ElishaElijah
Return
A Jew that receives Jesus Christ as their Messiah and is born again doesn’t stop being a Jew.That's to say, they're not Jewish, they're Christians. So they're not the people to ask about the Tanakh.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Jew that receives Jesus Christ as their Messiah and is born again doesn’t stop being a Jew.That's to say, they're not Jewish, they're Christians. So they're not the people to ask about the Tanakh.
That’s not correct, I’m immune from the effect of sin and the penalty. I’m going in a different direction and pursuing God, that’s a lot different than avoiding sin. Don’t have the appetite or lust for sin anymore. Sin has lost its grip and I have hunger and thirst for God now.That does not mean you are immune from sin. It means that you are aware and doing all you can to avoid sin.
Same error as before ─ using the NT to "interpret" (retrofit) the Tanakh.“For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.”
Romans 2:28-29 NKJV
Of course he or she does. For a start, Jews don't believe you need a mediator between God and man, and the God of the Jews is not triune. (The ruach, "breath", of the Jewish god is not a separate "person" but a manifestation of God. And the Jewish God's son, David (Psalm2:7, as we saw) has a status not unlike a saint, but that's all.A Jew that receives Jesus Christ as their Messiah and is born again doesn’t stop being a Jew.
Really? Why the priesthood? Why the temple? Why the sacrifices? Who was the High Priest? What was his role?For a start, Jews don't believe you need a mediator between God and man, and the God
Error is yours because the NT is a revealing and fulfillment of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is the Messiah, He fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies and the Law. The Jews that received Him were the poor, fisherman, some of the religious leaders yet was rejected by the ruling class of Jews because they were jealous loved their power and social status.Same error as before ─ using the NT to "interpret" (retrofit) the Tanakh.
Those are leaders of ritual and offering. The High Priest was the head of the Jewish religious organization. You could learn from them, and take part in community rituals led by them.Really? Why the priesthood? Why the temple? Why the sacrifices? Who was the High Priest? What was his role?
As I've already pointed out, Jesus nohow qualifies as a Jewish messiah. The idea that he does is a Christian notion. Equally Jesus is not mentioned in the Tanakh. That's also a Christian notion.Error is yours because the NT is a revealing and fulfillment of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is the Messiah, He fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies and the Law.
It’s who God the Father said Jesus is, High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Almighty God, The Passover Lamb, The First Fruits from the dead, The Son of God, Son of Man, Second Adam, Autor of Life, Image and Exact representation of God The Father, The Word made flesh.As I've already pointed out, Jesus nohow qualifies as a Jewish messiah. The idea that he does is a Christian notion. Equally Jesus is not mentioned in the Tanakh. That's also a Christian notion.
You believe Jesus was talking about prayer here?Whereas John's Jesus says no one gets to the Father but through him ─ a totally different concept.
It was the Christian God who said that. The Jewish God never said anything remotely resembling it.It’s who God the Father said Jesus is, High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Almighty God, The Passover Lamb, The First Fruits from the dead, The Son of God, Son of Man, Second Adam, Autor of Life, Image and Exact representation of God The Father, The Word made flesh.
"God" in that context, as you know from Solomon being called God in Psalm 45:7, is an honorific. Jesus has never had any "government" on his shoulder, and as I keep pointing out to you, he's not a prince of peace, he's the instrument of two thousand years of antisemitism. No doubt you've come across the hypothesis that this Isaiah passage is written for the accession of a Judean king, perhaps Hezekiah.“For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Now you're confusing yourself ─ Isaiah is part of the Tanakh, and nowhere does the Tanakh refer to Jesus.Not sure how you can say this is antisemitic, far from it.
That, if I may respectfully observe, is both silly and cheap. Very plainly Hindus, Buddhists, Confucianists, atheists (and so on), do NOT "follow the antichrist believing he is the Messiah" ─ no need to consider here whether some Republicans might qualify.If a person rejects Jesus Christ who already came they will follow the antichrist believing he is the Messiah but will prove to be a fraud.
We worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and JacobIt was the Christian God who said that. The Jewish God never said anything remotely resembling it.
I just showed you the Scriptures, here is another example:Now you're confusing yourself ─ Isaiah is part of the Tanakh, and nowhere does the Tanakh refer to Jesus.
John 14:6 puts Jesus between man and God, as I pointed out. To pray to the Jewish God, you don't need an intermediary ─ you address [him] directly. (The idea of putting Jesus between man and the Father is also incompatible with the Trinity doctrine.)
No you don't. You worship the Triune Christian God who can only be accessed via Jesus.We worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
As I said, don't quote the NT when you're talking about the God of the Tanakh. The NT is for the Christian God. As I keep pointing out, they're completely distinct, no matter what the NT says.I just showed you the Scriptures, here is another example:
That’s not what they said:The Jewish God is the God of the covenant of circumcision, is not triune and may be addressed directly.
Since you don't appear to understand anything I've said, I've leave you to it.You’re confusing prayer with entering into the presence of God in the Holy of Holies, The Most Holy Place behind the Veil. I have access there now because of My High Priest Jesus. You don’t, but you could.
Science may be a smart lady, but I would argue that whatever it is quest is carrying on about is, to carry on with the dopey metaphors, a homely, brain-damaged, disease-riddled man.So did we ever figure out if science is a smart lady or not?