How in the world can ANYBODY think the Jews and Christians have the same god, that Jesus is messiah?

[fschmidt]

"Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." - De 6:4

Seriously that's how JWs translate this part of the Shema?

Hilarious.

Why is that hilarious?

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהֹוָה | אֶחָד

Using "Jehovah" for God's name, I get:

Hear Israel, Jehovah our God, Jehovah is one.

That's not so far.

 

[Flankerl]

And you're trying to say that by God manifesting in human form

The Greek Pantheon called, they want their Gimmick back.

Why is that hilarious?

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהֹוָה | אֶחָד

Using "Jehovah" for God's name, I get:

Hear Israel, Jehovah our God, Jehovah is one.

That's not so far.

Ah so you know how the Tetragrammaton is pronounced. Yeah we already got a couple of those on RF.

 

[Thana]

The Greek Pantheon called, they want their Gimmick back.

Most people would meet your condescension with some of their own, But it's really quite unnecessary.
I prefer debate without it, So if you can manage that please feel free to reply.

 

[dantech]

And you're trying to say that by God manifesting in human form, that would be man seeing His face?
Yeah.. no.

So God manifesting in human form would not mean that man could see his face? Was he a human with no face? Did he temporarily change his law to make it so that his face would no longer kill anyone who sees it? This is such a weird debate for me. It makes no sense to me that someone would want their God to be someone who failed at his time and died. If my God wasn't even able to convince a few people in his lifetime, and ended up being killed for it... I doubt i'd worship him. And if we assume that he wanted to die to purify everyone of their sins... Why would he do that in the first place considering he is the one condemning you for your sins. Couldn't he just forgive you without having to humiliate himself and die for it?

 

[Desert Snake]

It does.n


Sorry but it doesn't say that anywhere in your Bible, and only a small few references in the gospels to him being son or offspring of God, which still doesn't make him God any more than being a son makes him his mother or father....

I have various extra biblical teachings. I'm not concerned about what your reading in Bibles.

 

[Kolibri]

"Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." - De 6:4 NWT

If you must have the full quote.

So God manifesting in human form would not mean that man could see his face? Was he a human with no face? Did he temporarily change his law to make it so that his face would no longer kill anyone who sees it?

This (referring to these questions) make perfect sense. John's gospel even addresses Ex 33:20 at both John 1:18 and 6:46.

"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father's side (or "in the bosom position with the Father." This refers to a position of special favor.) is the one who has explained him." - John 1:18 (Notice too the similarity to Pr 8:22,30).

"Not that any man has seen the Father, except the one who is from God; this one has seen the Father." - John 6:46 (something Jesus literally could have done when he was living as an angel instead of a man).

So, before Jesus came to earth, as documented here, he was not Almighty God.

 

[Thana]

So God manifesting in human form would not mean that man could see his face? Was he a human with no face? Did he temporarily change his law to make it so that his face would no longer kill anyone who sees it? This is such a weird debate for me. It makes no sense to me that someone would want their God to be someone who failed at his time and died. If my God wasn't even able to convince a few people in his lifetime, and ended up being killed for it... I doubt i'd worship him. And if we assume that he wanted to die to purify everyone of their sins... Why would he do that in the first place considering he is the one condemning you for your sins. Couldn't he just forgive you without having to humiliate himself and die for it?

Well it makes no sense to me that God wouldn't give His people their Messiah for something like 2000 years or more. And even if He did now, The Jews are already back in their homeland and one would never be able to determine if He descended from David or not.

As to Him manifesting in human form, I don't really understand how you don't get it. My soul cannot be reflected by my flesh, If you see my face have you then seen my soul? And God is a spiritual being so if He manifested in flesh you'd see flesh, Not spirit so therefore you're not looking upon His true spiritual (and most likely metaphorical) face.

And since Judaism is something like 0.2% of the entire population and Christianity is something like 32%, I'd say Jesus did pretty well in the end.

 

[dantech]

Well it makes no sense to me that God wouldn't give His people their Messiah for something like 2000 years or more. And even if He did now, The Jews are already back in their homeland and one would never be able to determine if He descended from David or not.

that's all nice and well... it's nice to think you got a messiah, but is there world peace(the most coveted of all benefits that he messiah will bring)? It's easy to say you got your messiah, but you didn't. Also, there is only around one third of Jews who live in Israel... As for the 2000 year remark, we simply haven't deserved him.

