Total posts: 905
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Not really an "explanation" but a contextualization. I see much of the content of the gospels as a copying of the style and approach of the "OT". So since in the book of Deuteronomy (the last of the 5 books of Moses) it is written "See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it." I believe that the gospel writers included an echo of that in their own final book.
Just my take on it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
1. "Many things Jesus taught are not written in the OT"
1a. I don't recall saying that. I mentioned that some of what he said was cribbed from the Talmud.
2. "are you still awaiting?"
2a. Yes, every day.
3. "I would have to believe you've never read the Gospels"
3a. If you have to, feel free to. That isn't to say that your belief is accurate.
4. "if Jesus only ever spoke of what was written in the OT"
4a. cf 1a
5. "does deliverer contradict anointed?"
5a. You have yet to explain "DELIVERER" but the issue isn't whether they contradict but whether they are at all related.
6. "you've talked to a bush. That's not practical and we never see that other than in stories. Jesus performed miracles"
6a. I'm not going to comment unless you can show me where you've performed miracles. That's not practical and we never see it other than in stories.
Strange how talking to bushes is only in stories but the Jesus claim to miracles isn't. And yet it only exists in the gospels.
BTW, the holiday of Sukkot begins very soon so if I don't answer you immediately, I will try to get to whatever you ask by late Tuesday night or Wednesday morning.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
"and is a very inadequate statement for ANY spiritual person to make and IMO is quite unrealistic. If you don't find the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus "useful" and yet find your OT txts as somehow useful we will just have to leave this as our own opinions. But I do appreciate the response. "
OK, we can leave it at that. Jesus stated material that can be found in the Talmud (as he was endorsing the Pharisaic view) so I get it from the Talmud, so his saying it is of no use. Jesus stated things that go contrary to Jewish law, so they are not of any use to me.
"MESSIAH-
the promised deliverer of the Jewish nation prophesied in the Hebrew Bible."
Saying he is a deliverer is very different from saying that "that's what Messiah means" which was your earlier claim. I'm not sure what you mean by "deliverer" -- Moses, I guess, delivered us from the bondage of Egypt, though actually, God did that. The promised king-messiah will not do things that are for God to do, that is, redeem us from the captivity of spiritual exile. My point was also that a number of people have been historically "anointed" and yet none of them would be called a "deliverer" so tying anointed and deliverer together seems uncalled for.
"if God is omnipresent and has no embodiment what does God do to reach the lower worlds? God does this through incarnations. I know that's foreign to your beliefs but we are not talking about just the Jews beliefs. "
An associated idea is not actually foreign. When God shows Moses a burning bush and speaks from within it, God isn't a bush. When God splits the sea, God isn't the sea. God's power, God's "voice" (as it were) make themselves known. And when God inspires a prophet to carry a message, the person is inspired by God to spread a message using his own (human) words. So I wouldn't call these "incarnations" (which means, based on its root, made into flesh, and God isn't) but manifestations maybe of God's will. A human might be inspired, but he isn't possessed by God's spirit, walking around like some puppet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
1. do they need to reject the example and teachings of Jesus of the Gospels, why would they not believe or support any spiritual principle Jesus taught?
1a. Because nothing he added is useful. We have sources of actual authority to rely on. Why listen to some random itinerant teacher who was taking from another source that we already have? And when he changed things, why follow a person who is not in a position to change things?
2. Next question (perhaps to Jews), who was that "Messiah" the Jews believe in and whom will fill those shoes besides Jesus? Lol I mean it's pretty obvious Jesus was the promised DELIVERER, that's what Messiah means. The name of Jesus is hardly anything to not recognize as a Messiah.
2a. Messiah (in English) comes from "moshiach" in Hebrew which means "one who is anointed", not "deliverer". High priests and kings were anointed with a particular oil. Jesus wasn't, nor was he eligible to be either a king or a high priest. We await a king from the proper lineage and of the proper personal characteristics.
3. Jesus' body WAS purely human, however His soul and message was that of God's own. Jesus actually hardly ever went around proclaiming He was God, rather always spoke of the Father, and when He was questioned He said Him and the Father were one, that's true if you understand unity on a spiritual level.
3a. You can try to make the argument that the body was human but the soul wasn't, but Judaism's conception of the messiah is that he is a full on human in body and soul.
4. Really lol? you mean He may not have fulfilled a few misconceptions?
4a. Are you saying that Jews don't understand their own texts? There are some very clear expectations and he didn't meet them.
5. Ouch, that's entirely not true and if it were, we wouldn't have anything to consider in this topic. Jesus would have never been acclaimed Messiah.
5a. What Jesus might have "fulfilled" were of 3 categories -- the first were prophecies that were so general that many people fulfilled them (where someone is born - lots of people are born in lots of places), the second are intentional (mis)appropriations of biblical text said to apply to him (wait, Isaiah said that and Jesus said it?! WOW!) including some mis-statements and misinterpretations (the Hebrew word for virgin is Betula...) and the third are textual citations which simply weren't ever biblical prophecies but which, it was decided by non-Jews, were "shadows of things to come" (Jews sacrificed a lamb, Jesus was called a "lamb" so the biblical sacrifices must have been a hint to Jesus!). Choplogic, all of them.
6. Deliverer not supporter.
6a. This is tougher because Jesus does make claims about not coming to end Jewish law and yet people still say that he delivered people from the yoke of the laws. They want to see him as supporter of the Jewish legal system and yet a rebel against it.
7. Not that the concept of the Trinity is not Christian doctrine, but can you show where Jesus uses that term? if Jesus did not use that term perhaps He meant something different....however, the so-called Trinity also lies in the understanding of unity. Unity binds things together as one unit and one purpose.
7a. What is foreign to Judaism is the idea that God has any "parts" which need to be united. Unfortunately, people like to point to the word "echad" and say that it means "a combination of parts, so God is divisible" but that isn't always so. Sometimes, one means "one unit" and sometimes, "one" means "indivisible" and even "unique." That's the "one" which applies to God.
Created: