Christians can't be Anti-Semitic

[McBell]

You tell me you the expert here

Best I can tell is you painted yourself into a corner and are now desperately trying to divert attention away from your holding the brush.

 

[roger1440]

Old Covenant and New Covenant?

Heb 8:13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

“For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.” (Hebrews 8:6) That is conjecture on Paul’s part or whoever wrote Hebrews. It is found nowhere in Jewish scripture. There is not a Jew on the planet that believes that. Is the whole bunch of them wrong about their own scripture?
The newness of the New Covenant is not the content that makes it new, it’s how it’s revealed that makes it new. The New Covenant is a direct revelation from God. The purpose of the Old Covenant is to lead the Jews to holiness. The New Covenant is that holiness. The author of the Gospel of Mathew understood this.

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”
14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church,… (Matthew 16:13-17)

The Church is founded on not what was revealed to Peter but how it was revealed to Peter. It was a direct revelation from God. Jesus represents the union between God and man, hence the virgin birth. An allegorical interpretation is within the boundaries of orthodox Judaism. It may be a little odd, but not heretical.

 

[Flankerl]

I know is hard for you to understand

Well at least i can count.

 

[roger1440]

That's not really how I view it. I think you're getting a bunch of things mixed up here. Just because Judaism isn't Christianity doesn't mean it isn't a continuation Covenant.

Explain "continuation Covenant". How are Christians continuing a covenant they were never part of in the first place?

 

[McBell]

Explain "continuation Covenant". How are Christians continuing a covenant they were never part of in the first place?

Christians aren't continuing the first covenant, Jews are.

 

[Desert Snake]

Explain "continuation Covenant". How are Christians continuing a covenant they were never part of in the first place?

Okay, may as well address this, at least in part.
-The Christian Bible includes the Torah and the Tanach, called in Judaism the 'Tanakh collectively.
- Jesus stated in so many words that's He was not here to get rid of the Old Testament, ie. the Covenant of His time.
- The OT speaks of the Covenant, we know various "rules" that are literally written down, for us to follow.
- Jesus modified SOME of these rules. but not all. Jeshua never said to abolish the previous Covenant, in fact He was a proponent of such! He said He was here to fulfill the Covenant, that does not mean abolish.
- The 'New Covenant' is merely a description of how Jesus changed the territory in which we practice our spirituality.

 

[roger1440]

- Jesus stated in so many words that's He was not here to get rid of the Old Testament, ie. the Covenant of His time.

He had stated this to the Jews, not Gentiles.

 

[Desert Snake]

He had stated this to the Jews, not Gentiles.

The 'Jews' who followed Jesus were called 'Xians'.

 

[Flankerl]

He said He was here to fulfill the Covenant, that does not mean abolish.

Still doesn't make any sense from a Jewish POV.

Did he "fulfill" the law that women shouldn't wear clothings designed for men?
Did he "fulfill" that the Levites should serve in the Temple?
Or that Kohen shouldn't marry a divorced woman?

How do you even "fulfill" laws for someone who isn't you? If i don't murder anyone can i not murder for someone else too?

 

[Desert Snake]

Still doesn't make any sense from a Jewish POV.

Did he "fulfill" the law that women shouldn't wear clothings designed for men?
Did he "fulfill" that the Levites should serve in the Temple?
Or that Kohen shouldn't marry a divorced woman?

How do you even "fulfill" laws for someone who isn't you? If i don't murder anyone can i not murder for someone else too?

Who said it should make sense from a jewish point of view.

 

[roger1440]

well...my mother reads the Old Testament. That's what makes her Jewish, in her opinion



It's like I said that Protestants are not Christians and only Catholics are. There is a continuity between Judaism and Christianity, without any transition.
and so in Protestantism.

Let me get this straight. Protestants are not Christians. Jews have it backward. Only Catholics are Christians. You were brought up Catholic. Lucky you. You were born into the right religion.

