Jesus And The Law

[smokydot]

Well Smokydot if Paul was plying to be a Jew for the sake of evangelizing what do you think they would think of him after they found out that Paul had tricked them.

Probably pretty much what Muslim citizens would think if you wore head covering when among them.

 

[dmgdnooc]

smokydot
'Is it time to find another lab rat?'
Yeah, I've had enough.
　
　
　
Ben Masada
I would like to hear something about how Judaism adapted to the loss of the Temple.
　

 

[Ben Masada]

Well Ben you are a religious person your character has not changed sence you believed and put your faith in the law to perform them, and that is very well if you could keep all the requirements of the law.

We might break the Law, but there is a way to be forgiven and set things right with God: Through repentance and obedience. Read Isaiah 1:18,19. As long as we don't reject God's Law, we are in peace with God and ourselves.

On the other hand I was also a religious person observind the doctrine of a Christian denomination but sence I become a true Christian my character has changed I am no longer under the law or doctrine of any religion, because I have put on the holy character of Christ, now by his grace I am under the law of love, which is the fulfilment of the whole law.

We Jews have suffered much more from "true Christians" than from the just nominal ones. The "true ones" preach Replacement Theology as they open their mouth to talk about their faith in Jesus.

fraudulance has allways been a problem, gullible people has allways existed.

You can say that again, especially the "true religious ones."

Christian do not abhor the law, because by his grace we are fulfilling it.

What law are you talking about?

Well Ben you are also gullible to to believe replacement theology through the new interpretation of the old testament.

Replacement Theology is a Pauline policy. It has nothing to do with the Tanakh.

 

[Ben Masada]

smokydot
'Is it time to find another lab rat?'
Yeah, I've had enough.
　
　
　
Ben Masada
I would like to hear something about how Judaism adapted to the loss of the Temple.
　

We didn't. As long as we keep our hopes up to rebuild it, we can't adapt without it. One day we will find the way to get rid of that abomination built on our Temple Mount and we will bring our Temple back. And you commit this to memory that the Gentiles will pay for all the expenses. They paid for the second Temple, and they will
pay for the third one too.

 

[dmgdnooc]

We didn't. As long as we keep our hopes up to rebuild it, we can't adapt without it. One day we will find the way to get rid of that abomination built on our Temple Mount and we will bring our Temple back. And you commit this to memory that the Gentiles will pay for all the expenses. They paid for the second Temple, and they will
pay for the third one too.

OK then.
I had hoped you might say something about the replacement of the Temple with the Synagogue, the Priest with the Rabbi and the Sacrifices with Prayer and Study.
Maybe something about the Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash and Gemara; how and why they came to be and the place that they occupy in post-2ndTemple Jewish life.
　
Well, I think that the Messiah will build the Temple, that the Jewish people will remain unable to build it without him.
When that happens, if I am still around, I will gladly contribute all that I have; but I don't think that there will be any shortage of available funds and materials.
　
Maybe you could take a look at my posts; the things that you have been saying, particularly about Paul, do not accord with my understanding of the NT.
They do not agree with either his words or manner of life.

 

[free spirit]

We might break the Law, but there is a way to be forgiven and set things right with God: Through repentance and obedience. Read Isaiah 1:18,19. As long as we don't reject God's Law, we are in peace with God and ourselves.

So Ben what is the difference of what you are doing from what the hypocrites do.

We Jews have suffered much more from "true Christians" than from the just nominal ones. The "true ones" preach Replacement Theology as they open their mouth to talk about their faith in Jesus.

In the beginning Christians suffered by the hand of the Jews, then the New testament scriptures were adulterated by the Jews that had infiltrated Christianity and so Christianity stoped to be a way of life and become a religion, after that the Christian religion gave the Jews a hard time.

." You can say that again, especially the "true religious ones

religious devotees are the most dangeorous, they love their religion more than God.

What law are you talking about?

Love God and love your neighbour

Replacement Theology is a Pauline policy. It has nothing to do with the Tanakh.

Jews also have denominations which interpret the OT different from you, therefore someone is using replacement theology.

