Israel and the Jewish Messiah

[Levite]

I know that, but you have already stated your opinion on other groups, if you don't think other opinions are valid, that narrows the parameters of the discussion.
That's fine, but it is also just your opinion, we can't really say "Judaism believes"...in that context, only "these groups believe"...

I am honestly not certain which groups you mean here. If you mean Christian groups or "Jewish Christian groups," that is something that all the movements agree upon and the Tradition is fairly unanimous concerning: Christianity is another religion, and Jews are forbidden from practicing religions other than Judaism.

If you mean differing opinions amongst differing Jewish movements or communities, it's true it's often hard to say "Judaism teaches," in general, but it is occasionally possible, at least for the majority of normative Judaism. And not practicing other religions, or attempting to fuse those religions with Judaism, is pretty dead center of normative Judaism.

 

[Desert Snake]

I am honestly not certain which groups you mean here. If you mean Christian groups or "Jewish Christian groups," that is something that all the movements agree upon and the Tradition is fairly unanimous concerning: Christianity is another religion, and Jews are forbidden from practicing religions other than Judaism.

I wasn't suggesting otherwise, actually.
That being said, Christianity does use the Tanakh, that's just a fact. Certain denominations place less importance on the OT, but that's beside the point. We shouldn't confuse "Judaism" with Torah/Tanakh, the terms are mutually exclusive.

And not practicing other religions, or attempting to fuse those religions with Judaism,

Again, no argument here.
I think you misunderstood my comments.

 

[Flankerl]

We shouldn't confuse "Judaism" with Torah/Tanakh, the terms are mutually exclusive.

What? Its our book.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What? Its our book.

'mutually exclusive' is a seven syllable term. That has to count for something irrespective of whether it's being used in a coherent manner. :yes:

 

[roger1440]

What are your thoughts on the fact that Judaism generally doesn't recognize Jesus as the Messiah, in essence waiting for the 'first Messiah'.
Do you, if you are Christian, think that this is clearly against your religious beliefs?
If you are Jewish, how does this affect your view of Christianity?

I don’t think the majority of people understand the message of the canonical gospels, (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) both Jews and Christians.

 

[Desert Snake]

I don’t think the majority of people understand the message of the canonical gospels, (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) both Jews and Christians.

The responses this thread has received has been quite informative to me. I'm not sure I entirely agree with you, that might be true.
But then we need to discuss that message.

 

[Levite]

...Christianity does use the Tanakh, that's just a fact. Certain denominations place less importance on the OT, but that's beside the point. We shouldn't confuse "Judaism" with Torah/Tanakh, the terms are mutually exclusive.

Judaism and Torah/Tanach may be different, but they are in no way mutually exclusive.

Christianity uses the Tanach-- or at least the parts of the Tanach that suit it to use, in such translations/paraphrases that suit it to use. Judaism produced the Tanach. Christianity may or may not use it, but it's our collection of texts.

It was written by Jews, for Jews, in the Jewish language(s), to be used with Jewish exegetical methods, to produce results that suit the theologies and traditions of the Jewish People. It was never intended for non-Jews-- none of it.

We can't stop non-Jews from using it in whatever ways they see fit, but that is a very big difference from it belonging to non-Jews in any meaningful way.

 

[roger1440]

The responses this thread has received has been quite informative to me. I'm not sure I entirely agree with you, that might be true.
But then we need to discuss that message.

I find it more than a little odd, when we read the last page of the Old Testament the symbolism and allegory ends, then open the first page of the New Testament and everything is to be taken literal. What’s up with that?

 

[Desert Snake]

Judaism and Torah/Tanach may be different, but they are in no way mutually exclusive.

Christianity uses the Tanach-- or at least the parts of the Tanach that suit it to use, in such translations/paraphrases that suit it to use. Judaism produced the Tanach. Christianity may or may not use it, but it's our collection of texts.

It was written by Jews, for Jews, in the Jewish language(s), to be used with Jewish exegetical methods, to produce results that suit the theologies and traditions of the Jewish People. It was never intended for non-Jews-- none of it.

We can't stop non-Jews from using it in whatever ways they see fit, but that is a very big difference from it belonging to non-Jews in any meaningful way.

