Jesus Lived as a Jew

[Nehustan]

I personally think that Jeheshuah's birth was special, an act of God (but then isn't any birth), that JHShVH was IHVH with the descending RVCh ELHM, and thus the word of ELH, and that this was announced by Gabriel to Myriam, a woman chaste amongst her peers, but Benjamin am I right in thinking that the word in Hebrew means 'young girl'? A young girl is in the context of the world at the time would usually by default be a virgin. Also I have heard it said that the first birth of a woman was referred to as her 'virgin' birth. I think in regards to what occured with Mary none of us know, and maybe it is best we say God knows best.

It's a young woman, not a virgin.

1. A virgin isn't always a young woman.
2. A young woman isn't always a virgin.

See the problem?

Furthermore, it has NOTHING to do with Moshaich. It's a sign to King Ahaz. In your opinion, was isaiah telling King Ahaz in 700+ years a guy named Jesus is going to come, and THEN you wont need to fear Arma and the other country? To say that it even has to do with Moshiach is stretching the bible for your own interpretation and ignoring what it says.

Well as far as I am concerned a woman bethrothed to a son of David (the geneology of Joseph in the NT testifies to this), and probably of that house herself, would certainly be chaste. As to you what you are saying about Isisah and your King Ahaz, I have no knowledge of this, but...I don't recall making any reference to Isiah, tho' I am aware of what you may be making reference to. As I'm not a Christian, I don't think that I stretch the bible at all, what is written is written, as to being a Jew (as I am often accused of being) I like to smile, think of Jacob, and say Zabulon (the word of the Holy Royal Arch).

The 'lights' tell me that Mary/Myriam was a chaste woman beloved of Eloah, and that her son, the son of man, was the annointed of Eloah, and anyone casting apersions on her virtue, well i just hope they have some pretty tight evidence. It will take more than a person better equipped than I with knowledge of Hebrew to convince me otherwise, given that some people I know who are probably fluent in Biblical Hebrew oft smile at me, and give me a nod and a wink. I will leave you with a quote from Isisah as you bring that book up...

'So this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who trusts will never be dismayed."' (Isiah 28:16)

Not my style to 'bible bash' but our temple is not Herodian, nor physically that of Solomon, but surely when we enter our spiritual temple we are between Boaz and Jachin

'And he set up the pillars in the porch of the temple: and he set up the right pillar, and called the name thereof Jachin: and he set up the left pillar, and called the name thereof Boaz.' 1 Kings, 7:21

I guess with a name like Nehustan I was always going to like brazen pillars.

 

[Deut 13:1]

Well as far as I am concerned a woman bethrothed to a son of David (the geneology of Joseph in the NT testifies to this), and probably of that house herself, would certainly be chaste.

Why would her geneology be relevent at all? Tribes are passed down through the father, not mother. Furthermore, you do realize that Joseph descended from a king in davidic dynasty who was cursed that his descendants would never sit on the throne, right? I think Yekonia in english, or jekonia, I can look it up.

As to you what you are saying about Isisah and your King Ahaz, I have no knowledge of this, but...I don't recall making any reference to Isiah, tho' I am aware of what you may be making reference to. As I'm not a Christian, I don't think that I stretch the bible at all, what is written is written, as to being a Jew (as I am often accused of being) I like to smile, think of Jacob, and say Zabulon (the word of the Holy Royal Arch).

Re-read your posts on the second page, you're the perosn that brought up the 'virgin' birth.

The 'lights' tell me that Mary/Myriam was a chaste woman beloved of Eloah, and that her son, the son of man, was the annointed of Eloah, and anyone casting apersions on her virtue, well i just hope they have some pretty tight evidence.

Yes, well, if I stated my opinion on her, I doubt this conversation would go anywhere.

It will take more than a person better equipped than I with knowledge of Hebrew to convince me otherwise, given that some people I know who are probably fluent in Biblical Hebrew oft smile at me, and give me a nod and a wink. I will leave you with a quote from Isisah as you bring that book up...

You're the one that brough the book up, not I.

Not my style to 'bible bash' but our temple is not Herodian, nor physically that of Solomon, but surely when we enter our spiritual temple we are between Boaz and Jachin

Do you do animal sacrifices in your little messianic temple...

I guess with a name like Nehustan I was always going to like brazen pillars.

I guess so, luckily, if you get enuf frubals, you can change your name.

