I need to speak with a learned or/and courageous Jew, and obtain his honorable response regarding the Christian Bible.

[Betho_br]

Anyone?

 

[Betho_br]

Everything is fine, and I would like to add that:

Hebrews 9:22 King James Version
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

1 John 1:7 King James Version
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Matthew 27:25 King James Version
Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

According to the logic of the doctrine contained in the Christian Bible ("New Testament"), the sacrifice of Jesus is central to the purification and justification of those who are under His blood. Therefore, the "affirmation of the Jews" written in Matthew 27:25, when they said, "His blood be on us and on our children," is significant and relevant in this context. It expresses a collective responsibility and is indeed directly related to the sacrifice of Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. That is, according to the Christian Bible ("New Testament"), the Jews are a people purified and justified by the crucifixion of Jesus.

I'm outta here... thanks a bunch to everyone who put up with me all this time on this forum, you guys are awesome!

 

[Ebionite]

Hebrews 9:22 King James Version
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

That's incorrect.

But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put [any] frankincense thereon: for it [is] a sin offering.
Leviticus 5:11

1 John 1:7 King James Version
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Pharisee doctrine is unreliable. The writer of the gospel of John (most likely Nicodemus) had insider knowledge and where his accounts differed from those in the synoptic gospels his accounts all favoured the Pharisees.

"His blood be on us and on our children,"

The phrase "blood upon him" predates Christianity and refers to liability, eg:

But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take [any] person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.
Ezekiel 33:6

 

[TantoGreenberg]

Anyone?

I'm hardly learned, but might be able to answer your question.

 

[TantoGreenberg]

Not sure what your question is, but understand we don't recognize a "New Testament" or "Christian Bible." Our holy book is the "Tanach" and it didn't end with "Vol.1" or "To be continued." We consider your "New Testament" to be "The Christisn Scriptures." For us there is no such thing as "The Old Testament," it being a label created by, most likely, Christian writers or theologians.
I can, at best, find answered in the Tanach (the Hebrew Bible). For more authoritative answers, I'd refer you to Rabbi Tovia Singer, a very knowledgeable Orthodox Rabbi. You can find him on YouTube.
Hopefully this helps
Sincerely, TG.

 

[Betho_br]

Thank you.

 

[Spice]

Everything is fine, and I would like to add that:

Hebrews 9:22 King James Version
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

1 John 1:7 King James Version
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Matthew 27:25 King James Version
Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

According to the logic of the doctrine contained in the Christian Bible ("New Testament"), the sacrifice of Jesus is central to the purification and justification of those who are under His blood. Therefore, the "affirmation of the Jews" written in Matthew 27:25, when they said, "His blood be on us and on our children," is significant and relevant in this context. It expresses a collective responsibility and is indeed directly related to the sacrifice of Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. That is, according to the Christian Bible ("New Testament"), the Jews are a people purified and justified by the crucifixion of Jesus.

I'm outta here... thanks a bunch to everyone who put up with me all this time on this forum, you guys are awesome!

I'm not Jewish nor well learned, however I can share with you what is written in my copy of The Jewish Annotated New Testament, edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler. The notes on the passages you've sited are:
Hebrews 9:22 (9:15-22)
The author's logic rests on the word "diathēkē," meaning either "covenant" or "will: in the sense of one's last will and testament. Both a will and a covenant require a death to take effect. Blood was necessary for inauguration of the Mosaic covenant; Christ's blood is similarly necessary to inaugurate the New Covenant. . . . Purified with blood, the efficacy of sacrifice.
1 John 1:7 (1:7,8)
Blood ... cleanses, a reference to sacrificial practice, see Leviticus 4:18: Sin, etmologically falling short or missing a goal; to deny one's sin is to deceive oneself and deny God's truth.
Matthew 27:25
This unique Matthean addition resulted in Jews throughout the generations being blamed for Jesus's death. Matthew's first readers likely related the verse to the Jerusalem population devastated in 70 CE.

