[Abrahamics ONLY] Who is a Jew?

[metis]

Please tell us what Torah prescribes for sacrificing a person.

Go ahead and put the Tanakh points here where you feel we have alternatives on sin forgiveness/atonement.

Torah does not prescribe anything for sacrificing a person.

Secondly, I provided a link for you to check out, but it's obvious you have no intent to do so.

 

[Tumah]

Torah does not prescribe anything for sacrificing a person.

Sure it does. It proscribes the death penalty.

Ex. 21:12, 14
Lev. 24:17
Num. 35:16-18

 

[metis]

Sure it does. It proscribes the death penalty.

Ex. 21:12, 14
Lev. 24:17
Num. 35:16-18

I assume this is tongue-in-cheek since a sacrifice is not the same as an execution because the motivations and the procedures involved are quite different. I would never refer to someone being executed as being a "sacrifice", at least within our Jewish context.

 

[Tumah]

I assume this is tongue-in-cheek since a sacrifice is not the same as an execution because the motivations and the procedures involved are quite different. I would never refer to someone being executed as being a "sacrifice", at least within our Jewish context.

You're looking at it sdrawkcab.
Someone who has been sacrificed has been murdered. His murderer receives the death penalty for pre-meditated murder.

 

[metis]

You're looking at it sdrawkcab.
Someone who has been sacrificed has been murdered. His murderer receives the death penalty for pre-meditated murder.

Grapes and bowling balls are both round but they still are not the same.

 

[Tumah]

Grapes and bowling balls are both round but they still are not the same.

However, since the Torah makes no allowance for human sacrifice, calling it such doesn't take it out of the category of murder.

 

[Desert Snake]

However, since the Torah makes no allowance for human sacrifice, calling it such doesn't take it out of the category of murder.

It isn't a ''human sacrifice''. Jesu is divine, ie not an average Rabbi/fisherman, in the text. If you are not referring to the text/Scripture,/Bible, then just make that clear. Tell us what fictional story/narrative whatever your using.

 

[Tumah]

It isn't a ''human sacrifice''. Jesu is divine, ie not an average Rabbi/fisherman, in the text. If you are not referring to the text/Scripture,/Bible, then just make that clear. Tell us what fictional story/narrative whatever your using.

If it came out of a human, its a human.
Any other attributes you want to give it are your problem.

To make it clear, we are discussing the fictional narrative presented in the canonical gospels of Jesus' death.

 

[Desert Snake]

If it came out of a human, its a human.

You can take that up in the Christian DIR=s if you want. It isn't relevant to the narrative being discussed.

Any other attributes you want to give it are your problem.

This doesn't make any sense. The narrative is what has to be argued, not 'whatever attributes I want to give it''. Your statement literally has no logical meaning.

To make it clear, we are discussing the fictional narrative presented in the canonical gospels of Jesus' death.

Actually, you don't seem to be. You are discussing a fictional narrative that you made up. That's clear...you have basically stated that side by side of this statement.


So, it's your clarification that's needed here, not mine.

/I'm not the one presenting a fictional narrative.
//I'm actually not presenting any narrative here, aside from reference to the Biblical narrative.

 

[Tumah]

You can take that up in the Christian DIR=s if you want. It isn't relevant to the narrative being discussed.

This doesn't make any sense. The narrative is what has to be argued, not 'whatever attributes I want to give it''. Your statement literally has no logical meaning.


Actually, you don't seem to be. You are discussing a fictional narrative that you made up. That's clear...you have basically stated that side by side of this statement.


So, it's your clarification that's needed here, not mine.

/I'm not the one presenting a fictional narrative.
//I'm actually not presenting any narrative here, aside from reference to the Biblical narrative.

No my statement is perfectly sound.

Jesus resurrected on the third day according to the narrative.
To be resurrected implies a previous death.
G-d cannot die (Deut. 32:40 et al.)
Jesus (or at least the part that died) was human.

Human sacrifice is murder according to the Bible.

 

[metis]

However, since the Torah makes no allowance for human sacrifice, calling it such doesn't take it out of the category of murder.

Who was talking about "murder"? The issue is "human sacrifices", and it's not allowed in Judaism-- well, at least in my branch.