As to Him manifesting in human form, I don't really understand how you don't get it.

that's funny, considering a big chunk of Christians don't understand it either...

My soul cannot be reflected by my flesh, If you see my face have you then seen my soul? And God is a spiritual being so if He manifested in flesh you'd see flesh, Not spirit so therefore you're not looking upon His true spiritual (and most likely metaphorical) face. And since Judaism is something like 0.2% of the entire population and Christianity is something like 32%, I'd say Jesus did pretty well in the end.

actually, I think you'd have a hard time showing that Jesus had any intention of starting Christianity. His followers did have success in selling the religion they started. And the messiah's job isn't to convert everyone to one religion. Judaism doesn't believe that the whole world will become Jewish once the messiah arrives. It does believe we will have a clear understanding of who God is - something that isn't even true within the sects of Christianity...

 

[jeager106]

Flankerl said:
↑"Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." - De 6:4
Seriously that's how JWs translate this part of the Shema?

Hilarious."
Hilarity aside what IS the correct translation please?
No challenge to you pesonally, I'm inquiring, need to know.
It's important to me, my spiritual self, to understand correct meaning.
I've read, and like many biblical matters, that the oridinal translation of the KJV is a terrible translation done at the request of the King of England.
The King provided minimum funds, and scholars to translate a new Bible for the Church of England. Does anyone doubt that a "request" of the King wasn't a "do it with what is provided, do it fast, do it for England, or else"?
Does one not see that politics and power entered the minds of the translators?
The Council of Nicea was a command from pagan Constitine. The Council was to put togther all the alleged surviving texts into canon.
There is no documentation that Constintine was ever baptised as a Jew or Christian.
I'm not saying the KJV was a poor translation, merely echoing what I've read.
Do we not think that modern schollars with todays techno goodies would not be able to translate better today than about 1700 years ago?
An example of translation problems:
There are problems of language with the KJV. In fact, I have a book called "The King James Bible Word Book." This book is over 400 pages in length detailing words used in the KJV that have changed their meaning since that translation was first published in 1610. For example, in Psalm 119:47, the Psalmist says (KJV) "I prevented the dawning of the morning." The ordinary modern reader is a bit mystified by his meaning. That's because the word "prevent" has changed its meaning in English. In the days of the translators of the KJV, "prevent" meant "to go before, anticipate, or precede." The RSV correctly translates this verse "I rise before dawn."
I'm not knocking anyones perfered Bible, I doubt any modern translations have everything nailed down with the hammer of perfection, ergo why I aks questions, dig for answers.........and remain so confused.
What do people here think of the New World Translation?
Does anyone really not see that a governing power might not twisted Scripture to make it fit the churches doctrine?
For centuries after Christ died the comman man could not read or write.
How easy and criminal it might have been for the ruling "church" to corrupt what was written to take advantage of the illiterate? There is power in church membership, the masses follow church doctrine even into wars as we all know.
The larger the membership the greater the "donations" the greater the political influence, the more distorted the truth becomes until some meanings are lost.
Today most can read/write/inquire; like we here do. We have information, both accurate and questionable at our fingertips due to techno tools.
It's more difficult to mislead people that have an inquiring mind.
I hope.

 

[Desert Snake]

^ Constantine is a Xian hero.

 

[Lyndon]

Flankerl said:
↑"Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." - De 6:4
Seriously that's how JWs translate this part of the Shema?

