Posted on 07/26/2012 11:34:14 AM PDT by Teófilo
Read the article first before jumping to conclusions. The whole article, not just the title or excerpts.
Correctly stated. Even taken coldly the “blood libel” cannot be read to be for all Jews — even by the broadest of brushes. It would be for those people who uttered it — and their descendents who could be Jews or Christians or Moslems or even Buddhists or Hindus.
yhaos — do read the article, the whole article and not just the title or excerpts.
“You question has the veneer o” —> read the article. It’s got nothing to do with your first post. read the whole article, don’t excerpt.
well, there are those who believe that the message went to gentiles only to quote “make His people jealous” — I kid you not, that’s been posted on this forum! And not by a Jewish poster!
I doubt you could say “the masses” — more specifically the crowd gathered in front of Pilate. This could have been a specially bought crowd, yes “bought” by Cleophas etc.
It doesn’t drive a wedge for me. I don’t consider Maimonides infallible, though he was brilliant and is an important Jew. If Jewish leaders were involved in the decision to kill Jesus I’d like to think Christians wouldn’t hold it against all Jews forever.
For Jews, Jesus did not bring among other things a messianic era. No, because to us he didn’t fulfill the prophecy. It doesn’t mean he is evil or mad. It means we can’t call him a prophet.
Is it OK that Jesus is a prophet or savior to Christians? Yes. Because for Christians it is so. For Christians, praying to or through Jesus is not idolatry. It would be for us Jews. But it is right for Christians.
I a. Not offended nor should any Jew be that you all struggle and think and pray on this difference. We respect struggling with Gd.
It’s a different paradigm. We are commanded to be Jews. We accept that others are not, nor should they be. Others have their own Ways. For them, their religion is the right way. Christianity feels it must convert others. So in your Way you must struggle with Judaism because yours is to be, for you, the Only Way. This is to me the saddest thing about Christianity, though I mean only expression of my honest feeling and no offense at all. I respect your theology even though it isn’t mine.
There is only one Gd. One creator. There are apparently different ways to worship Him. I can accept that. I think that is how Jews feel, or are supposed to feel, about Christian theology.
Well, this Christian doesn't hold it against all Jews forever. More to the point, I see all of humanity as being complicit in this killing. Pushing it off on to one group "Jews" or a smaller group "those Jewish leaders then" is pushing off one's own complicity.
Maimonides' comments are his own as an individual.
See y’all? This is a good reaction. Thank you.
~Theo
“ELS coded”? No idea what that is. Please, explain.
~Theo
I can’t say I have any Jewish friends, other than Jesus, his Mom, his earthly Dad, and the first followers who now bask before the Beatific Vision. Jewish acquaintances, yes, but all of them in a professional setting.
Having said that, I will share the Gospel with any Jewish brother or sisters who approach me willing to know more about Jesus, yes I would. Which I would do with anyone regardless of avowed religion, or no religion.
~Theo
I won’t say it emphasized difference, but it did start from opposite viewpoints and tried to engage them in a dialogue.
The excerpt from Ratzinger didn’t do justice to his whole essay. You must read it!
~Theo
“What other signs or markers for Messiah would the Jews accept?”
I don’t speak for the Jews - heck, no one speak for the Jews, not even other Jews - but for what I know, your question is liable for as many answers as there are individual Jewish opinions.
You see, Maimonides aside, today’s Judaism isn’t a systematic “creedal” faith. It would be fair to say that they are all like Thomas the Apostle was: everything is mere speculation until they meet the Messiah in person and then all empirical doubt will be dispelled for them - and even then, many will question him. :-)
~Theo
Not so sure this works out that way.
The crowd at the governor's palace was not necessarily a representative sample of the Jewish populace. It would have been extraordinarily foolish of the Jewish leaders to not have as many of their henchmen as possible in this crowd. The remainder would have probably been largely city rif-raf. As in today's city mobs, most "solid citizens" are busy elsewhere with their lives.
And even those who were not predisposed against Jesus might have been easily swept up in the peer pressure of a mob setting rather than making a concious decision to reject Him.
That is inherent in the very root of Christianity.
Christians believe Jesus is the Savior of man. If other groups, such as the Jews, can achieve salvation without His intercession, then this claim is false.
Jesus himself said, "Nobody comes to the Father except through me." No exceptions, even for His relatives.
If you reject that statement, you can still believe He is a great moral teacher, but you can't believe He is the Messiah in any meaningful sense.
Perhaps you can answer a question for me that I have wondered about for quite some time. Many Jews are apparently seriously offended by (what they believe to be) the Christian belief that Jews who don't accept Jesus as their Savior will go to hell. This pops up every so often when some Jewish group gets its panties all wadded up of the Southern Baptists or some other group.
I find this very odd. Quite a few Christians who believe differently from me on various aspects believe that I will therefore go to hell. This doesn't bother me at all, since their belief will presumably not affect God's judgment in any way.
Either they are right, and I'm in for eternity in the toaster, or they're wrong and I'm not. Either way, why should I (or the Jews I mentioned) care one way or another what some random idiot believes?
Obviously such belief can for fanatics lead to regrettable actions in the real world. But I think it has been quite some time (if ever) that the US has experienced a pogrom. Some Jews seem to expect the appearance around the corner at any moment of a mob of Cossacks.
121 The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value,92 for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.Regarding the validity of the Jewish law, we teach and believe that:122 Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately SO oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,94 The books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."95
123 Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. the Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).
1961 God, our Creator and Redeemer, chose Israel for himself to be his people and revealed his Law to them, thus preparing for the coming of Christ. the Law of Moses expresses many truths naturally accessible to reason. These are stated and authenticated within the covenant of salvation.I think that the core of the debate related to the identity of Israel within the People of God. Are there two People of God, Israel and the Church? Or only one? If one - and this is what we believe - can Jews exist as Jews in the People of God, or not?1962 The Old Law is the first stage of revealed Law. Its moral prescriptions are summed up in the Ten Commandments. the precepts of the Decalogue lay the foundations for the vocation of man fashioned in the image of God; they prohibit what is contrary to the love of God and neighbor and prescribe what is essential to it. the Decalogue is a light offered to the conscience of every man to make God's call and ways known to him and to protect him against evil:
God wrote on the tables of the Law what men did not read in their hearts.131963 According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good,14 yet still imperfect. Like a tutor15 it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage.According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a "law of concupiscence" in the human heart.16 However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.1964 The Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel. "The Law is a pedagogy and a prophecy of things to come."17 It prophesies and presages the work of liberation from sin which will be fulfilled in Christ: it provides the New Testament with images, "types," and symbols for expressing the life according to the Spirit. Finally, the Law is completed by the teaching of the sapiential books and the prophets which set its course toward the New Covenant and the Kingdom of heaven.There were . . . under the regimen of the Old Covenant, people who possessed the charity and grace of the Holy Spirit and longed above all for the spiritual and eternal promises by which they were associated with the New Law. Conversely, there exist carnal men under the New Covenant still distanced from the perfection of the New Law: the fear of punishment and certain temporal promises have been necessary, even under the New Covenant, to incite them to virtuous works. In any case, even though the Old Law prescribed charity, it did not give the Holy Spirit, through whom "God's charity has been poured into our hearts."18
Throughout history, the answer - from both sides - has been a resounding "no." But after the Holocaust, we on the Christian side are wondering if we blundered by insisting that supersessionism meant the suppression and absorption of Jewish identity into Gentile Christianity. Of course, the Holocaust has led most Jews to insist more than ever on their separate uniqueness and election.
That's where the debate stands and I don't mean to solve it here, except to insist upon the Christian vocation of Love.
~Theo
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.