“Israel My People”

The teachings of the NT are based on those of the OT (or your holy writings). Your holy writings are also our holy writings. What was promised in your holy writings Christians claim met their fulfillment in the NT times. 

Yes, that is the claim.

The OT is a constant revelation of a disobedient people, a people who failed to live according to the teachings of the book or covenant (Exodus 24:3,7). God continually sent prophets and teachers to your people who continually rejected them and pursued foreign gods and things that by nature are not God. God continually warned them that if they continued this way they would receive judgment. Your ancestors did not listen. Thus, in AD 70 God brought the curses of the covenant (Deuteronomy 28:15 onwards) against His chosen people. He brought divorce to Judah as He had previously brought divorce on Israel.

And this is also the claim. There have certainly been judgments over time, but not one which invalidates the relationship between God and the Jewish people.

In AD 70 God selected a new bride with a new covenant, the people Jesus was betrothed to.  

Again, that is what you claim, and that's very nice. It is just irrelevant to Jewish people.

After AD 70 there is no more Levitical priesthood (that God had sanctioned as the mediator between Israel and Himself).

So you believe.

There is no more animal sacrifice to bring the offer of atonement on the Day of Atonement. There are no more feast day sacrifices required under the Law of Moses. 

Fortunately, Jewish law had already taken this into account.

Thus, you cannot worship God as He required you to under the Mosaic Covenant. It no longer exists. If it did you would still be bringing your sacrifices to God via it and through the Levitical priesthood. 

And you say this because you don't understand what the full Mosaic Covenant is. That's OK. But because you have limited knowledge and have decided on a required series of events predicated on that limited knowledge, you come to erroneous conclusions.

Daniel 2:44 predicted God setting up His eternal kingdom during the time of the fourth kingdom or empire. Which kingdom do you identify this to be? 

The remnants of what is called the Roman exile -- what we are still in now.

It is verified in many ways with reasonable evidence. 

How many passages of the OT can you identify as a reference to the Messiah?

Did God promise a new covenant in Jeremiah?

Where are the animal sacrifices? Where are the Levitical priests? The NT explains the transition and what happened confirms its writings. This can be logically and reasonably confirmed.

Does it follow the Torah? If so, please document how. 

I go, in large, on the knowledge of those who were 1st-century Jews that are recorded in the NT. I go on the evidence of the revelation of Jesus Christ, Yeshua the Messiah. I go on the fact that the OT prophecies cannot be fulfilled after AD 70. They address an OT people who are in covenant relationship with God. The means they are charged with atoning for sin are no longer available after AD 70.  

How do you figure that? It is not the same kingdom or empire. The four kingdoms would affect the Jewish people and they did. 

There of course is only one explanation for Pharaoh believing every shepherd to be an "abomination". It is because the shepherds supported the Ram god of the house of Aries.

I would look to this sort of thing as a less fanciful grounds for the cattle-keeping Egyptians

I think I remember reading once that one isn't a " real" Jew unless born of a Jewish thoroughbred mother.

 I'm not sure where you read that (unless you happen to read Syrian). Under Jewish law, people can convert to Judaism and be as much a "real" Jew (whatever that is) as any other Jew.

Well ya not a Real jew if you have a foreskin are you. 

Sure there is a need to respond. You are ignoring what the LOR says.

So from memory, I wasn't far off

It is verified in many ways with reasonable evidence. 

Well, evidence that you, self-servingly, think of as reasonable. Not exactly a paradigm of intellectual integrity but whatever.

How many passages of the OT can you identify as a reference to the Messiah?

You really don't understand Judaism, right? Some day, after you have had a very basic course in Judaism and Jewish texts, we can continue this. You have yet to define terms you throw around.

Did God promise a new covenant in Jeremiah?

Well, no, not exactly. God promised that the same old content would be instilled directly into the hearts of the Jews in a mode which made traditional "teaching" unnecessary. This renewed covenant is the topic.

Where are the animal sacrifices? Where are the Levitical priests? The NT explains the transition and what happened confirms its writings. This can be logically and reasonably confirmed.

The priests are all around. Go to any Jewish community and ask. The sacrifices? they are in the early parts of each day's prayers. Just check a prayer book and you will see. Judaism already knows what happened. Your texts are unnecessary but thanks.

Have you considered maybe it is your evidence that you think ofas reasonable that is self-serving? 

“How many passages of the OT can you identify as a reference tothe Messiah?
 
“The following passages in the Jewishscriptures are the ones that Jewsconsider to be messianic in nature or relating to the end of days. These arethe ones that we rely upon in developing our messianic concept:

 
“While this is partly true, in that He would instill the lawdirectly into the hearts of His people, He also promised a new covenant. 

“How do you know the priestly line is unbroken from Aaron?

“So are you still sacrifices animals on an altar? For instance,do you still follow Leviticus 5:6 (ESV)
 
“Do you still sacrifice animals on the Day of Atonement?

“Are you still following the Covenant in all the Lord God hasspoken?

 I can read the OT. I understand the substitutionary nature ofthe atonement. I understand the five Levitical offerings and how theyapply - the burnt offering, the meal offering, the peace offering, the sinoffering, and the trespass offering.  I understand the seven feast dayofferings as they relate to the NT. Everything that Moses told the Israelitesto construct was a pattern of a greater truth, a spiritual truth.
 

“ I can read the OT just like you can.

 
“I also understand the spiritual significance of that patternwhich the Jews have missed. In every OT writing, there is a picture, a shadow,a type of the Mashiach!