 

[Ben Masada]

OK then.
I had hoped you might say something about the replacement of the Temple with the Synagogue, the Priest with the Rabbi and the Sacrifices with Prayer and Study.
Maybe something about the Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash and Gemara; how and why they came to be and the place that they occupy in post-2ndTemple Jewish life.
　
Well, I think that the Messiah will build the Temple, that the Jewish people will remain unable to build it without him.
When that happens, if I am still around, I will gladly contribute all that I have; but I don't think that there will be any shortage of available funds and materials.
　
Maybe you could take a look at my posts; the things that you have been saying, particularly about Paul, do not accord with my understanding of the NT.
They do not agree with either his words or manner of life.

The Messiah will build the Temple alright, because it can't be built by Gentiles; albeit at their expenses. But the real Messiah. Here is how you can identify it:

The Collective Messiah - Isaiah 53

We all know that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah. So, no argument about it. But then whom did Isaiah have in mind when he wrote chapter 53? In fact, who was in his mind when he wrote the whole book? That's in Isaiah 1:1: "A vision about Judah and Jerusalem." That's the theme of the book of Isaiah: Judah. Or the House of Jacob called by the name Israel from the stock of Judah. (Isa. 48:1)

Now, how about the Suffering Servant? Isaiah mentions him by name, which is Israel according to Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21. Now, we have extablished a syllogism. If the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah, and the Suffering Servant is Israel, the resultant premise will obviously be that Israel (the Jewish People) is the Messiah. Rashi thought so too, and a few other thinkers of weight.

Now, if the Messiah must also bring the epithet of son of God, there is no problem. We can have it from Exodus 4:22,23. Here's what it says in there: "Israel is My son; so, let My son go, that he may serve Me," says the Lord. That's why Hosea said that "When Israel was a child, God said, out of Egypt I called My son." (Hosea 11:1)

Last but not least, Jesus no doubt was part of the Messiah but not on an individual basis. The Messiah is collective. What we need from time to time, especially in exile, is of a Messianic leader to lead or inspire the Messiah to return home. Moses was one for bringing the Messiah back to Canaan. Cyrus was another for proclaiming the return of the Messiah to rebuild the Temple; which he contributed heavily finacially; and in our modern times, we had Herzl who was also one for inspiring the Messiah with love for Zion.

How about Jesus, what do we have to classify him as at least a Messianic leader? Well, when he was born Israel was at home, although suffering under the foreign power of the Romans. As he grew up that suffering only got worse. When he left, the collective Messiah was expelled into another exile of about 2000 years. Not even as a Messianic leader he could not classify. Let alone as the Messiah himself.

Now, I would appreciate to share your comments about the above.

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

So Ben what is the difference of what you are doing from what the hypocrites do.

I am trying to let you know about the right way to get things right with God, so that our sins, from scarlet red can become as white as snow. (Isa. 1:18,19) Can you accuse me of doing anything improper?

In the beginning Christians suffered by the hand of the Jews, then the New testament scriptures were adulterated by the Jews that had infiltrated Christianity and so Christianity stoped to be a way of life and become a religion, after that the Christian religion gave the Jews a hard time.

Would you please quote your assertions for reference?

Love God and love your neighbour

Do you love your neighbour as yourself? Would you like to be called a hypocrite? I didn't think so. If this is not your strange way to love your neighbour, you have broken the Golden Rule of not doing unto others what you would not like they did unto you.

Jews also have denominations which interpret the OT different from you, therefore someone is using replacement theology.

There is no Jew in the whole world who claims that God's Law has been abolished. Therefore, no Jew ever promotes the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology, the difference between a denomination and another is only in the level of commitment.

 

[Muffled]

Jesus and the Law

This is one of Jesus' secret teachings, not because Jesus meant it to be a secret, but because Christians find it so hard to understand that it is taken as a secret. It is in the parable of the Richman and Lazarus.

Since you can read the whole parable in Luke 16:19-31, I am cutting short this thread by going straighht to the bottom line: Verses 29-31. Somehow, the Richman must not have been a good man, because his afterlife was to be spent in Hell. Lazarus, who was a beggar, and a good man in his ways, also happened to die and spend his afterlife in Heaven. As the text say, in the bosom of Abraham.

It happens that the Richman in Hell lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said: "Oh father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus to my father's house, because I have five brethrens and Lazarus could testify to them, so that they would not fall in this place of torment."

