For the Christians (Abrahamic only)

[Shermana]

eating a piece of fruit defiled Adam and Eve.

Perhaps the principle here is not 'what' is eaten, but the fact that disobedience has occurred?

Genesis says nothing about the fruit defiling them. The only thing it mentions is that they disobeyed God's command.

Let me ask you yet again, maybe I'll get an answer, what do you think "defilement" refers to specifically?

 

[Shermana]

Are you saying that had Jews actually understood Jesus' teachings, there'd be no Christians today? Just Jews?

I actually agree with this conclusion to an extent.

 

[roger1440]

Can you show me in scripture where in the Torah it says that all Jews are to sacrifice themselves, as Jesus did? Or is that not what you meant?

The sacrifice isn’t meant in a literal sense. I didn’t mean Jews are to have their heart stop in there chest and there blood cease to flow their veins. I meant the will God should be in there heart and their own will should cease. To put it another way, the Jesus sacrifice is a metaphor.

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5)

 

[roger1440]

So was Jesus the Messiah? Or just a very righteous Jew looking to preach to his surroundings how he believed Jews should be acting?

I knew you were going to ask that. If I understand the Gospel of Mathew correctly, the Israel that never went astray is Jesus. This Jesus is a metaphor. He is a character in a story. Threw out Israel’s history in the Jewish Bible Israel had gone astray. Israel didn’t trust God from time to time, Israel worshiped foreign gods. The list goes on and on. This Jesus is the Israel that never did those wrong things. He never veered to the left or right. He stayed right on course. He trusted God. If Jesus is Israel and Jesus is the Messiah then logic would dictate Israel is its own Messiah.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It has been one of those conversations that I'll remember. This is standing on a cliff's edge with lightning all around, clouds and wind, dry eyed, tired and deafened by the thunder when a glowing UFO takes off into space from underground. You watch it zoom away. Then after all that you silently trudge home on foot to put some oatmeal on the stove, so you can go to bed and get up to do the chores in the morning. That was this conversation.

 

[dantech]

The sacrifice isn’t meant in a literal sense. I didn’t mean Jews are to have their heart stop in there chest and there blood cease to flow their veins. I meant the will God should be in there heart and their own will should cease. To put it another way, the Jesus sacrifice is a metaphor.

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5)

But then what does Jesus have to do with this. How did Jesus dying explain or change the meaning of that verse in any way? I could have never heard of Jesus, and that verse would mean the same thing to me than it would to you.

 

[dantech]

I knew you were going to ask that. If I understand the Gospel of Mathew correctly, the Israel that never went astray is Jesus. This Jesus is a metaphor. He is a character in a story. Threw out Israel’s history in the Jewish Bible Israel had gone astray. Israel didn’t trust God from time to time, Israel worshiped foreign gods. The list goes on and on. This Jesus is the Israel that never did those wrong things. He never veered to the left or right. He stayed right on course. He trusted God. If Jesus is Israel and Jesus is the Messiah then logic would dictate Israel is its own Messiah.

I'm sorry I don't understand. Is he or is he not the messiah the Jewish people are waiting for? The one that all those prophecies were about.

 

[dantech]

It has been one of those conversations that I'll remember. This is standing on a cliff's edge with lightning all around, clouds and wind, dry eyed, tired and deafened by the thunder when a glowing UFO takes off into space from underground. You watch it zoom away. Then after all that you silently trudge home on foot to put some oatmeal on the stove, so you can go to bed and get up to do the chores in the morning. That was this conversation.

Are you saying this conversation's results have shocked you to your very core? Made you know things you didn't before? But you will go on as if nothing has happened through life?

 

[roger1440]

But then what does Jesus have to do with this. How did Jesus dying explain or change the meaning of that verse in any way? I could have never heard of Jesus, and that verse would mean the same thing to me than it would to you.

What I’m saying is the Jesus of the Gospels is not a real flesh and blood person. He is a symbol, metaphor. The story is allegory. There may have been a Jesus that was executed but the gospels go far beyond the man. The gospels took on a life of their own. This type of writing went on for the next two or three hundred years. There are many other gospels. Still more to be discovered.

 

[Shermana]

Jesus says a lot of esoteric, obscure stuff, even in things which may have been close to the original (whatever it may be) like in the Gospel of Thomas, for it to be merely just a metaphor for the righteous Israel in general. IMO.

 

[roger1440]

Jesus says a lot of esoteric, obscure stuff, even in things which may have been close to the original (whatever it may be) like in the Gospel of Thomas, for it to be merely just a metaphor for the righteous Israel in general. IMO.

