications to speak for Judaism.
I do not profess any qualifications but I had understood that rabbinical Judaism uses the Talmud as Scripture and that it considers the Trinity doctrine to be a belief in three gods instead of one.
You're too caught up in your little fantasy that those stiffnecked and impious Jews tossed aside the Scriptures for another book while you, noble Christian that you are, are keeping the true faith and have been true to the Bible. Well, you know, except for that first 4/5ths that you pretty much ignore except when it suits you. Why? Because that's what your Christian tradition tells you to do. All too well you set aside the Word of God for the sake of your tradition.
You are not the reader of my soul. Yes, I try to put forth arguments that are based on Sacred Tradition, inclusive of Scripture. If you find my argument lacking, point out the flaw. That should be enough.
2 Thes 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle"
Hagee's point was that Yeshua did not come to be the Melekh HaMashiach, the Annointed King, and lead Israel's armies to victory--which is what the word "Messiah" means to most Jews--in His First Coming.
It was clear that most of the Jews at first misunderstood the mission of the Messiah, even His own disciples:
Acts 1:6: "They therefore who were come together, asked him, saying: Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 But he said to them: It is not for you to know the times or moments, which the Father hath put in his own power: 8 But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth."
After receiving the Holy Ghost, Peter says:
Acts 2:32: "This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. 33 Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. 34 For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus"
But what you are preaching is not the true Gospel.
I am only trying to repeat what I understand to be the Tradition passed down from the Apostles.
Waitwaitwaitwait. Are you seriously, seriously suggesting that you, a Gentile who never walked with Yeshua, never saw Him in a vision, thousands of years removed from events, and not even speaking the same languages somehow understand the New Covenant better than those who were actually there and were entrusted by our Master with His words, teachings, and example?
Where the heck are you claiming to have come across such wisdom? It can't be the New Testament, since it was written by the very people that you are claiming didn't understand the importance of the torn veil even after three decades.
I do not profess any qualifications but I had understood that rabbinical Judaism uses the Talmud as Scripture . . .
You understand incorrectly. Whenever we study the Talmud, or any other rabbinic source, the prayer we say is, "Blessed are You O Hashem our God, King of the Universe, who has set us apart by His commandments and commanded us to engross ourselves in the words of Torah . . . Blessed are You, O Hashem, giver of the Torah." It is the Torah that we are to be engaged in and the Torah we thank God for.
While my more traditional Jewish brethren hold the Talmud in very high regard, it is as the repository of the wisdom and knowledge of the earliest sages about the Torah, not in place of it. It holds much the same position to a Jew that Calvin's Institutes do to the Calvinist. The Talmud, in fact, is the record of 600 years of debates among the rabbis. I am often annoyed at the way Christians make pronouncements that, "The Talmud says X" when if they kept reading they would find out that X was proven wrong half a page down.
So no, the Talmud does not replace the Torah. It depends on it.
. . . it considers the Trinity doctrine to be a belief in three gods instead of one.
Given how few Christians can explain the Trinity coherently, you can hardly blame the Jews for that.
You are not the reader of my soul.
No, but out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks . . . or the fingers type, as the case may be.
Yes, I try to put forth arguments that are based on Sacred Tradition, inclusive of Scripture.
And yet you are quick to condemn others for their traditions, even when they are far older than your own. For example, while Dispensationalism as such is relatively new, premillennialism and a literal interpretation of prophecy can be found in the earliest Church fathers, e.g., Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Victoraenus (sp? not bothering to pause to look it up), etc. Preterism and Historicism both came much later.
So like I said, if you want to play the "my tradition is older than yours" with the Dispys, you certainly lose against the premills, and definitely against the Jews.
2 Thes 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle"
And those traditions were taught by a practicing Pharisee. Hmmm . . .
It was clear that most of the Jews at first misunderstood the mission of the Messiah, even His own disciples
It's clear you can't understand Yeshua saying "Not yet, and don't ask when," with the implication that yes, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. But again, that event and Peter's quote from chapter 2 (and you still refuse to understand Hagee's point--but then, that would be admitting being wrong about something) was forty days after the Resurrection. They were still taking Nazrite vows and making sacrifices in the Temple thirty years later. That means that Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc.--you know, the books you depend on to try to prove that the Torah is taken away--were all written by a man who took a voluntary Nazrite vow and went to Jerusalem with the express purpose of making animal sacrifices in accordance with the Torah and even Jewish Law.
If the Apostles themselves so misunderstood the Gospel, what chance in heck do you have of having it right?
I am only trying to repeat what I understand to be the Tradition passed down from the Apostles.
If that were all, I wouldn't be laying into you. But no, you went around claiming everything you disagree with to be heresy.
As I said to Karliner, I consider all who truly believe in and follow the King of Israel to be my brethren, and while I enjoy a good debate, I take a very live-and-let-live with my Sunday brethren. But when someone starts playing the "Heretic!" card, and especially when that person blatantly misrepresents both other Christians and Jews, that's a different story.
Since you have presumed to pass judgment on others based on how "perfect" their theology is in your eyes, rest assured that the Holy One will pass judgment on you based on how perfect your theology is in His. "For judgment is without mercy to him who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment" (Jas. 2:13).
I would suggest repenting, apologizing, and being a bit more careful about passing judgment based ignorance. I would also suggest that you do some reading on what Judaism actually teaches before you presume to speak for it. You might try Jewish Literacy by Rabbi Telushkin for a good primer.
Shalom.