YART : Did Jesus preach Judaism ?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Amorphus

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
5,561
1
0
Originally posted by: przero
Resurrection?

I believe it, and that is the pillar holding up my faith. If Jesus was never raised from death and Hell, my faith would be nothing, it would be meaningless.
:)
 

Atrail

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2001
4,326
0
0
Yeah I always wondered why Christians who's goal is to be "Christ Like", don't live their life how Jesus lived his.
Jesus did not reinterpret Judaism, the writers of the New Testament did. Jesus lived his life as a Jew and set an example
for those to follow. Some seem to pick and choose where they want to be "Christ Like".
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: Sysadmin
YAAAAAAAAAWN


Sysadmin

Why bother? If you're not interested in threads that discuss matters of faith, why don't you just avoid them?

Curious minds want to know.

Sorry to single you out, but this happens all the time.
 

Flyermax2k3

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2003
3,204
0
0
Originally posted by: ThePresence
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: ThePresence
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: ThePresence
Originally posted by: Amorphus
Originally posted by: Metalloid
Hebrews 8:10-13

10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Jesus did make the OT law obsolete, and he said that he will put the new law on the people's hearts and minds. He said that he is the only way to heaven, because he died for us.

Also, the Jews did not believe that Jesus was really God.

Neener neener :p

But no, the Jews (by religion) did not, and do not, believe that Y'shua (Jesus) is their promised Messiah (regardless that he fulfills all of over 400 prophecies concerning the Messiah...). No joke. Didn't miss a single one.
Just a minor point, Y'shua is Hebrew for Joshua, Yeshu is Hebrew for Jesus.

The Hebrew word you're referring to is Y'shua/Yeshua which means "Salvation". If anyone tells you otherwise they're quite simply wrong. The angel Gabriel told Mary to name her son "Salvation, for he shall save his people". The Hebrew word for salvation is Y'shua/Yeshua.
To be exact the name is Yehoshua with an "H" or a "Hey" in Hebrew. That is translated in English as Joshua. Jesus's name as it appears in the Talmud is Yeshu.

Sorry, the Hebrew word for salvation is Yeshua. You can go over the whole Joshua debate all you like, you're just arguing about transliterations of the original word. I'll say it again: the angel Gabriel told Mary to name her son "Salvation, for he shall save his people."

Sir, I attended Rabbinical Seminary for 8 years, and I lived in Israel, speak fluent Hebrew, I'm quite sure I know what the word is. I'm not arguing about transliteration at all. In fact I'm not even arguing.

SALVATION = YESHUA
JOSHUA = YEHOSHUA.
JESUS = YESHU

What I said before about Y'shua being Joshua, I thought the guy was making the mistake that is usally made. People call Joshua Yeshua, but it's a corruption of the original word. It's what happens when you say YEHOSHUA quickly, you get YESHUA. There is a Hebrew word YESHUA and it means salvation.

So let me get this straight... You agree that the Hebrew word for salvation is, in fact, Yeshua.
What, then, are you arguing about?
 

Flyermax2k3

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2003
3,204
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Getting back to the original topic, I think that these verses are instructive regarding the law:

When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

(Galatians 2:14-21)

Thank you for proving my point.
Those verses may mean something else to you, but they only back up what I said earlier.
That being that man *cannot* save himself by following the Law, which is why Yeshua was given to us as a sin sacrifice. This does not mean that the Law has somehow become irrelevant or done away with, just that man is simply not capable of saving himself by following the Law.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Can you explain what your point is? I'm not sure I'm following.

Can you give me examples of Jewish laws that Christians should be following but aren't?

Do you want Christians to follow Jewish customs? If so, that's what Paul is agruing against.
 

ThePresence

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
27,730
16
81
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
So let me get this straight... You agree that the Hebrew word for salvation is, in fact, Yeshua.
What, then, are you arguing about?

I am not arguing, I was just pointing out that Jesus's name in Hebrew was not Yeshua but YESHU ( pronounced YAYSHOO). Both words have the same root and mean the same thing, but they are pronounced differently.
 

Flyermax2k3

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2003
3,204
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Can you explain what your point is? I'm not sure I'm following.

Can you give me examples of Jewish laws that Christians should be following but aren't?

Do you want Christians to follow Jewish customs? If so, that's what Paul is agruing against.

Yeah, I can name about 600 or so ;) It's called the Mosaic Law.
Nothing against Paul, but was he not the apostle sent to the gentiles to bring them to Christ? Gentiles hated Jews at the time, and wanted absolutely nothing to do with them or their customs. It was pretty much assumed back then (and still should be) that when Christ commanded his followers to live as he did, he was being literal ;)
I don't discount what Paul had to say, I just try to look at it in the context mentioned above.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
The Old Covenant or Mosaic Covenant is a legal covenant that required perfect obedience. Failure to do so brought on the curse of God. Deuteronomy 28, 29. In God?s plan of salvation the Ten Commandments, as part of the Mosaic law, were given to an unbelieving people in order to bring about their condemnation.

Christ freed us from the law; the Mosaic law as a unit is no longer in effect.
Galatians 4:21-13


Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband."
Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.


Ephsians 2:14 - 18

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.




 

Czesia

Senior member
Nov 22, 2003
296
0
0
Originally posted by: Amorphus
Originally posted by: Stefan
How exactly did Jesus come to believe that he was the son of God? was he told this from the very beginning of his life? starting at age 5? did he just think he was the son of God from the very beginning?

Other than the miricals he performed be healing people and whatnot (which could just easily be a subjective thing where the people thought they were better because he said he would make them better), how is someone supposed to believe that Jesus didn't just suffer from schizophrenia? Or some other condition that say that he was just delusional?

We're not told when He knew he was Son of God, but we do know that He was exceptional in His youth, discussing Judaism's particulars with temple elders when His family visited Jerusalem. Nevertheless, it is irrelevant to this discussion. There are things we don't need to know. There is a term for what you just did, though. It's called ad hominem, and it's a fallacy of logic.

His healings are hardly acts of suggestive reasoning. Allowing a man who had been a cripple for 38 years to walk is one very impressive feat of suggestive reasoning, especially since all was said was "Get up and walk" (Text). Or, the account of the Roman officer who had faith to simply ask Jesus to heal his servant, who was at home - that servant was made better from his deathbed without Jesus even being there (Text).

Jesus' behavior was far from delusional and schizophrenic. If it was, why would the temple elders be so concerned with a crazy man?

Your reasoning is very well put, Amorphus. :)