The Gospel of Thomas was written for the Gentiles. All the Jewishness was taken out.

 

[Shermana]

The Gospel of Thomas was written for the Gentiles. All the Jewishness was taken out.

That's highly debatable, though I do believe there are some anti-judaizing interpolations added in our known copies.

In some cases, the "Jewishness" simply isn't an issue since it was within a Jewish culture and taken for granted.

Besides, we don't know whether the current Gospel of Thomas reflects an Egyptian gentilized tradition of the original or not, but I do believe much what's in it does accurately reflect what was originally there for the most part.

And further besides, there's plenty of esoteric stuff in Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.

 

[roger1440]

Jesus says a lot of esoteric, obscure stuff, even in things which may have been close to the original (whatever it may be) like in the Gospel of Thomas, for it to be merely just a metaphor for the righteous Israel in general. IMO.

There are still things attributed to Confucius and the guy has been dead for 2,500 years. Jesus is or was no different. The Jesus character is a great theme for a story 2000 years ago. Lots of people jumped on the band wagon and created their own version of the story. Among all the versions is a sacrificial death. How to interpret his sacrificial death is the million dollar question. I don’t think salvation comes from believing in a 2000 year old dead Jew.

 

[Shermana]

I don’t think salvation comes from believing in a 2000 year old dead Jew.

First off, what does "salvation" mean, and what does "believe in" mean? Jesus surely taught a lot of behavioral requirements to avoid burning in the fire, "For an age" (Age-long, not eternal).

It certainly didn't mean "Believe in that he died for your sins alone" to the Gospel writers.

 

[captainbryce]

Captain,

You are correct about Shermana. He also cut off talking to me, as did the other Ebionites, etc. like Zardoz and Messianic Jew.

Are you a convinced Trinitarian? If not, then perhaps we could talk at the "Messianic Judaism Discussions" thread I started in "Same Faith Debates" (NOT the DIR, because debates are not allowed there).

Perhaps.

The Orthodox Jew who did the OP missed the obvious about Jesus, as do Shermana and the others: Jesus indeed affirmed the books of Moses (which I will henceforth refer to as "Torah", not "Oral Torah"), while calling Oral Torah mere "traditions of men". He also prioritized Torah, saying that all the commandments hung on the two most important:

1. Love God with all your heart, etc.
2. Love your neighbor as yourself.

Correct!

The Jews of today are like a Doctor X who is very careful to do all the things a doctor must do: He sets up an office, hangs out his sign and advertizes in the Yellow Pages. Doctor Y was talking with Doctor X one day, and "X" noted that "Y" was not a good doctor, because he had not advertized in the Yellow Pages. Doctor "Y" responded, "Yes, but at least I've been to medical school, which you haven't". Doctor X was then all the more convinced that "Y" was not a proper doctor; because not only didn't he advertize in the Yellow Pages, but he had insulted Doctor X, whom "X" considered the model of a true doctor.

Jesus wants us to love God with all our hearts (which the rich young man of the gospels did not do, because he loved his riches), and then to love one another. Without doing that, our righteousness is, as Paul calls it, "tinkling brass".

I would that Shermana, Messianic Jew and Zardoz would show at least enough love for the brethren, to continue to answer our questions; but they do not. Like the Pharisees, they say, "And who is my brother, or my neighbor?", and so they dismiss us.

Shalom shalom.

Those are some interesting analogies. But I really don't care whether or not Shermana or any others continue to answer me or not because their lack of answers are an answer in themselves. And that answer ultimately justifies MY position.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Are you saying this conversation's results have shocked you to your very core? Made you know things you didn't before? But you will go on as if nothing has happened through life?

No, not shocked. I'm tired and haven't processed everything I'm thinking about yet. The man sees the UFO, but it doesn't see him and goes on its way. I'm not new to thinking about the Christian situation which continues no matter how smart I think I am. Lets say that the UFO is a bright but not well understood future, and the present is that slow trudge home to make the oatmeal (which was in no way referring to a member of our forum. I just think oatmeal is a very boring tasteless food.)

 

[roger1440]

First off, what does "salvation" mean, and what does "believe in" mean? Jesus surely taught a lot of behavioral requirements to avoid burning in the fire, "For an age" (Age-long, not eternal).

It certainly didn't mean "Believe in that he died for your sins alone" to the Gospel writers.