 

[wmam]

how do you reconcile the words of Galatians 3 where the Laws are referred to as a curse and the words of Duet. 13:1 where it says "All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it."?

it is an everlasting covenant between G-d and the Jewish people, even in the days of the Moshiach, they shall not change.

I personally don't look at what is said in Gal. 3:10 as meaning that the Law is a curse but rather meaning that one that would do the Law without Faith is under a curse that he/she would have to be 100% in the Law at all times to never fault for if they did without faith then they have no way of repentance except by way of Faith. If one sin's just one sin then you might as well as sinned all sin. The punishment for sin is death and you can only die once so ................ Theres the curse. Now with Faith, if it be True Faith, then that one would be striving to do the will of the Father which is His Truth which is His Law therefore if you love the Father and fear Him then you obey. If you fall for weakness of the flesh sake then through Faith you be forgiven through the love of our Master and Saviour, YAHshua the Anointed. Again, without Faith then who would one turn to? Thats the missing link!

 

[Solon]

Jesus didn't abolish the law He lived by, He fuffilled it.

I don't think so; if anything he was opposed to the ruling Sanhedrin, and saw them as hypocrites. In my view, Jesus was a rebel preacher, stirring up unrest against what he saw as the corrupt ruling religious elite.

S

 

[jewscout]

I personally don't look at what is said in Gal. 3:10 as meaning that the Law is a curse but rather meaning that one that would do the Law without Faith is under a curse that he/she would have to be 100% in the Law at all times to never fault for if they did without faith then they have no way of repentance except by way of Faith. If one sin's just one sin then you might as well as sinned all sin. The punishment for sin is death and you can only die once so ................ Theres the curse. Now with Faith, if it be True Faith, then that one would be striving to do the will of the Father which is His Truth which is His Law therefore if you love the Father and fear Him then you obey. If you fall for weakness of the flesh sake then through Faith you be forgiven through the love of our Master and Saviour, YAHshua the Anointed. Again, without Faith then who would one turn to? Thats the missing link!

this concept you are pushing comes mostly from Paul whose views and writings do not fall in line w/ traditional Judaism or the Torah and it's views on the world and mankind.

 

[Green Gaia]

Reminder: This is NOT a debate section.

:149:

 

[wmam]

To go along with my last post......

You got to have Faith......... By this I mean you have to believe that there is a Elohim and that His name is YAH. You have to believe that He sent His only begotten Son, YAHshua the Anointed, to die for His peoples sin's. If you don't believe then you don't have any reason to be forgiven for anything. If you don't believe then you have no reason to do the Law. If you don't believe then what use is it? If you believe but a little then is it enough? It's a start but I don't believe that it would be enough. I believe that one would need to believe completely and the belief would have to be of the correct belief. What good would it do to believe the wrong thing? What good would it do to believe in only part of the right thing? To me it would all be for not unless you held firm your belief in all of the right and True thing. That being the Right and True Way of YAHshua, the Anointed. For living in His path in all things will be the Right and True Way. That Way included the Law and the Prophets. Genesis to Malachi. With the Master's teaching's, we are shown what alot was meant to be and how alot was to be understood in the Law and the Prophets. Not what man changed them into.

I have said this before and I know I will say it again many times..........

Not all can be right with all their differences, but they all can be wrong.

 

[jewscout]

:149:

my apologies Maize i'll stop

 

[Green Gaia]

Moved to Debates, proceed with the debate.

 

[jewscout]

Moved to Debates, proceed with the debate.

okey dokey

 

[jewscout]

To go along with my last post......

You got to have Faith......... By this I mean you have to believe that there is a Elohim and that His name is YAH. You have to believe that He sent His only begotten Son, YAHshua the Anointed, to die for His peoples sin's. If you don't believe then you don't have any reason to be forgiven for anything. If you don't believe then you have no reason to do the Law. If you don't believe then what use is it? If you believe but a little then is it enough? It's a start but I don't believe that it would be enough. I believe that one would need to believe completely and the belief would have to be of the correct belief. What good would it do to believe the wrong thing? What good would it do to believe in only part of the right thing? To me it would all be for not unless you held firm your belief in all of the right and True thing. That being the Right and True Way of YAHshua, the Anointed. For living in His path in all things will be the Right and True Way. That Way included the Law and the Prophets. Genesis to Malachi. With the Master's teaching's, we are shown what alot was meant to be and how alot was to be understood in the Law and the Prophets. Not what man changed them into.

I have said this before and I know I will say it again many times..........