I hope this gives you some direction in what you're asking. This edition of the New Testament has been a great addition to my study library, along with Levine's book _The Misunderstood Jew, The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus_.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Anyone?

The following may help.

Why the NT is Historically and Theologically not acceptable for Torath Mosheh Jews

Given that the various church councils were the ones who decided what material went into the New Testament and what information did not go into it – this alone provides a very critical reason why Torath Mosheh Jews and Orthodox Jews are required by Hashem/Torah to ignore such a text due to its...

www.religiousforums.com

Davidic King/Mashiahh according to Torath Mosheh Sources

In another thread the question was asked about Judaism's concept of "messiah." In this thread I will only be presenting what Torath Mosheh sources state on the matter of a future Dadivic king/leader who is espected to lead according to Torath Mosheh. Note: This information only covers what can...

www.religiousforums.com

Jews and Jesus

Who do Jews believe Jesus was with all his supposed miracles along with all the supposed commotion that surrounded Jesus? Do Jews even believe that he existed? Also, I wanted to note that I am not asking this question to Jewish Christians, but only to Jews.

www.religiousforums.com

There is no Judaism vs. Christianity - There is Judaism and there is Christianity

In reality there is no Judaism vs. Christianity. As far as Jews/Torath Mosheh/Judaism are concerned Christians can beleive whatever they want, how they want, etc. Most Torah based Jews are not trying to convince Christians to change their religion, adjust their religion, or even to accept Jewish...

www.religiousforums.com

A playlist of videos I and others have made on the topic

Debunking Missionaries

This is a set of videos that debunk missionary claims.

youtube.com

 

[John D. Brey]

Not sure what your question is, but understand we don't recognize a "New Testament" or "Christian Bible." Our holy book is the "Tanach" and it didn't end with "Vol.1" or "To be continued."

The written Tanakh is volume one. The oral Torah is volume two. And Jewish Professor Michael Fishbane speaks of a third volume: Torah Kelulah.




John

 

[John D. Brey]

Not sure what your question is, but understand we don't recognize a "New Testament" or "Christian Bible." Our holy book is the "Tanach" and it didn't end with "Vol.1" or "To be continued."

The written Tanakh is volume one. The oral Torah is volume two. And Jewish Professor Michael Fishbane speaks of a third volume: Torah Kelulah.



John

 

[Elliott]

The written Tanakh is volume one. The oral Torah is volume two. And Jewish Professor Michael Fishbane speaks of a third volume: Torah Kelulah.



John

I've never heard of Torah Kelulah.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Anyone?

Jews think about the New Testament the same way that Christians think about the Quran or Book of Mormon.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I've never heard of Torah Kelulah.

The Torah Kelulah is the Kabbalistic teaching that the Torah has hidden, secret meanings. With all respect to my fellow Jews who are into the Kabbalah, I don't think the Torah has ANY hidden meanings. There are certain things that are harder to understand unless you have the background in Hebrew and the ancient culture of the Israelites. But that is not the Torah being mysterious. It's just you and me not being scholars. An ordinary Jew living say in 600 BCE would not experience these problems.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Hebrews 9:22 King James Version
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

I realize that Hebrews teaches this idea, but it is in absolute contradiction with the Torah (the first five books of your Bible).

Lets go to Leviticus 4-5, which is the passage on sin offerings. From chapter 5:
11 “‘If, however, they cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, they are to bring as an offering for their sin a tenth of an ephah of the finest flour for a sin offering. They must not put olive oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering. 12 They are to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial[c] portion and burn it on the altar on top of the food offerings presented to the Lord. It is a sin offering. 13 In this way the priest will make atonement for them for any of these sins they have committed, and they will be forgiven. The rest of the offering will belong to the priest, as in the case of the grain offering.’”