This is off topic.
If you wish to argue these issues, this isn't the thread.

 

[Desert Snake]

I find it more than a little odd, when we read the last page of the Old Testament the symbolism and allegory ends, then open the first page of the New Testament and everything is to be taken literal. What’s up with that?

I don't know, you tell me.

 

[roger1440]

I don't know, you tell me.

I think the writers of the gospels used the same type of symbolism as the writers of the Old Testament, but when they were read by the ignorant Gentiles they were read as literal.
I can apply what Levite just wrote to the Gospels. “It was written by Jews, for Jews, in the Jewish language(s), to be used with Jewish exegetical methods, to produce results that suit the theologies and traditions of the Jewish People. It was never intended for non-Jews-- none of it.” The gospels were NEVER intended for Gentiles.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think the writers of the gospels used the same type of symbolism as the writers of the Old Testament, but when they were read by the ignorant Gentiles they were read as literal.
I can apply what Levite just wrote to the Gospels. “It was written by Jews, for Jews, in the Jewish language(s), to be used with Jewish exegetical methods, to produce results that suit the theologies and traditions of the Jewish People. It was never intended for non-Jews-- none of it.” The gospels were NEVER intended for Gentiles.

So you disagree with the assertion that Christianity is totally separate from Judaism?

 

[roger1440]

I think the orthodox church was formed by at least two different branches of early Christianity intertwined. Early Christianity had many branches in the beginning. Scholars know this for a fact. The Gospel of Thomas is much different than the canonical gospels. Whoever wrote that gospel thought of himself as a Christian and wrote the gospel for Christians. If I remember correctly, there are at least twelve known gospels. The message is somewhat different from one gospel to the next.

 

[roger1440]

So you disagree with the assertion that Christianity is totally separate from Judaism?

I can't even define Christianity and I have been studying it my entire adult life. I'm 56 years old now.

 

[roger1440]

So you disagree with the assertion that Christianity is totally separate from Judaism?

I’ll say this much. Christianity started as a sect within Judaism. As Christianity left the time and place of its origin it became distinct from Judaism. I use a crude metaphor. When a light is close to an object, it will cast a very defined shadow. As the light moves away from the object the shadow becomes more and more blurred.

 

[Desert Snake]

I’ll say this much. Christianity started as a sect within Judaism. As Christianity left the time and place of its origin it became distinct from Judaism. I use a crude metaphor. When a light is close to an object, it will cast a very defined shadow. As the light moves away from the object the shadow becomes more and more blurred.

Hmm I don't perceive Christianity that way. You're saying "Judaism", do you mean Talmudic Judaism? That's far newer than Christianity.

 

[roger1440]

Hmm I don't perceive Christianity that way. You're saying "Judaism", do you mean Talmudic Judaism? That's far newer than Christianity.

I mean the Judaism of the first century. At least one of the Jewish sects started the ball rolling. Which one we will probably never know.

 

[Levite]

You're saying "Judaism", do you mean Talmudic Judaism? That's far newer than Christianity.

That is not, in fact, accurate. The early generations of the Rabbis of the Talmud lived in the first century of the Common Era, and their immediate predecessors and teachers lived in the first century BCE.

Rabbinic Judaism is, at minimum, about as old as Christianity if one dates Christianity to Jesus (though I think properly speaking it ought to be dated to Paul at the earliest); there is every likelihood that Rabbinic Judaism-- in its immediate root form-- predates Christianity by several decades at the least. And, of course, Rabbinic Judaism grew out of Second Temple Judaism, and the First Temple Judaism that preceeded it, over the previous millennium.

 

[roger1440]

Hmm I don't perceive Christianity that way. You're saying "Judaism", do you mean Talmudic Judaism? That's far newer than Christianity.

Ok, I'll bite. How do you perceive Christianity?

 

[Desert Snake]

I mean the Judaism of the first century. At least one of the Jewish sects started the ball rolling. Which one we will probably never know.

I'm not sure what you mean here. At some point, the people who were followers of Yeshua, regardless of who you think Yoheshuah is, were later known as Christians. Since you yourself stated that the gospels were written for Jews, then we can assume the earlier names for "Christians" weren't Greek.