Not all can be right with all their differences, but they all can be wrong.

and this is why i am of the opinion that Messianic Judaism in the form of groups like Jews 4 jesus is a slap in the face of Judaism

the teachings of the above fall in line w/ Christianity...not Traditional Judaism

 

[wmam]

and this is why i am of the opinion that Messianic Judaism in the form of groups like Jews 4 jesus is a slap in the face of Judaism

the teachings of the above fall in line w/ Christianity...not Traditional Judaism

That is why I am neither. There are Truths in all but lie's lay there as well. It's either all Right and True or it isn't. To me neither is all that. Not meaning to sound harsh or to offend but to me it is that simple.

I am curious though as to why you feel threatened by such groups and would say that it is a slap in the face? Why would you care? Does it affect you and your belief's? If it did, would that be such a bad thing? If your faith is that built on sand that another could change it then what good would it have been in the first place? Don't take this as me attacking you or what you or others believe cause it is most assuredly not intended in that way. I am only curious as to your way of thinking since you have posed to claim that my beliefs fall in line with that of Sha'ul. He wasn't as different as one might think if one understood what one was reading more without all the outside influences like that of the cemetary...... oops I meant seminary.

 

[Nehustan]

Why would her geneology be relevent at all? Tribes are passed down through the father, not mother. Furthermore, you do realize that Joseph descended from a king in davidic dynasty who was cursed that his descendants would never sit on the throne, right? I think Yekonia in english, or jekonia, I can look it up.

Re-read your posts on the second page, you're the perosn that brought up the 'virgin' birth.

Yes, well, if I stated my opinion on her, I doubt this conversation would go anywhere.

You're the one that brough the book up, not I.

Do you do animal sacrifices in your little messianic temple...

I guess so, luckily, if you get enuf frubals, you can change your name.

If I could have paid you 1 million dollars for saying this, I would have. For me, in a public forum, this is priceless.

 

[Nehustan]

What? you mean all those prophecies in the Old Testament. The holy scripture of the Jews. The prophecies that he would come as a king, a savior, and establish a new Kingdom for god's people. Be born of a woman who did not know man. conquer death. you mean those prophecies? those Jewish prophecies?

Read the first page (that's the one before the second, just in case your hands/fingers are in your pockets) and you'll see it wasn't me that brought up the 'virgin' birth.

:clap​

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If Jesus was a Jew, Lived as a Jew, observed the torah and the festivals, then why do Christians do the opposite. Christians are supposed to strive to become Christ-like. That would involve living as Christ did. Christianity as it exist today would not be something that Jesus would even recognize. I do not believe that Jesus abolished the law. If Jesus is the Christ, or Messiah, I do not believe that he would approve of Christians abolishing the law either. G-ds personality (YHVH) is encompassed in the torah. If the law is abolished then (YHVH) would also be abolished, obviously, this cannot be. The Jews of Jesus day were looking for the Messiah-a human king that would sit on Davids throne. If this were not the case then there would be no reason for the Jewish people to ask John the Baptist if he was the one. John the Baptist was obviously a human.


Getting back to the subject, why would Jesus abolish the law he lived by? Why would (YHVH) even give the law to the Jewish people and tell them to live by it forever? Why would the scriptures say in zechariah that eventually all the family of the earth would observe the feast of tabernacles if the biblical feast are no longer required? The scriptures also say that the torah (law) would go forth from Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. This is recognized as a scripture regarding the second coming of the Messiah, as it goes on to say, swords would be beaten into plowshares and nations would not learn war again, these things have not yet occurred.

Christians believe that Jesus fulfilled the law, so we live as the law is fulfilled in Christ. We believe that Jesus is still alive, being risen from the dead, a continual fulfillment of every law and prophesy of the Hebrews. We don't need to observe the law because Jesus observes it for us. This doesn't mean that we don't care about morality or sin. On the contrary, we have a long tradition of living as pure lives as we can in the name of Jesus.

In fulfilling the law, Jesus gave to us a new law that fulfills all the old requirements: love God and love our fellow human beings. That is the law that we follow now...

 

[Nehustan]

In fulfilling the law, Jesus gave to us a new law that fulfills all the old requirements: love God and love our fellow human beings. That is the law that we follow now...

​

Jahweh is Love and Unity​

אחד אהבה יהוה​

( why has this page reversed my hebrew :149: )​

Or as Marley might have said 'Jah...One Love'​

 

[jewscout]

That is why I am neither. There are Truths in all but lie's lay there as well. It's either all Right and True or it isn't. To me neither is all that. Not meaning to sound harsh or to offend but to me it is that simple.