 

[Desert Snake]

How do you even "fulfill" laws for someone who isn't you?

It doesn't. Xianity means to follow Jesus, who fulfilled the Covenant, if you don't do that, you aren't following the fulfilled Covenant. Right? I never said that Judaism has a 'complete' Covenant.

 

[JM2C]

Best I can tell is you painted yourself into a corner and are now desperately trying to divert attention away from your holding the brush.

Nice words. Tell me from what FANTASY BOOK did you plagiarize this?

 

[JM2C]

“For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.” (Hebrews 8:6) That is conjecture on Paul’s part or whoever wrote Hebrews.

Who is conjecturing here? The Hebrews author or you?

 

[JM2C]

It is found nowhere in Jewish scripture. There is not a Jew on the planet that believes that. Is the whole bunch of them wrong about their own scripture?

You should have read the rest of Hebrews chapter 8 and you will see it yourself on where did the author got this quotes from.

 

[JM2C]

The newness of the New Covenant is not the content that makes it new, it’s how it’s revealed that makes it new. The New Covenant is a direct revelation from God. The purpose of the Old Covenant is to lead the Jews to holiness. The New Covenant is that holiness. The author of the Gospel of Mathew understood this.

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church,… (Matthew 16:13-17)

The Church is founded on not what was revealed to Peter but how it was revealed to Peter. It was a direct revelation from God. Jesus represents the union between God and man, hence the virgin birth. An allegorical interpretation is within the boundaries of orthodox Judaism. It may be a little odd, but not heretical.

And your point is

 

[JM2C]

Christians aren't continuing the first covenant, Jews are.

Please do not comment on things you don’t have any understanding at all. This is not a FANTASY BOOK. This is what you call REALITY.

 

[Simplelogic]

The eternal priesthood:

Exodus 29:9And you shall gird them with sashes, Aaron and his sons, and put the hats on them. The priesthood shall be theirs for a perpetual statute (forever in the Hebrew). So you shall consecrate Aaron and his sons.

Exodus 40:15 You shall anoint them, as you anointed their father, that they may minister to Me as priests; for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting (forever in Hebrew) priesthood throughout their generations.”

Numbers 25:13 and it shall be to him and his descendants after him a covenant of an everlasting (forever in Hebrew) priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for the children of Israel.’”

 

[sojourner]

well...false Christians can be Anti-Semitic and History proves it.
But you can't tell that the authentic Christian, the one who imitates Jesus Christ is anti-Semitic. Saints are sometimes martyrs, so victims and not perpetrators.

Jesus is our model. and Jesus, the first Christian, was a Jew. so he couldn't be against Himself.


Let's not forget that Hitler and most Nazis worshiped Germanic gods. and they killed lots of Christian priests

First, Christians are not "the same as Jews." Even in the bible we have the example of the Council at Jerusalem stating that Gentile converts to Xy need not become Jewish, establishing Xy as a separate movement from Judaism.

Second, "false/true Xian" is a moot point. All who profess Jesus follow Xian teachings to the best of their understanding. You'd have to have some completely objective, yet authoritative body determine what's "true" and what's "false." No such body exists. I've known many Xtians who are anti-semitic, sadly.

 

[sojourner]

Not at all. I presented an ordained Catholic priest who is easily representative of many Christians.

Your instance that only the ideal you present can be held as authoritive is a fallacy; like most groups, Christianity is far too broad and diverse to be characterised by a single example, and there are both good and bad within the group. The Christian who firebombed his Jewish neighbor's house during kristallnacht is just as much part of the fabric of Christendom as is Father Cortese.

We all would like to ignore the bad within the groups we identify with and pretend it doesn't exist or claim that they can't be "real" members of the group, but to do so is detrimental to the group and often dangerous to society at large.

Which is precisely Matthew's point in his gospel. In fact, Xy lies more truly in the fringe than in the establishment. And it's usually the establishment that serves to distort in order to maintain the status quo of power.