Now lets go to Numbers 16, the aftermath of the Korah rebellion:
46 Then Moses said to Aaron, “Take your censer and put incense in it, along with burning coals from the altar, and hurry to the assembly to make atonement for them. Wrath has come out from the Lord; the plague has started.” 47 So Aaron did as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. The plague had already started among the people, but Aaron offered the incense and made atonement for them. 48 He stood between the living and the dead, and the plague stopped.

​

So there you have two example from the Torah of atonement being made without any blood at all. So now the only question remaining is which are you going to believe? The Torah? Or the book of Hebrews? Because clearly you cannot believe both as they outright contradict.

 

[Elliott]

The Torah Kelulah is the Kabbalistic teaching that the Torah has hidden, secret meanings. With all respect to my fellow Jews who are into the Kabbalah, I don't think the Torah has ANY hidden meanings. There are certain things that are harder to understand unless you have the background in Hebrew and the ancient culture of the Israelites. But that is not the Torah being mysterious. It's just you and me not being scholars. An ordinary Jew living say in 600 BCE would not experience these problems.

So if i understood correctly, this would include teachings like Chassidus, correct?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So if i understood correctly, this would include teachings like Chassidus, correct?

Good question.

Chassidus originated in Eastern Europe, and most would say it had its foundation in the teachings of the Baal Shem Tov. In its original form, it emphasized a deeply emotional, experiential connection with God. Kabbalah was an important aspect of this movement, but we should never make the mistake of reducing it to Kabbalah.

As far as "Torah, Avidah, and Gemilut Chasadim," it may have the word Chasadim in it, but has a completely different origin than the Chasadim of Eastern Europe. The word Chasadim simply means "kindesses." It is based on the root word Chesed, which refers to love, mercy, and benevolence. The expression Torah, Avodah, and Gemilut Chasidim comes from the Pirkei Avot (part of the Mishnah) which was written in the second century, some 1500 years before the Baal Shem Tov.

The Chasidim or Eastern Europe took their name because they valued acts of kindness. But the idea that Jews should act kindly really goes all the way back to the Torah, which teaches to love your neighbor as yourself.

 

[Eliana]

Anyone?

Why does the Jew need to be courageous? Do you plan to ask them to do something dangerous?

 

[GoodAttention]

Anyone?

Christianity is in the unique position to have a religion that preceeds it as well as one that follows it.

I recommend you take advantage of this and pose the same question to a Muslim.

 

[Betho_br]

I realize that Hebrews teaches this idea, but it is in absolute contradiction with the Torah (the first five books of your Bible).

Lets go to Leviticus 4-5, which is the passage on sin offerings. From chapter 5:
11 “‘If, however, they cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, they are to bring as an offering for their sin a tenth of an ephah of the finest flour for a sin offering. They must not put olive oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering. 12 They are to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial[c] portion and burn it on the altar on top of the food offerings presented to the Lord. It is a sin offering. 13 In this way the priest will make atonement for them for any of these sins they have committed, and they will be forgiven. The rest of the offering will belong to the priest, as in the case of the grain offering.’”


Now lets go to Numbers 16, the aftermath of the Korah rebellion:
46 Then Moses said to Aaron, “Take your censer and put incense in it, along with burning coals from the altar, and hurry to the assembly to make atonement for them. Wrath has come out from the Lord; the plague has started.” 47 So Aaron did as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. The plague had already started among the people, but Aaron offered the incense and made atonement for them. 48 He stood between the living and the dead, and the plague stopped.

​

So there you have two example from the Torah of atonement being made without any blood at all. So now the only question remaining is which are you going to believe? The Torah? Or the book of Hebrews? Because clearly you cannot believe both as they outright contradict.

We do have an interpretation issue in Hebrews 9:22, but I didn't mean to get all technical. It's all good though!

 

[Betho_br]

I realize that Hebrews teaches this idea, but it is in absolute contradiction with the Torah (the first five books of your Bible).

You got the spirit of the thing, buddy!