Posted on 08/27/2003 2:00:45 PM PDT by yonif
B'nai Brith Canada today announced the launch of a campaign to inform members of Toronto's Jewish community about the activities of "Jews for Jesus."
Calling it the "Proud to be Jewish" Campaign," B'nai Brith's goal is to warn members of the Toronto Jewish community about the presence and methods of the missionary group and to advise them of their rights.
"This isn't about free speech," said Rochelle Wilner, president of B'nai Brith Canada. "Targeted missionizing, especially when done in a manner calculated to deceive the unsuspecting, is offensive to our community. Christianity is not a branch of Judaism it's a different religion altogether, and any attempt to portray it as anything but a different religion is subterfuge. "The term 'Jews for Jesus' makes about as much sense as 'Baptists for Buddha' or 'Catholics for Krishna,'" she said.
"We didn't want this to be just another lesson in how to answer," said Frank Dimant, executive vice president.
"Some in our community are simply not capable of countering missionaries because they have received little formal Jewish education.
"We want members of our community to know that they don't have to defend Judaism to Christian missionaries they have an absolute right to not be subjected to these ministrations in the first place."
Dr. Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College and a leader in Canada's evangelical Christian community, spoke as well. "As a committed Christian I support the idea of preaching Christianity, but preaching Christianity under the guise of Judaism to those who are in fact seeking Judaism, is plainly wrong," said McVety.
"We unequivocally denounce any and all deceptive tactics."
The "question of Job" has always been fascinating to me, because it symbolizes, for me at least, the essence of "the subjective versus the objective". Although God's answer to Job is in many ways one of the more cryptic, and seemingly dismissive, set of statements attributed to God, it touches on a very important set of points.
Being made in God's image as we are, sometimes we forget we are not the center of THE universe, just the center of OUR universe. It seems God must frequently remind us of the distinction between the two.
Having been given just the barest glimpse into the incredible vastness, power and dazzling glory of God (one way to put it: God is the instantaneous yet eternal explosion of infinite possibilities embodied) it is ever more clear to me how great the folly of our own vanity can be.
Thus, even a man as good and loyal to God as Job can still make the mistake of getting lost in himself. God's wakeup calls may not always be pleasant, but they always work as intended.
I died laughing.
Speaking as a Jew, "I don't know" (although I definitely do not presume to speak for all Jews on this!).
Speaking personally, Heaven? I don't know. I depends on what you think of heaven as being, I suppose. I tend to think of "heaven" as being with God, and since God is everywhere, the notion of "heaven" as being a "place" is sort of superfluous.
I think that outside this universe, in what I call the "spiritual continuum" where such things as "space" and "cause and effect" have no concrete meaning (i.e., where there is true "eternity"), there may very well be a reality called "heaven", but I don't presume to know for sure, nor what it's like there if it exists.
I have asked God about this, and have received a very satisfactory answer, but I'll leave it at that for now. One hint though: God made it clear that the answer I got truly makes sense only to me, sort of like a model only makes sense to one who understands the parameters under which it is conceived.
One thing I do know is that I am not going to hell, unless I choose to. And the choice remains mine to make, interestingly enough. Just as we can punish ourselves by sinning, we can punish ourselves eternally by embracing sin eternally. But God has always made it crystal clear that the choice to sin or not to sin is ours alone, and that the one true sin is to turn away from God.
I am human and imperfect, and I will no doubt be forever prone to "sin". But I will never again turn away from God, and God has never, and will never, turn away from me, nor any who come to Him.
Orthodox Judaism? Nope. But as a Jew, I have come to know God in ways I could never before imagine, and that's just fine with me.
Jesus and Moses have an argument as to who is the better programmer. This goes on for a few hours until they come to an agreement to hold a contest, with God the Father as the judge.
They set themselves before their computers and begin. They are given the task, and began to type furiously, lines of code streaming up the screen for several hours straight. Seconds before the end of the competition, a bolt of lightning strikes, taking out the electricity. Moments later, the power is restored, and God announces that the contest is over.
He asks Moses to show what he has come up with. Moses indignantly protests, "I have nothing! I lost it all when the power went out." "Very well, then," says God, "let us see if Jesus fared any better."
Jesus enters a command and the screen comes to life with a vivid display, the voices of an angelic choir pour forth from the speakers. Moses is astonished.
He stutters, "B-b-but how? I lost everything, yet Jesus' program is intact! How did he do it?" God chuckles, "Moses, when are you going to learn ...Jesus saves!"