 

[metis]

It isn't a ''human sacrifice''. Jesu is divine, ie not an average Rabbi/fisherman, in the text.

Can you point out for us where the Tanakh states that God can and must be sacrificed to God?

 

[Desert Snake]

Can you point out for us where the Tanakh states that God can and must be sacrificed to God?

Why, relevance.

 

[Desert Snake]

Can you point out for us where the Tanakh states that God can and must be sacrificed to God?

The Sacrifice of Jesu is not the same type of sacrifice, as the temple sacrifices. In literal sense, it is actually a conditional sacrifice, for Jesu adherents, imo.

I don't know what you taught about this, when you were teaching Christian classes.

 

[metis]

Why, relevance.

What is that supposed to mean? I ask for verses that may support your position, and yet "Why, relevance" is your response that explains nothing?

 

[metis]

The Sacrifice of Jesu is not the same type of sacrifice, as the temple sacrifices. In literal sense, it is actually a conditional sacrifice, for Jesu adherents, imo.

I don't know what you taught about this, when you were teaching Christian classes.

When I taught as such, I was obligated to put forth "the company line", which I did. In my own mind, however, I took that issue as being symbolic because taking it at the literal level simply didn't make sense to me. Worse-- it basically condemned anyone who didn't believe in Jesus as their "personal savior" for whatever reason, which also made no sense to me.

 

[BilliardsBall]

In other words:
I have no answer for you. Try to pretend I am giving you logical responses.


In other words:
I can't respond to your question. Let me try deflecting the question.


In other words:
Since my understanding of Abraham's response doesn't fit with the context, let's go ahead and reinterpret the context as well.

Please note: A messiah is a savior or liberator of a group of people (courtesy Wikipedia: Messiah). A messiah is not "one who carries wood across his shoulders". That would correctly be defined as a "wood carrier". Nor is a messiah defined as "one who is sacrificed by a father". That would correctly be defined as a "victim". While Isaac did carry wood across his shoulders and seemed to almost be the victim of human sacrifice, he neither saved nor liberated a group of people.
Isaac was not a type of messiah.

Oy vey.

1. I didn't "respond to your question" as you didn't ask one! You made a point that Messianics wait long periods of time for certain prophecies to come to pass, and I retorted, correctly, that you would thus be waiting even longer for the Messiah to come at all!

2. Issac is certainly a type of Mashiach:

He was the unique son of a father who sacrificed him. Torah is plain--he carried wood on his shoulders. Mashiach carried his cross-piece on His shoulders. His Father made a sacrifice.

 

[BilliardsBall]

And all of them were of animals, not people. Can you show me the sacrifices that are for atonement that have anything to do with non-Jews? Did Abraham sacrifice anything on behalf of other people? Did Job impale his animals on a cross?

I think you know that Abraham sacrificed (offered) a tithe of his spoils to Melchizedek, high priest of Salem, who wasn't a Jew.

I think you know that Job made sacrifices on behalf of other people, his own children.

I think you know that crucifixion hadn't yet been invented in the days of Job and Abraham.

I think you might know that the Qu'ran has Pharaoh threaten Moses and Aaron with crucifixion, showing how mixed up on details Muhammed was, and I think you should step back, breathe deeply. I'm not a Muslim, I'm a person who trusts Y'shua because I first trusted Tanakh as perfect. If you are trying to help me/save me, you'd be a bit less abrasive to me, particularly as a Jewish brother.

 

[BilliardsBall]

As far as today is concerned, as I told you how to look it up before, Torah prescribes more than just animal/grain sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins, and I even linked you to where you can look that up in the Tanakh itself. So, why did you ignore that link? or did you forget?

I looked for your link but could not find it. I'm happy to visit your link if you'd be so kind as to post it again. Before you do, though, please understand I'm aware of the variety of sacrifices, offerings and etc. that are provided by God in His Word.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I think the crux of some of our argument is answered by this:

Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel:

“Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
The remnant will be saved.
28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness,
Because the Lord will make a short work upon the earth."

29 And as Isaiah said before:

“Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed,
We would have become like Sodom,
And we would have been made like Gomorrah."

Present Condition of Israel
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”