I am curious though as to why you feel threatened by such groups and would say that it is a slap in the face? Why would you care? Does it affect you and your belief's? If it did, would that be such a bad thing? If your faith is that built on sand that another could change it then what good would it have been in the first place? Don't take this as me attacking you or what you or others believe cause it is most assuredly not intended in that way. I am only curious as to your way of thinking since you have posed to claim that my beliefs fall in line with that of Sha'ul. He wasn't as different as one might think if one understood what one was reading more without all the outside influences like that of the cemetary...... oops I meant seminary.

why would i care? Jews 4 Jesus is nothing more than a very well funded evangelical organization whose sole purpose is to bring Jews to christianity, and by twisting the words of both faiths, undermine Judaism. It is yet another attack, IMPO, on Judaism and the Jewish people. You can wear all the Tallits and Teffilin you want, it does not make you a Jew by halachich standards!

it is NOT that judaism is built on sand but that groups like Jews 4 Jesus are IMPO decieving, they are like a wolf in sheeps clothing. You can not combine the docterines of the 2 faiths as this group attempts to do, they are 2 seperate faiths with very different world views.
to understand this better read the article linked to this post
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=294615#post294615

 

[Nehustan]

You can not combine the docterines of the 2 faiths as this group attempts to do, they are 2 seperate faiths with very different world views.

I think the point is, and I know nothing about Jews for Jesus other than seeing one of their offices in North London, that, to coin the title of this thread, 'Jesus lived as a Jew'

It is surely true that the message that he preached has been lost beneath the hellenisation/romanisation (and arguably aegyptian influence, but lets seriously not get into Aegyptian influence on Semetic religions) that has come to be known as 'Christianity'. Do they in actuality (i.e. the teachings of Jeheshuah and rabbinical 'Judaism') have two different world views? No more than they did 2000 years ago, which was certainly part of the problem. Are they two different faiths, well I'm sure if you if you were to sit Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Jeheshuah in a room having a chat, they'd say they worshipped the same God, and had the same faith, to say they are different is to divide God's revealed faith (apart from a fair theological disection of say Paul's Roman syncretism, which changed the religion from that of Jeheshuah to that of Paul's), and to be semantic naught be a divisive act.

 

[jewscout]

I think the point is, and I know nothing about Jews for Jesus other than seeing one of their offices in North London, that, to coin the title of this thread, 'Jesus lived as a Jew'

It is surely true that the message that he preached has been lost beneath the hellenisation/romanisation (and arguably aegyptian influence, but lets seriously not get into Aegyptian influence on Semetic religions) that has come to be known as 'Christianity'. Do they in actuality (i.e. the teachings of Jeheshuah and rabbinical 'Judaism') have two different world views? No more than they did 2000 years ago, which was certainly part of the problem. Are they two different faiths, well I'm sure if you if you were to sit Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Jeheshuah in a room having a chat, they'd say they worshipped the same God, and had the same faith, to say they are different is to divide God's revealed faith (apart from a fair theological disection of say Paul's Roman syncretism, which changed the religion from that of Jeheshuah to that of Paul's), and to be semantic naught be a divisive act.

again read the article linked at the post above, it is a discussion on redemption, the Moshiach and the DIFFERING veiws of the two faiths
you will see that there is a great difference between the docterine in the Tanach and that of the christian bible, especially that of Paul

they are 2 seperate faiths with two different world views, period.

 

[Nehustan]

again read the article linked at the post above, it is a discussion on redemption, the Moshiach and the DIFFERING veiws of the two faiths
you will see that there is a great difference between the docterine in the Tanach and that of the christian bible, especially that of Paul

they are 2 seperate faiths with two different world views, period.

Well myself I am taught to believe what the prophets tell me, and they tell me God is one, his message one. Just because somebody takes the Paulinist manifestation of the teachings of Jeheshauh to be true, does not mean that they are true. For this we must rely on the company of the prophets, certainly not those sudjugate to ideologies be they political or religious. As to taking much heed to what the Yahoud say I am minded that they are but three tribes, Judah, Levi, and Benjamin, and even when they had Moses within their midst were prone to stray...I'm thinking golden calfs here. I have found the tradition of the Hebrews/Chaldeans a great source of wisdom to me, but I think I shall ponder the variety in my blood, think Zabulon, and not pay too much thought to Cohens, Levites, and those who consider themself Israelites, especially those who have no blood ties with Jacob. It will take more than, period, to convince me.