YART : Did Jesus preach Judaism ?

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: mandala
So, you can interpret Matthew 5:18 as meaning that the law would only only pass away once it was fulfilled (nothing will take away from the law until it is completely fulfilled), which Christians believe Jesus did.

nopers. Read the verse again. It says not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the Law until ALL be fulfilled. All means everything which G-d has preordained for Creation. It does not say "...pass from the Law until all concerning the Law be fulfilled."
Quite an important distinction, wouldn't you say?

 

[azazyel]

move a long folks.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: azazyel
move a long folks.

What's your point? I see nothing on that site that has *anything* to do with this discussion. Perhaps there is a particular portion of that site you were referring to?

 

[azazyel]

There was no point for the link. I am just getting tired of all these Chrisitanity threads so I thought I would give people some new reading material about Jesus. They might as well study Christianity before they start listening to the people who visit here.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Oh, I see. So, according to you, no one who visits AT has the right to have an opinion regarding Christianity or to share said opinion?
Interesting philosophy there....

 

[Riprorin]

Let's don't lose sight of what's really important:

The Greatest Commandment (Matthew 22:34 - 38)

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Oh, I see. So, according to you, no one who visits AT has the right to have an opinion regarding Christianity or to share said opinion?
Interesting philosophy there....

No, I am just saying that there has been more postings about Christianity in the past month than there has been in the 3+ years I have been here. People are starting flame fests left and right and it is getting a little annoying.

Anyways, you never did answer my question from yesterday.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: azazyel

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Oh, I see. So, according to you, no one who visits AT has the right to have an opinion regarding Christianity or to share said opinion?
Interesting philosophy there....

No, I am just saying that there has been more postings about Christianity in the past month than there has been in the 3+ years I have been here. People are starting flame fests left and right and it is getting a little annoying.

Anyways, you never did answer my question from yesterday.

Flame fests (especially religious ones) have been around as long as the internet has. Get used to it.
What question from yesterday are you referring to?

 

[azazyel]

doesn't matter... I'm done

 

[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 😛

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.

 

[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 😛

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.

 

[mandala]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: mandala
So, you can interpret Matthew 5:18 as meaning that the law would only only pass away once it was fulfilled (nothing will take away from the law until it is completely fulfilled), which Christians believe Jesus did.

nopers. Read the verse again. It says not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the Law until ALL be fulfilled. All means everything which G-d has preordained for Creation. It does not say "...pass from the Law until all concerning the Law be fulfilled."
Quite an important distinction, wouldn't you say?

I can see how you could interpet it that way, but I also think it is equally valid to assume that since Jesus is talking about "the law", the "all" also refers to the law.

This is part of why it can be difficult to try to justify any particular idea by saying, "the Bible says", because the Bible requires interpretation and not everyone agrees on their interpretation.

 

[polm]

The NT does not dwell on the kosher laws, because it assumes we know they are still in effect. Animals that were not suitable for human consumption in the OT are still not suitable for human consumption. Even under the New Covenant, a cockroach still carries bacteria and disease. Shellfish are still high in purines (a substance which we now know causes certain forms of arthritis) and they are scavengers who feed off the refuse that settles to the bottom of the ocean. Buzzards still pick rotting flesh off the bones of dead animals. The biological makeup of these creatures has not changed simply because Jesus died and we have another covenant. The New Testament assumes we have sense enough to know this.

from : http://www.cjf.org/pages/kosher1.htm

 

[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 😛

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.

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

Originally posted by: bleeb
He didn't change any of their laws, he just got the interpretations right.

Ding Ding Ding...BOOYAH!

 

[Riprorin]

I find it fascinating that a summary of the Christian Gospel appears to be hidden in a genealogy within the Torah. Can someone that understands Hebrew confirm the translations?

Sorry, to go off the topic off the thread, but I think that we have some folks here who know Hebrew.

Adam - Man
Seth - Appointed
Enosh - Mortal
Kenan - Sorrow
Mahalalel - The Blessed God
Jared - Shall come down
Enoch - Teaching
Methuselah - His death shall bring
Lamech - The despairing
Noah - Rest, or comfort

Putting it together:

"Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow; (but) the Blessed God shall come down teaching (that) His death shall bring (the) despairing rest".

 

[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 😛

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."

 

[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 😛

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.

 

[przero]

Read Acts Chap. 10 and 11, explains it from Peter's perspective.

 

[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)

 

[Gand1]

Originally posted by: DuffmanOhYeah

Originally posted by: bleeb
He didn't change any of their laws, he just got the interpretations right.

Ding Ding Ding...BOOYAH!

And now you see why there are religious flame fests!!! If you cannot accept another persons view on religion with an open mind, you have no right to claim yourself as one of Gods followers and are in fact just a bigot!

 

[BigToque]

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?

 

[Amorphus]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Amorphus
We do, but he changed the means to salvation, and abolished the ecclesiastical consequences of sins. It doesn't mean that said sins were now alright.

Christian morality draws largely from the Old testament, except for where Jesus explicitly changed things.

I.e. in OT Judaism, sacrifices were made to atone for sins. Jesus was the sacrifice, thus negating the need for sacrifices - all we have to do is accept Jesus as savior.

*edit*
on the issue of kosher and such
Jesus did say (I'm trying to find the verse ATM) that what you eat is of no consequence - what matters is what comes out of your mouth, not what goes in.

You're right on one thing (that being that Jesus is the sin sacrifice) but I disagree with your interpretation that the laws were done away with. I must, once again, refer to Matthew 5:17-18 "17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
RE: keeping kosher and your "quote": one has to take that quote in context to truly understand it. Jesus was simply saying that man should be more concerned with what fruit he bears, than what fruit he eats. This ties into the parable of cutting off one's hand if it causes him to sin.

I didn't say the original laws were abolished at all - sorry if I miscommunicated. Some laws were struck down, because Jesus changed them, but the great portion remained the same. We are still instructed to follow the morality laid down in the OT.

As for your metaphorical interpretation - I don't take to that, namely because in reading Mark 7, Jesus said it once (that what enters a man's body cannot defile him), and when asked to elaborate, he said the same thing. Here's the entire section.

Your example of Mark 9:43-48/Matthew 18:8-9/Matthew 5:29-30 (all of them say the same thing) is extreme, and maybe it should be taken literally. The context certainly doesn't say. I can flounder all I want, and say the verse in Mark seems to allude to hyperbole, since the immediately preceding verse says ""But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.". But I can't really prove that's what Jesus meant, and I'm certainly not going to put words in His mouth. Meh. We don't know everything about God, far from it. The Bible is only a guide to life, not a handbook to God's psyche.

 

[przero]

Resurrection?

 

[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?