Was G-D Wrong?

Mid East Analyst & Commentator ^ | December 31, 2001 | Emanuel A. Winston

[AshleyMontagu]

What did they have to say about Jesus? An old poster, TheSword, told me that he spelled Jesus as J***s (or something like that) because he'd been taught that so much harm had come to the Jews through His name that it was to be treated as a curse word. Also, what does someone call someone else who worships non-divine objects? Idol worshipper perhaps?

[malakhi]

I was raised in an Orthodox Jewish home, and educated for 12 years in Orthodox Jewish schools, and I never heard such a thing said.

Maimonides preferred Christianity over Islam. He favored the strict monotheism of Islam over the trinitarian belief of Christianity. But Christians accept the Tanakh as divinely inspired and true (even if they differ on matters of interpretation), while Islam believes that the Hebrew scriptures have been corrupted.

[JohnnyM]

"Didn't the first generation of disciples believe the same thing?"

I would say yes. Jesus' description of what the times would be like at His return was fairly ambiguous, intentionally so I imagine. He said there would be wars and rumors of wars, that it would be like the days of Noah, that there would be natural disasters, so on and so forth. All of these have pretty much been the case since Christ was on the earth. Some of these things are relative too. I personally think we are much more like the days of Noah today, then we were 2000 years ago, but the apostles probably thought the same of their day. The important thing to understand is that only the Father knows when Christ is returning.

JM

[malakhi]

Which passage of scripture was that?

The whole of the Hebrew scriptures, in context, on its own terms.

Every one of the 4 major prophesies of the Messiah are also understood by Christians as applying to the 2nd Coming.

This is true. Absent any prophecy in the Tanakh for a second coming of the messiah, however, I cannot accept this belief.

Who was Jesus anyway?

Jesus was a man and a Jew. He was a charismatic preacher. He may have been affiliated with, or at least educated by, one of the branches of Phariseeism, the Hillel school. I base this on his agreement with them regarding the nature of the resurrection, among other things. His blistering attacks on the Pharisees are probably aimed at the Shammaites, who held to a very rigid interpretation of the Law, and who received very similar criticism from the Hillelites, who subsribed to a more lenient interpretation.

I think Judaism has almost a bigger stake in trying to disprove Jesus than Christianity does in trying to prove Him from prophesy.

Why so?

From the Jewish standpoint, it is very straightforward. Either a man fulfills the prophecies within his lifetime, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he isn't the messiah.

Jesus proved Himself by ressurection...and nearly all His disciples maintained that fact through lives of great hardship, imprisonment, etc. up into torturous deaths... Why would these formerly cowardly guys act this way for a deception?

Unlike you, I don't automatically assume that the Christian scriptures are 'gospel truth'. Paul's writings are the earliest Christian documents we have. It is not at all clear that belief in a physical resurrection was part of Paul's teaching. Mark 16:9-20 does not appear in the earliest manuscripts, and appears to be a later interpolation derived from Matthew. I think that Christian belief about the nature of Jesus evolved over time. IMO.

You must be familiar with C. S. Lewis's formula (restating Augustine I believe) of Liar, Lunatic or Lord

Yes, I am. This is a false di(actually, tri)chotomy. It assumes that we have Jesus's teachings accurately rendered. It also fails to take into consideration that, while he may have believed what he is reported to have said about himself, he may simply have been wrong.

[Liberty Belle]

Ping!

[JohnnyM]

"The whole of the Hebrew scriptures, in context, on its own terms."

I would liken having only the OT as reading a book half-way through and trying to guess the end. You say we bring Christ into the OT, and I say He was always there, He wasn't fully visible until He came in the flesh. Without the death of Christ on the Cross and His Resurrection, the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac seems cruel. Now that we see the parallels with the only son, Isaac carrying wood (i.e. Cross) on his back, father sacrificing son, resurrection on 3rd day, we have revelation and light. The same can be said for the account of the Passover. I don't see this as reading into Scripture, but as Scripture being fully realized. Christ is the interpretation of Scripture and the Holy Spirit is the Interpreter.

JM

[is_is]

The Jewish faith believes that you cannot write out God's name....why????.... i don't know the particulars.....It is their belief though, so i respect it....

[AnalogReigns]

It is not at all clear that belief in a physical resurrection was part of Paul's teaching.

What have you been smoking? Give me a break!!! Since when is the Pauline source of this passage questioned: "and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain." (Paul in I Cor. 15:14) Anyone who has read Paul cannot but help see the physical resurrection of Christ is essential to his message. I can provide you with dozens of passages from Paul's letters where in context, he is clearly referring to Jesus' bodily resurrection.