The answer to the Richman in Hell put in the mouth of Abraham by Jesus was: "They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them." And the Richman insisted, "Ney, father Abraham, but if one went to them from the dead, they wouldl repent." And Abraham (Jesus) said to him: "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither they will be persuaded even if one rose from the dead."

IMHO, that was a prophecy of Jesus' in the form of a parable which has been fulfilled by Christians in general. They do believe that Jesus rose from the dead; nevertheless, they just can't be persuaded to listen to Moses and the Prophets, which means the Law, in order to prevent themselves from falling in Hell. They prefer the Pauline policy of salvation by faith only.
Ben

Nice try but totally misinterpreted.

The interpretation should be that one should have respect for the law of Moses and then that person will more likely listen to one risen from the dead. An athiest throws out the whole Bible, including the parts about Jesus rising from the dead. However, one ought to remember the context and that is Jesus addresssing Jews.
Supposedly a Jew comes to know and believe in God through the writings of Moses and the prophets. Then it should be easy to arrive at this point:
Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: believe in God, believe also in me.

 

[Ben Masada]

Nice try but totally misinterpreted.

The interpretation should be that one should have respect for the law of Moses and then that person will more likely listen to one risen from the dead. An athiest throws out the whole Bible, including the parts about Jesus rising from the dead. However, one ought to remember the context and that is Jesus addresssing Jews.
Supposedly a Jew comes to know and believe in God through the writings of Moses and the prophets. Then it should be easy to arrive at this point:
Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: believe in God, believe also in me.

I can very well say the same as Jesus did, who was also speaking as a Jew. "Believe in God by believing what I am telling you." That's our role in this world, to speak for God to man. Isn't what Ezekiel says in 20:41? "By means of Israel God reveals His glory in the sight of the nations."

 

[dmgdnooc]

The Messiah will build the Temple alright, because it can't be built by Gentiles; albeit at their expenses. But the real Messiah. Here is how you can identify it:

The Collective Messiah - Isaiah 53

We all know that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah. So, no argument about it. But then whom did Isaiah have in mind when he wrote chapter 53? In fact, who was in his mind when he wrote the whole book? That's in Isaiah 1:1: "A vision about Judah and Jerusalem." That's the theme of the book of Isaiah: Judah. Or the House of Jacob called by the name Israel from the stock of Judah. (Isa. 48:1)

Now, how about the Suffering Servant? Isaiah mentions him by name, which is Israel according to Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21. Now, we have extablished a syllogism. If the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah, and the Suffering Servant is Israel, the resultant premise will obviously be that Israel (the Jewish People) is the Messiah. Rashi thought so too, and a few other thinkers of weight.

Now, if the Messiah must also bring the epithet of son of God, there is no problem. We can have it from Exodus 4:22,23. Here's what it says in there: "Israel is My son; so, let My son go, that he may serve Me," says the Lord. That's why Hosea said that "When Israel was a child, God said, out of Egypt I called My son." (Hosea 11:1)

Last but not least, Jesus no doubt was part of the Messiah but not on an individual basis. The Messiah is collective. What we need from time to time, especially in exile, is of a Messianic leader to lead or inspire the Messiah to return home. Moses was one for bringing the Messiah back to Canaan. Cyrus was another for proclaiming the return of the Messiah to rebuild the Temple; which he contributed heavily finacially; and in our modern times, we had Herzl who was also one for inspiring the Messiah with love for Zion.

How about Jesus, what do we have to classify him as at least a Messianic leader? Well, when he was born Israel was at home, although suffering under the foreign power of the Romans. As he grew up that suffering only got worse. When he left, the collective Messiah was expelled into another exile of about 2000 years. Not even as a Messianic leader he could not classify. Let alone as the Messiah himself.

Now, I would appreciate to share your comments about the above.