Did you read the article you posted? It says:
Neither is the issue that "Jews for Jesus" is somehow a "cult,"
The writer of the article is not exactly coherent. For example, compare the following two statements:
What ultimately makes a Jew is faith, not background.
Jews that leave Judaism by accepting another religious belief system have always been historically referred to as "apostate Jews."
So the question for the confused author would be: If one cannot be a Jew unless he is a religious Jew, how then can one be an apostate Jew?
The article is full of finger-pointing nonsense. JFJ must be fairly effective to incite all this panic.
Now, now, now Rochelle. Who's engaging in mis-information now?
Perhaps I should have used Dane. Stereotyping Germans, however, is no different that stereotyping Jews. The socialist "democratic republic" has renounced the evils of the paper hanger and embraced a new destructive politics.
Frankly, that depends. Is Christianity compatable with modern, Talmudic Judaism? Probably not, given that the latter is a legalistic system (by which I mean that it says one must follow 613 laws and all of the corollaries in the Talmud to be right with God), and the former is a relational system.
However, the real question is whether Christianity is compatible with Judaism as it is presented in the Tanakh, sans the mountain of additional commentary and legalism. I am fully convinced, after long study, that not only is it compatible, but that without Christ, there is no evidence at all for Judaism--and you have to throw out several books of the OT as being false prophets to boot. I know quite a number of Jews who happen to agree, and who, seeing absolutely no conflict between the Tanakh and the New Testament, see no reason to give up their Jewish identity simply because they trust in a Jewish Messiah.
The question has been asked several times, and I think it deserves an answer: What then of atheists who identify themselves as Jews? And why does the Jewish community, which embraces atheists and agnostics even to the point of giving them dual-citizenship in Israel, condemn only Messianic Jews as having left their faith and community? It's a horrible double-standard.
Now, regarding your objection, how exactly is eating unleavened bread and drinking wine (or grape juice) un-kosher?
I also found this statement by you back in post 116 to be completely illogical, if a very common sentiment: The only "One True Faith" is that which leads you to God. How can this be? If you have two faiths that point to the opposite directions (like Christianity and Buddhism, for example), how can they point to the same God? If you have two faiths that are similar on a lot of points, but which are incompatible in their core beliefs, like Christianity and Judaism, how can they both lead you to God?
Frankly, I think we need to elimiate that kind of sloppy thinking in any honest dialogue about religion. The "all roads lead to God" approach sounds concillatory, but it's ultimately idiotic. While it is possible that God could make leeway for those who are honestly mistaken (though I personally don't believe this to be true for a variety of reasons that I don't want to get into right now), if we're really serious about loving Him, we should be prepared to constantly re-examine our beliefs about how He relates to us and how we are to relate to Him. To do less, to stifle the discussion with vague "oh, it doesn't matter" statements, dishonors God by making our own comfort a god before Him.
Having said that, I also believe that we need to have these discussions with all love and consideration for each other. Having said that, I greatly appreciate your mostly gentle tone throughout this thread, which I have been lurking on since yesterday. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
Have you ever done an intensive study of the Messianic prophecies? They are such that many Jews (historically speaking), including the Essenes, have been forced to speculate that there would be not one, but two Messiahs: Messiah ben Joseph, who would be the suffering servant, and Messiah ben David, who would be the triumphant king.
Well, that's one possible reconcilliation. However, the view that we hold is that the prophecies point to the Messiah coming twice. In the first coming, He came as the suffering servant, whose death consumated all of the bloody sin-sacrifices of the Torah, but who rose again from the dead as said in Isa. 53:10-12--though God made Him a sin offering, He was raised so that He could also "see His seed" and "prolong His days."
So why didn't Yeshua go on to immediately fulfill the prophecies of Israel's restoration after He rose from the dead? Simply put, because already having come to His own, His own did not receive Him (see John 1:11). The fact that the Jews would transgress against God in some way to fall from His favor after the Messiah came and was "cut off" is spoken of in the Tanakh, where Jerusalem is prophesyed to be destroyed again after the Messiah came in Dan. 9:26 (and when has Jerusalem ever been destroyed save for the sins of its people?).
In Hosea 5:15, God says, "I will return again to My place till they acknowledge their offense." Hmm, so when did God leave His place (i.e. heaven)? In the Christian concept of the Godhead, where Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all the same God at the same time, God did indeed leave His place when He came in the person of Jesus Christ. And He did indeed return to His place, where He will remain until the Israelite people acknowledge that they sinned against Him, as spoken of in Ps. 110:1.