I already provided you with HUNDREDS of passages in the Old Testament which point to Christ. Admittedly some of these could be out of context or not applicable, but all? What if 90% are merely Christian reading into the text...that makes 30+ passages that aren't. However you have yet to dispute ONE. You said it was the Hebrew scriptures that convinced you Jesus could not be the Messiah, and I asked you for only ONE passage to prove that, yet you offer none. Hundreds of verses I argue show He is Messiah, yet you offer me not one to show He isn't.

You are correct virtually all scholars agree the last chapter of Mark leaves only with the empty tomb--verses after that were likely added... I've studied Mark in detail, and the whole pattern of the book, in the traditional Jewish pattern, is to ask the question (without always answering), "who is this guy?" So, WHERE IS THE BODY??? So all those first followers who got tortured and killed did so for merely a nice Jewish teacher? The integrity of the New Testament is greater than that of any other book from the last 2000 years, there is no evidence it was tampered with, certainly not by inserting major themes like the ressurection or the virgin birth. Your mind is made up, a priori, on the issue of Jesus as Messiah, let the reader decide.

[DreamWeaver]

These concepts are not in my bible. Nor do I see any reason to accept the Christian scriptures as canonical.

I have no intention of trying to forcibly convince you or anyone on this truth. When you study the Word and do not literaly take things out of context, you come to discernment with much prayer of course for discernment.

Yes, Bible does back this up. Read what " chosen " means from for example, Strong's concordance, study the word "gentile," the word "elect" . Then you pray for discernment and you will see the " whole picture" not just one verse out of context.

If you do not see this as truth, then what can I say. So be it.

Peace.

[malakhi]

What have you been smoking? Give me a break!!! Since when is the Pauline source of this passage questioned: "and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain."

I said physical resurrection. Read farther in the chapter:

[42] So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable.
[43] It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power.
[44] It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body.
[45] Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. [46] But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual.
[47] The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.
[48] As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven, so are those who are of heaven.
[49] Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.

I read 1 Corinthians 15 to mean that Paul believed that the resurrection was real, but that it was a spiritual, not a physical, resurrection.

However you have yet to dispute ONE.

Earlier on this thread, I addressed both Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22. You posted a huge block of cites that you pulled from some web site. I feel no obligation to go through and address them all. If you have two or three that you feel are your strongest, then let me know and I will discuss them.

Hundreds of verses I argue show He is Messiah, yet you offer me not one to show He isn't.

How about this?

[1] "If a prophet arises among you, or a dreamer of dreams, and gives you a sign or a wonder,
[2] and the sign or wonder which he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, `Let us go after other gods,' which you have not known, `and let us serve them,'
[3] you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
[4] You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him, and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and cleave to him.
[5] But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to make you leave the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from the midst of you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5)

Your mind is made up, a priori, on the issue of Jesus as Messiah

Dittos.

[malakhi]

Yes, Bible does back this up. Read what " chosen " means from for example, Strong's concordance, study the word "gentile," the word "elect" .

It should not surprise you that I do not consider Strong's Concordance to be a reliable guide to understanding the meaning of the Hebrew scriptures.

[DreamWeaver]

No, I'm not surprised about your opinion on Strong's concordance. In my searches for understanding I found that many, many Bible Scholars who have been scholars for 40- 50 yrs do find Strong's Concordance to be a reliable source. Until I am shown a more reliable source I will continue with Strong's.

As far as your statement re: "faith" is not a gift ,it is free will, I concede. YOu are correct, it is man's free will. He knocks to the heart of all, but it is up to each individual to make that choice, thus free will. YOu are correct, Grace is the free gift.

[Prodigal Daughter]

If the Catholic church persecuted Jews because they were worried about their ties with the Moslems, why did the Catholic church kidnap Jewish children, HUH?????

If the Catholic church's persecution of Jews was because of the Crusades, why did they burn women at the stake along with the sons they had chosen to circumcise, HUH?????

Why'd they kill all the Protestants, too much Protestant-Muslim collusion?

[Fabozz]

I went into some detail on this with BibChr a while ago. I failed to convince him that the practice is correct (obviously), but I thought I had at least gotten the point across that it's not motivated by pride or conceit. Sigh.