Ben

Israel as God's national son is a concept which I have long held to be true.
And I might have called on the very same scriptures that you do to show the truth of the concept.
　
Isaiah 53 though, describes an individual, 'the arm of the Lord' who grew up 'as a tender plant' in a 'dry land'.
He was 'despised and rejected' by the national son because his 'comeliness' and 'beauty' was not what they desired.
He was not believed because his message did not accord with their sensibilities and preconceptions, so he was deemed to be 'stricken, smitten of God and afflicted'.
Such a man could not be the Messiah, by the rules you propose. Yet Isaiah thought differently.
Jesus taught that a man should submit to God and believe the scriptures in his inward parts.
He did not cast down the Romans and lift up David's throne, which is what the people wanted.
　
It is in Christ's return that a Christian can recognise the Messiah that you describe.
A 'horn of salvation for Israel in the house of his servant David' (Luke 1.67 ff) come to save Israel from his enemies and from the hand of all that hate him.
Jesus returns with a sword in order to enforce the performance of the mercy promised to the Patriarchs, in remembrance of the holy covenant and in accordance with the scripture.
　
So then, what say you about the fact that Paul said and did nothing that would indicate that he ceased to be a Jew upon accepting Jesus as the Christ.
That he did not advise any Jew to abandon the Law or the customs.
That he, in fact, taught the Law to Gentiles and advised them to adopt some of the customs.
　
This, so called, 'Replacement Theology' is not from Paul, it appears to me to be quite firmly rooted in the 2nd century ad. Perhaps a Gentile reaction to the Bar Kokhba revolt and the dangers of its aftermath.
　
nooc

 

[free spirit]

I am trying to let you know about the right way to get things right with God, so that our sins, from scarlet red can become as white as snow. (Isa. 1:18,19) Can you accuse me of doing anything improper?

Repentance is not to just say sorry, and than sometime later do it again, that is what the hypocrites do. To repent it to fix permanently what made you break the law in the first place. I know for sure that without the spirit of the Lord in you, you cannot repent in the proper manner.

Would you please quote your assertions for reference?

It is recorded in the NT the Jews were persecuting the church of God, Paul was a persecuter of the church before he was converted.
Also I found passages of scriptures that do not belong in the NT and they favour the Jewish stance, Christians attach a great deal of importance to the alleged future events in Romans 11:26-27, which read: “And thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, the Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. And this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.”
They mistakenly believe that the above scripture of forgiving sins has yet to take place. They do not realise that the above scripture belongs to the Old Testament and has been fulfilled with the crucifixion of our Lord, for His sacrifice to forgive the sins of the world was once, and for all men. Or do they think that Jesus has to come back and sacrifice Himself once more especially for the sins of the “Jews?” Or do they think that the blessing of Calvary, which flows to all men, was withheld from reaching the “Jews?” They also fail to understand that the removal of ungodliness as is written above is for Jacob (the believer and appreciatorof the blessing) and not for Esau (the believer in God but depreciatorof the blessing).
Also Romans chapter 11 speaks about the Israel of God as the olive tree. As you may know those who did not believe were cut off from the olive tree and we who believe were grafted into the olive tree. Sadly there are some Christians who mistakenly believe that the branches that were cut off from the olive tree have somehow become the tree again. But it is impossible for this to take place without first believing in Christ, because only with that acknowledgement will Jesus be able to graft them back again into the rich olive tree. The olive tree “as if you do not know” is Christ himself. For it is written: John 15:5 “I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me, and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing.” Galatians 3:16 makes it clearer still, for we read: “Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, and to seeds, as referring to many, but rather to one. And to your seed that is Christ.”

Do you love your neighbour as yourself? Would you like to be called a hypocrite? I didn't think so. If this is not your strange way to love your neighbour, you have broken the Golden Rule of not doing unto others what you would not like they did unto you.

It is not a sin to speak the truth.

There is no Jew in the whole world who claims that God's Law has been abolished. Therefore, no Jew ever promotes the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology, the difference between a denomination and another is only in the level of commitment.[/

Also there is not a true Christian in the world that would claim that God's law has been abolished: but they would claim that the law has been abolished because we have been given a way to fulfil it. In other words you cannot be a true Christian and a trangressor of the law.

 

[smokydot]

smokydot
'Is it time to find another lab rat?'
Yeah, I've had enough

You can keep the damn cheese! . .just lemme' outa' this trap!

 

[smokydot]

I give up smokdot, you will never admit that you might be mistaken. One can not discuss anything with you because you are always, as far as you are concerned, right.

Not always. . .see:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2273945-post435.html

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2313023-post1351.html

Are you ever mistaken?