“What are the earliest historical records you have of theseJewish writings? How accurately do you believe they have been kept? What isyour proof?

 
“1,000 years? That does not date back to the 1st-century whenGod judged the nation of Israel with the destruction of its temple and citywith the Roman armies.

Have you considered maybe it is your evidence that you think of as reasonable that is self-serving? 

 

Sure, and I can understand why anyone outside my system mightthink that. This makes it as persuasive to you as your “evidence” does to me.

 

 

“How many passages of the OT can you identify as a reference to the Messiah?

 

“The following passages in the Jewishscriptures are the ones that Jews consider to be messianic in nature or relating to the end of days. These are the ones that we rely upon in developing our messianic concept:

 

 

Oh boy. You really need to read a bit more carefully. The jewfaqlist specifically says that it is of verses that Jews “consider to be messianic in nature” or which relate to the end of days. You asked about verses that are “a reference to the Messiah.” Those verses do relate to a messianic concept, as do many, many others, but that doesn’t clarify anything because you still don’tunderstand the terms and how the Jewish vision of a messiah works.

 

 

“While this is partly true, in that He would instill the law directly into the hearts of His people, He also promised a new covenant. 

 

Yes, but in what sense was it “new”? Only in the way it is formed with the people, not in its content. So the Torah and all of its lawsand expectations stay the same. So we expect in the future a “new” covenant asone that makes the Torah and all of Judaism inscribed on our hearts. You seemto advocate a totally new-content covenant which the text doesn’t point to.

 

“How do you know the priestly line is unbroken from Aaron?

 

We don’t. We have a chezkas kahuna. The claim was that we don’thave priests. We do.

 

“So are you still sacrifices animals on an altar? For instance,do you still follow Leviticus 5:6 (ESV)

 

“Do you still sacrifice animals on the Day of Atonement?

Of course not. The fact that you ask means that you don’t understand Jewish law and are imposing what you think it should be onto it. You just happen to be wrong.

 

“Are you still following the Covenant in all the Lord God has spoken?

I’m trying, every day. I’m following the laws that I am bound by via the Torah (which is the content of the covenant).

And that is just it. You are a smart guy, but you are in a religious box, IMO. 

“ And that is just it. You are a smart guy, but you are in areligious box, IMO. 

“This again is your assumption, yet you do nothing but assertwhat is and is not without a shred of reasonable evidence in most of yourresponses. 

 
“In the sense that it was a covenant of grace, not works. Do youknow what separates Christianity from every other religion? It is a covenant ofgrace in which God accomplishes what we could not do.

“The Jews demonstrate repeatedly through the OT that they cannotlive by the covenant they agreed to with God. The Mosaic Covenant is just sucha covenant of works. It is what the human does that puts them right with God.The NT of grace is what God did in Jesus Christ that the Jew nor Gentile couldever do - that is live a perfectly righteous life before God.  

“Again, you are speaking Hebrew to me; in other words, you arespeaking above my head with language that is technical to a gentile. 

 
“The fact that I asked was to hear it from you, not because Idon't understand this but to prove the point from you that your people are notfollowing the law as they agreed to follow it.

“Thus, they are not living by the covenant. Theycontinually broke it. Thus God brought the curses/judgments of the Lawupon them.
 

“ So, again it is a covenant of works. You do what you can,somewhat unsuccessfully by the sounds of it, because you are bound by theworks of the Law, living according to the letter of the Law, yet you can'tfollow the sacrificial system as prescribed in the OT.

 I can read the OT. I understand the substitutionary nature of the atonement. I understand the five Levitical offerings and how they apply - the burnt offering, the meal offering, the peace offering, the sin offering, and the trespass offering.  I understand the seven feast day offerings as they relate to the NT. Everything that Moses told the Israelites to construct was a pattern of a greater truth, a spiritual truth.

 

No, everything Moses instructed was a set of laws to live by, and we do. And that you think of a sacrifice as substitutionary simply means that you are reading your belief into the text.

And that you think of a sacrifice as substitutionary simply meansthat you are reading your belief into the text.

“ I can read the OT just like you can.

 

See, here’s your problem. First, that you think I read the “OT”which I don’t. Next, that you think that that “OT” text somehow encompasses what Judaism is and your literal reading in English gives you insights that people within Judaism don’t get.

 

“I also understand the spiritual significance of that pattern which the Jews have missed. In every OT writing, there is a picture, a shadow, a type of the Moshiach!

 

That is certainly your (arrogant) opinion. We do just fine reading it and understanding it without inserting your wishful thinking into it.

 

 

“What are the earliest historical records you have of these Jewish writings? How accurately do you believe they have been kept? What is your proof?

 

We have the Mishna which dates to well before the common era. The discussions explicating it developed before the common era and continued until the text of the Talmud was fixed a couple of hundred years later. You must be familiar with the Oral law – it was the teachings of the Pharisees which Jesus said the people should follow, and it was the Talmud which he referenced (at least 6 different tractates are referenced in Matthew 5 and 6).

 

 

“1,000 years? That does not date back to the 1st-century when God judged the nation of Israel with the destruction of its temple and city with the Roman armies.

 

 

I never said it did. I’m just referencing a written commentary which answered your question 1000 years ago.

“The OT or Hebrew Bible contains various references to thesacrifice as representing them by their laying of hands on the animal. Theanimal was used to atone for their sins, thus it was a substitution. It was nottheir blood that was shed yet it provided the atonement for THEIR sins. 

“So the offering and the shed blood was a substitute. Itwas not their blood. 

“I think your charge is misrepresentative of the plain languagepresented.