Now, without wanting to turn this into a full-blown Scriptural debate (please feel free to email or freepmail me if you want one), I've given you a very standard Christian response, based almost entirely on the Scriptures we agree upon (barring one allusion to the NT) to your objection. There are other threads that we could chase down as well, but that's not my main point. My main point is that you shouldn't try to dismiss Jesus Christ on the basis of a one-liner that doesn't even really address the viewpoint that you're trying to refute.
If you want to pursue this, let's please take it off-forum rather than clog up Jim's space (and away from watchful eyes so that neither of us will be tempted to grandstand in front of others). If not, then you have my well-wishes and prayers, and I hope you'll have a good day.
There are no known writings of Jesus. I'm not aware of anyone who ever claimed there were. I'm not sure why that's important. Are you suggesting that if there was an " Autobiographical Gospel", it would change the way you see things?
As to your statement ",,,,by people who never met the guy...", the apparent Gospel writers were Matthew, the Levite, Mark, Luke and John. Matthew and John were disciples of Jesus, Mark was a contemporary, Luke, (possibly a gentile, but intimately aquainted with Jewish life and practice), was the one who did not meet Jesus, but did know many of the eyewitnesses. Of course, you can say that later people made it all up, (thought you don't have a lot of years to play with before extant manuscripts start popping up to ruin that game). I grant that the authorships cannot be "proven," (which is true of every ancient author from Herodotus to Moses to Hillel), but you are in error to reason that "therefore the claim is false."
I heard a story once about two Rabbis, Moishe and Simon, who met on the street. They hadn't talked in a long time.
Moishe says, "So, Simon, how is it with you?"
"Not so good," replies Simon. "My son, Isaac, has become a Christian."
Moishe says, "NO! Really? It is funny you should say this to me because my son, Samuel, he has also become a Christian. This is very disturbing. We should do something about it."
Simon answers him, "What can we do? I know, let's go talk to our old professor, Dr. Greenburg. Perhaps he can help us understand why our sons have become Christians".
So they go look up Dr. Greenburg who is ecstatic to see them. "So, Moishe and Simon," he says, "what's been happening with you all these years?"
Moishe says, "Dr. Greenburg, you won't believe it. Simon and I both have sons who have become Christians."
Dr. Greenburg is obviously very upset at this news. "You know, it's funny you should say this to me because my son, Jacob, has also become a Christian."
Moishe cries out, "Dr. Greenburg, say it is not so. What can we do? We must understand why all our sons are becoming Christians."
Dr. Greenburg says, "Maybe we should pray. Maybe the G-d of our fathers, the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, can tell us what is going on down here."
So all the men kneel and Dr. Greenburg says, "Blessed art thou, O LORD our G-d, King of the Universe. We are deeply greaved. Our sons have become Christians and we don't understand why."
A voice from heaven answers, "You know, it's funny you should say this to me..."
Shalom.
Mark, please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Jewishness had to do with observance of Torah. I am unaware of any Messianic prophecies in Torah, except that there would one day be a Prophet like Moses.
Is the coming Messiah truly a main tennant of Judaism or merely a side belief?
Shalom.
And you'll be expected to marry another Jew, right? I suppose you could marry another convert. Would your kids all marry converts? If you really follow the Jewish religion, eventually all your descendants will also be descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The same can't be said of, say, Catholicism. If you're a faithful Catholic and marry another Catholic, regardless of whether she's a convert or not, you won't join a (very) extended family by doing so.
The notion of "Jewish ethnic purity" being some sort of goal of Judaism is a fallacy.
Did I say anything like that? If that was a goal, the identity of the father would matter too. I know it doesn't.
This is not unique to Judaism, either. I know a few Catholics who don't want their daughters to marry non-Catholics. Does that make them racists?
1) I never accused Jews of being racist. My interest here is defending some of my brothers in Christ from false accusations.
2) There was never a Catholic homeland from which the Catholic diasporia spread, which includes all Catholics except a few converts, which converts generally merge into the original population in a few generations.
What is deceptive about it? They say openly for whom they are and what are their beliefs. I would say that progressive Episcopalians or liberal Reform Jews are deceptive, they claim to be religious and they promote libertinism.
One flaw of Jews for Jesus is that they are simply Protestants and they are not aware of it.
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.