Hilarious."
Hilarity aside what IS the correct translation please?
No challenge to you pesonally, I'm inquiring, need to know.
It's important to me, my spiritual self, to understand correct meaning.
I've read, and like many biblical matters, that the oridinal translation of the KJV is a terrible translation done at the request of the King of England.
The King provided minimum funds, and scholars to translate a new Bible for the Church of England. Does anyone doubt that a "request" of the King wasn't a "do it with what is provided, do it fast, do it for England, or else"?
Does one not see that politics and power entered the minds of the translators?
The Council of Nicea was a command from pagan Constitine. The Council was to put togther all the alleged surviving texts into canon.
There is no documentation that Constintine was ever baptised as a Jew or Christian.
I'm not saying the KJV was a poor translation, merely echoing what I've read.
Do we not think that modern schollars with todays techno goodies would not be able to translate better today than about 1700 years ago?
An example of translation problems:
There are problems of language with the KJV. In fact, I have a book called "The King James Bible Word Book." This book is over 400 pages in length detailing words used in the KJV that have changed their meaning since that translation was first published in 1610. For example, in Psalm 119:47, the Psalmist says (KJV) "I prevented the dawning of the morning." The ordinary modern reader is a bit mystified by his meaning. That's because the word "prevent" has changed its meaning in English. In the days of the translators of the KJV, "prevent" meant "to go before, anticipate, or precede." The RSV correctly translates this verse "I rise before dawn."
I'm not knocking anyones perfered Bible, I doubt any modern translations have everything nailed down with the hammer of perfection, ergo why I aks questions, dig for answers.........and remain so confused.
What do people here think of the New World Translation?
Does anyone really not see that a governing power might not twisted Scripture to make it fit the churches doctrine?
For centuries after Christ died the comman man could not read or write.
How easy and criminal it might have been for the ruling "church" to corrupt what was written to take advantage of the illiterate? There is power in church membership, the masses follow church doctrine even into wars as we all know.
The larger the membership the greater the "donations" the greater the political influence, the more distorted the truth becomes until some meanings are lost.
Today most can read/write/inquire; like we here do. We have information, both accurate and questionable at our fingertips due to techno tools.
It's more difficult to mislead people that have an inquiring mind.
I hope.

I strongly disagree, I think the KJV is clearly the best translation, its just hard to understand all the old english words and their meaning. I have a Bible with 4 translations side by side KJV, NIV, Living Bible, and RSV. In the prophecies I'm studying in Daniel, prophecies that make perfect sense in the KJV, have totally different meanings in the NIV, the NIV is translated by "liberals" that don't take the Hebrew words or the prophecies literally and think they have to "Interpret" the meaning to make it better, wrong, they only make it worse.

 

[gsa]

How can you be two contradictory things, each fully?

Or how can three co-eternal separate beings be one? I don't know, but these are the people who gave us transubstantiation, veneration of saints, substitutionary atonement, original sin, a virgin birth and other incomprehensible mysteries.

I mean I think Abrahamic orthodoxy is pretty silly all around, but the Christian version is really out there.

 

[jeager106]

^ Constantine is a Xian hero.

That's an emotional statement and sounds really poetic but lacks anything supportive save your personal feelings. Feelings, however are not facts.

For instance, how could a person leading an army in fighting a Roman civil war be a Xian hero when he was a pagan worshiping many Roman gods?
How can he be called a Christian? The early followers of Jesus called themsleves
Followers of Christ.
Constitine wanted to be Emporer of Rome, was perfectly willing to take that title by force.
Many Christians are taught that Consistine saw the sign of Christ in the clouds, the cross, and had his soldier paint the cross on battle shields.
This isn't true. What he claims he was was the ☧, or Chi Rho, the symbolic combining of the letters of Christs name, the "p" over an "x".
I can understand Christians thinking Constitine was a hero but I wonder what his motivations were.
His mother was a follower of Christ, perhaps that had great influence on the man?
Some say he was baptised just prior to his death, other historians argue he was never baptised. Which may nave nothing to do with anything.

 

[gsa]

And since Judaism is something like 0.2% of the entire population and Christianity is something like 32%, I'd say Jesus did pretty well in the end.

Judaism doesn't seek converts and Christianity has no uniform standards and is infinitely more diverse, with ongoing schism and archaic ancient ones. Islam is almost as large and is more standardized.

Also, is this a popularity contest or truth that's at issue here? And what dantech said.

 

[Etritonakin]

From a general "Christian" perspective, it is believed that the Jews don't realize that Christ is the Messiah -but was not to fulfill all at that time. His human life was to prepare/qualify him for his yet-future role.

However, many "Christians" do not actually understand that role.

So, Christ is both the stone the builders rejected.....

Psalm 118 22The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief corner stone.23This is the LORD'S doing......

And the one who will tell many that believe they prophesied in his name that he never knew them.....

Matthew 7:21. Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'

23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

Many "Christians" do not understand the gospel of the kingdom -or understand that they need to be keeping the law.

I honestly don't know what Judaism teaches -or how literally it takes the Old Testament prophecies, but they describe the literal kingdom of God on earth -and how it comes to pass. They are the foundation of the gospel of the kingdom.
The New Testament describes it in more detail.

However, many "Chritians" do not truly understand that the meek shall inherit the earth -but preach a gospel about going to heaven.