If I understand the orthodox and fundamentalists correctly, to save our souls from eternal damnation requires the belief in the life, death and resurrection of the literal Jesus Christ of 2000 some odd years ago. The belief in this Jesus doesn’t simply mean believing that these events happened in history. Even Satan believes in Jesus according to the Canonical Gospels. By belief I mean turning one life over to Jesus as ones lord and savior. Kind of reminds me of a book I had read many years ago, “The imitation of Christ”. The Imitation of Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Pegg]

Genesis says nothing about the fruit defiling them. The only thing it mentions is that they disobeyed God's command.

exactly. disobedience is what defiles a person....not what they eat.

Let me ask you yet again, maybe I'll get an answer, what do you think "defilement" refers to specifically?

defilement is the opposite of sanctification & holiness

 

[Shermana]

If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him.

What do you suppose it means to defile the temple of God?

Do not defile yourselves by any of these creatures.

Indeed, disobedience to avoid abominations surely defiles a person, as does their unholy behavior. However, this does not mean "Defile yourself in my eyes because you have disobeyed my commandments". It says "Defile yourselves BY/THROUGH these creatures. The creatures are the vehicle of defilement. The disobedience is not what defiles one, it just happens that disobeying what is commanded causes one to be defiled because of what they do, not the disobedience itself. The commandment is to avoid things that defile someone.

Why is a Priest forbidden from married a promiscuous and "Defiled" woman? If she repents, is she still not defiled? Hmmm. Perhaps there is a "Staining" aspect to this "Defilement".

The land itself can be "defiled" because of the sins of people such as a man returning to his wife after she has divorced and remarried and divorced again. But why?



There's a big relationship between "Abomination" and "Defilement".

What do you think "defiled" means? I ask yet again. Telling me it's the "opposite of sanctification and holiness" is the right step. But why do you suppose such things make one things unholy? Just because God said so? Or perhaps there's a reason for it.

Why do you suppose one was "defiled" for touching an object a menstruating woman had touched?

 

[Pegg]

The creatures are the vehicle of defilement. The disobedience is not what defiles one, it just happens that disobeying what is commanded causes one to be defiled because of what they do, not the disobedience itself. The commandment is to avoid things that defile someone.

were those creatures not creatures that God had created and did he not call them all 'good'?

Did those creatures exist inside Eden?

Why is a Priest forbidden from married a promiscuous and "Defiled" woman? If she repents, is she still not defiled? Hmmm. Perhaps there is a "Staining" aspect to this "Defilement".

“Though the sins of you people should prove to be as scarlet, they will be made white just like snow; though they should be red like crimson cloth, they will become even like wool.” Isaiah 1:18

Sin does not stain, it cannot stay upon a person who repents and stops practising the sin.

The land itself can be "defiled" because of the sins of people such as a man returning to his wife after she has divorced and remarried and divorced again. But why?

probably because it would be viewed as an act of adultery. Gods original standard was for one man to marry one woman for all his life. By divorcing and remarrying then divorcing and remarrying again, he would be defiling Gods original righteous and perfect arrangement.

Did you notice that nothing was said that would prohibit him from remarrying his divorced wife if she had not remarried after the legal severance of their marriage tie ? This shows that is it is the act of remarrying and having multiple sexual partners that God does not accept....it makes both men and women defiled in his eyes because it is out of harmony with his original righteous purpose for marriage.

There's a big relationship between "Abomination" and "Defilement".

What do you think "defiled" means? I ask yet again. Telling me it's the "opposite of sanctification and holiness" is the right step. But why do you suppose such things make one things unholy? Just because God said so? Or perhaps there's a reason for it.

the reason is because something which is 'holy' complies to Gods righteous standards and his holy Will. As soon as it is used for a purpose other then what God Wills, it is no longer 'sanctified' for use according to Gods righteousness.

When Adam and Eve disobeyed, they were no longer in harmony with the righteous standards of Gods perfect will....hence they became defiled.

Everything God created, he created with his own holy purpose in mind. When we take something he created and change its purpose, it becomes defiles.

Why do you suppose one was "defiled" for touching an object a menstruating woman had touched?

menstruation is the source of life.... it is where God creates new life, but that life is defiled by being born into sin. So the laws regarding menstruation and seminal flows were to remind us that life is defiled. It is not as God intended it to be. His holy purpose was for all of mankind to be members of his household as his perfect children... but sin prevents that holy purpose and everytime a new child is born, it is born outside of the holy purpose and will of God. It is born sick, dying and in need of a savior.