Anyway, the crux of it is Deuteronomy 12:3-4: "...and you shall destroy the names of pagan gods from their places. You shall not do similarly to G_d your Lord." Thus, the names of G_d may be spoken and written freely, but must not be destroyed. Writing His name on something that will be preserved is perfectly fine, which is why the writers of the Bible could throw His name around with abandon. But, by the same token, Deuteronomy 12:3-4 prevents one from destroying a copy of the Bible, precisely because it contains instances of His name.

This really only applies to Hebrew, and specifically only to the Tetragrammaton and the seven other true names of G_d found in the Torah. However, in the tradition of "building a fence around the Torah," many Jews extend the prohibition to English as well, lest by casually using His name in English they wind up forgetting to be careful in Hebrew. Others do this not out of their own belief but out of respect for Orthodox beliefs. Still others do this for reasons entirely their own. I personally straddle the latter two categories. ;-)

Just don't read more into it than is there: At its heart, this practice is no different from any other of the 613 mitzvot, and is motivated by a sincere desire to help perfect the world by conforming to His will. You can read more about this topic here.

[Prodigal Daughter]

If I were Jewish, I can't imagine wanting to learn about a religion whose adherents are constantly trying to correct the way I spell God.

[John Locke]

They do so on the claim that the root is krh, "to dig".

A not unreasonable claim, since the (Jewish) translator of the psalms who added them to LXX, well before Jesus' birth, also evidently thought so:

Hoti ekuklo:san me kunes polloi sunago:ge pone:reuomeno:n perieskon me o:ruxan kheiras mou kai podas

The key word is o:ruxan, third person plural aorist active indicative of orusso:, "they have dug". Hence the final phrase is, literally, "they have dug hands my and feet".

By the way, it makes no sense to lie at somebody's hands like a lion, does it?

[John Locke]

Looking at the Greek it seems to me that he was very possibly speaking of events that could be far down the road.

The Greek, with the relevant words highlighted:

Amne lego: humin hoti ou me: parelthe: he genea aute: heo:s panta tauta gene:tai.

[Matt xxiv:34]

[John Locke]

For that matter, pagans don't "worship idols". The word "idol" comes from Greek eido:lon, and means "image". When a pagan looks at an image of Isis he is not worshiping the image, but She whom the image denotes. Just as when a Christian looks at a crucifix (or a Catholic at a statue of Mary?). It's just a way of keeping ones thoughts focused.

[Illbay]

I, as a Christian, believe that the Jews are the chosen people [of] God.

From where, exactly, do you get this notion, that JEWS are the "chosen people of God"?

My reading of scripture tells me that ISRAEL are the chosen of God, not solely the Jews.

Furthermore, all who take up the Cross and follow Jesus Christ are partakers in the promise given to Abraham. In essence, then, those who believe in Christ and follow Christ's teachings are "Israel".

Many Jews are inheritors of the traditions of those who effectively reject Christ (as this news story illustrates), and as such are "no better than infidels." That is, they have no claim on the promise of God to His chosen people.

Anyone who is not of Christ is, in essence, "a gentile," no matter what their ETHNIC origin.

[Prodigal Daughter]

For that matter, pagans don't "worship idols". The word "idol" comes from Greek eido:lon, and means "image". When a pagan looks at an image of Isis he is not worshiping the image, but She whom the image denotes..

No.

From State Archives of Assyria Literary Texts from the The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project

The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia:
The Mesopotamian Mis Pî Ritual
State Archives of Assyria Literary Texts, Volume I
by Christopher Walker and Michael Dick
Helsinki 2001 • 175 x 250 mm • Pp. viii + 268 + CD with
tablet photographs
Paper • $75.00 • ISBN 951-45-9048-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to George Bernard Shaw, everyone knows the story of Pygmalion and the statue that was brought to life. But the idea of bringing statues to life long predates the classical period. At last the critical edition of the Mesopotamian "Washing of the Mouth" (Mis Pî) ritual has been published. This volume contains all the known texts of the 6 to 8 tablet ritual, including both ritual and incantation tablets; the volume includes new photographs of all the cuneiform manuscripts on a CD-ROM in high quality jpeg format. This book will be of interest to Assyriologists, scholars of the Hebrew Bible, and students of ancient religion and magic. This was the Mesopotamian ritual whereby the cult image was consecrated as the god, in essence, "brought to life." So here we have the most elaborate theology of the cult image preserved anywhere in the ancient world. The original Akkadian and Sumerian texts are given together with English translation. The book begins with an introduction both to the divine cult image in Mesopotamia and to the history of the Mis Pî ritual.