More later

 

[Avi1001]

....I mean I think Abrahamic orthodoxy is pretty silly all around, but the Christian version is really out there.

Hehe...you're going to get into trouble with both sides....I know.......keep fighting the good fight !!!

 

[1137]

"Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." - De 6:4 NWT

If you must have the full quote.



This (referring to these questions) make perfect sense. John's gospel even addresses Ex 33:20 at both John 1:18 and 6:46.

"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father's side (or "in the bosom position with the Father." This refers to a position of special favor.) is the one who has explained him." - John 1:18 (Notice too the similarity to Pr 8:22,30).

"Not that any man has seen the Father, except the one who is from God; this one has seen the Father." - John 6:46 (something Jesus literally could have done when he was living as an angel instead of a man).

So, before Jesus came to earth, as documented here, he was not Almighty God.

So the Christian writers helped pervert Jewish ideas? Who knew? That's only, like, the entire point of the last 5 pages.

 

[Thana]

that's all nice and well... it's nice to think you got a messiah, but is there world peace(the most coveted of all benefits that he messiah will bring)? It's easy to say you got your messiah, but you didn't. Also, there is only around one third of Jews who live in Israel... As for the 2000 year remark, we simply haven't deserved him.

Jesus never claimed to bring world peace, That's a silly idea. The world is corrupt and always will be. He came to bring salvation, To graft in the Gentiles and to show us a way to obtain God's grace without Judaism.

actually, I think you'd have a hard time showing that Jesus had any intention of starting Christianity. His followers did have success in selling the religion they started. And the messiah's job isn't to convert everyone to one religion. Judaism doesn't believe that the whole world will become Jewish once the messiah arrives.

Neither does Christianity, I have no expectation that everyone will become Christian. That's nonsensical to bring up as no one has even implied it, Besides you.

It does believe we will have a clear understanding of who God is - something that isn't even true within the sects of Christianity...

Judaism doesn't have it either, You have sects and denominations within your religion aswell.

that's funny, considering a big chunk of Christians don't understand it either...

I think you have a very misguided view of Christianity and it's varied beliefs.

 

[gsa]

Jesus never claimed to bring world peace, That's a silly idea. The world is corrupt and always will be. He came to bring salvation, To graft in the Gentiles and to show us a way to obtain God's grace without Judaism.



Neither does Christianity, I have no expectation that everyone will become Christian. That's nonsensical to bring up as no one has even implied it, Besides you.



Judaism doesn't have it either, You have sects and denominations within your religion aswell.



I think you have a very misguided view of Christianity and it's varied beliefs.

Oh boy...

1. World peace. You are right that Jesus never claimed to bring peace (a sword, maybe). Yet the Messiah, in traditional Judaism, will in fact bring global peace. Ergo, Jesus is not the Messiah.

2. Judaism is theologically diverse, but that diversity tends to end with hard polytheism. Whether you want to admit it or not, the Trinity, a foundational belief of Christian orthodoxy, posits three co-eternal but separate persons, all existing within one godhead. There are humanistic and nontheistic versions of Judaism but those are outliers and they still deny anything like the Trinity. And the reason that almost all Jews and Muslims reject the Trinity (and therefore Christian orthodoxy) is because they see it is virtually indistinguishable from hard polytheism.

 

[Kolibri]

1. World peace. You are right that Jesus never claimed to bring peace (a sword, maybe). Yet the Messiah, in traditional Judaism, will in fact bring global peace. Ergo, Jesus is not the Messiah.

1. From Jesus own words he was going away to his Father and then returning. The hopes for world peace were to be attached when the Messiah comes as foretold in the 2nd and 110th Psalms. His first arrival was at the end of the 69 weeks at his baptism in 29 C.E., and his dying 1/2 way thru the 70th week, at the Passover of 33 C.E. (Daniel 9:25,26)

And the reason that almost all Jews and Muslims reject the Trinity (and therefore Christian orthodoxy) is because they see it is virtually indistinguishable from hard polytheism.

2. By this standard of what is orthodox, I am glad to be a heretic. I do not relate with this God, yet not God stuff. If Jesus was supposed to be God there is an easier familial relationship to equate him to the Father with then between a parent and child: Twins or Triplets. Why confuse us with a parent-child symbolism? And why declare himself as a unique God in contrast to Egyptian and Canaanite Trinities only to reveal himself as one later?