 

[esmith]

Also I found passages of scriptures that do not belong in the NT and they favour the Jewish stance, Christians attach a great deal of importance to the alleged future events in Romans 11:26-27, which read: “And thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, the Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. And this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.”

The NT interprets Ro 11:26-27 as a reference to Jer 31:31-34 ( and is quoted in the NT fully) and says that this is Jeremiah prophesying the "new testament" through Jesus. Whereas it really refers to the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian exile and the reconstruction of the Temple. The "Deliverer" is an attempt to reference Isaiah 59:20. But it is the penitent Israelities, not the whole nation, who will enjoy the salvation of God long predicted and thus far delayed. The Babylonians have been defeated, as Deutero-Isiah and earlier prophets predicted, but the new age has failed to materialize: The exiles have not all returned to Zion, and the land remains mostly desolate. Consequently, some Judeans speculated that the Lord was not able to save them, or that God did not listen to their prayers. The prophet retorts that Israel's sins, not God's abilities, are the root of the problem.

 

[esmith]

[

Also there is not a true Christian in the world that would claim that God's law has been abolished: but they would claim that the law has been abolished because we have been given a way to fulfil it. In other words you cannot be a true Christian and a bracker of the law.

Which "Laws" are you referring to when you say "you cannot be a true Christian and a bracker(I assume backer) of the law". If so ,then you can not live by the ethical Laws?

 

[esmith]

May I also suggest to those that attempt to interpret the bible that they obtain a copy of the "New Standard Study Bible"(Christian) and the JPS "The Jewish Study Bible". These two books will give you a better understanding of what you think you have read. It will also allow you to compare the interpretation of the Old Testament by Christians and the interpretation of the Tanakh. Substitute the Catholic Study Bible for the Standard Study Bible if you are Catholic.

Just a thought.

 

[free spirit]

The NT interprets Ro 11:26-27 as a reference to Jer 31:31-34 ( and is quoted in the NT fully) and says that this is Jeremiah prophesying the "new testament" through Jesus. Whereas it really refers to the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian exile and the reconstruction of the Temple. The "Deliverer" is an attempt to reference Isaiah 59:20. But it is the penitent Israelities, not the whole nation, who will enjoy the salvation of God long predicted and thus far delayed. The Babylonians have been defeated, as Deutero-Isiah and earlier prophets predicted, but the new age has failed to materialize: The exiles have not all returned to Zion, and the land remains mostly desolate. Consequently, some Judeans speculated that the Lord was not able to save them, or that God did not listen to their prayers. The prophet retorts that Israel's sins, not God's abilities, are the root of the problem.

Originally Posted by free spirit
Also I found passages of scriptures that do not belong in the NT and they favour the Jewish stance, Christians attach a great deal of importance to the alleged future events in Romans 11:26-27, which read: “And thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, the Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. And this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.”

Romans 11:26- 27, has been fulfilled, because all the descendents of Jacob (or all Israel) believed the Christ and were saved; The Jews that did not believe were the descendents of Esau the twin brother of Jacob and they refuse to believe to this day.

 

[free spirit]

[

Which "Laws" are you referring to when you say "you cannot be a true Christian and a transgressor of the law". If so ,then you can not live by the ethical Laws?

Sorry for the confusion, as far as God is concerned there is anly the law.

 

[esmith]

Romans 11:26- 27, has been fulfilled, because all the descendents of Jacob (or all Israel) believed the Christ and were saved; The Jews that did not believe were the descendents of Esau the twin brother of Jacob and they refuse to believe to this day.

I think you have been reading too much into this. Just where do you come up with the idea that the Jews who did not believe in Christ were the descendants of Essau.

Your reference to Romans 11:26-27 Can be found almost word for word in Isaiah 59:20-21. The Christian Old Testament says "The Redeemer will come to Zion to those in Jacob who repent of their sins declared the Lord". Whereas the Tanakh reads as follows: "He shall come as redeemer to Zion To those in Jacob who turn back from sin---declares the Lord". Considerable different.
I am not Jewish nor a believer in Jesus. However, I find it pretentious of Christians to interpret the Tanakh/Old Testament in a way that supports their beliefs in Jesus. One would think that they really don't believe and have to find supporting evidence to prove their beliefs.