Judaism, Christianity, and the Jewish Faith

[Tarheeler]

It's a progressive faith as I understand it...

While an interesting outlook, it has nothing to do with your topic or my post.
All you're doing is reinforcing the idea that what Paul had to say had nothing to do with Judaism and was, in fact, something totally divorced from it.

 

[Desert Snake]

It wasn't the mob that handed Jesus to the Romans. It was one of Jesus's disciples Judas that led the Romans to Jesus.

It was the high priest that charged Jesus with blasphemy.

Mark 14:. 60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?"
61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?"
62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked.
64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death.
65 Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and beat him.

Right, you're assuming some monolithic concensus on hatred of Jesus, whatever.

 

[ZenMonkey]

While an interesting outlook, it has nothing to do with your topic or my post.
All you're doing is reinforcing the idea that what Paul had to say had nothing to do with Judaism and was, in fact, something totally divorced from it.

I never suggested that it was Judaism, so I'm not sure your point. I've merely suggested that Paul still belonged to the Jewish faith post Damascus. It was certainly a divorce from the religious regulations attached to Judaism, though. Religious law and custom seems to be less about faith in God, and more about faith in self, self will, and faith in ones obedience to these laws and customs. Paul taught a progression from self will to grace.

 

[Tarheeler]

I never suggested that it was Judaism, so I'm not sure your point. I've merely suggested that Paul still belonged to the Jewish faith post Damascus. It was certainly a divorce from the religious regulations attached to Judaism, though. Religious law and custom seems to be less about faith in God, and more about faith in self, self will, and faith in ones obedience to these laws and customs.

Now you're simply contradicting yourself.

Thanks for the conversation, but I think I'm done.
I've never really enjoyed beating my head against a wall.

 

[outhouse]

Jewish faith post Damascus. .

the Damascus road is more then likely fiction.

Paul makes no mention of it. had it really happened to Paul he surely would have given us details.

Your apologetics does not dictate history

 

[outhouse]

Now you're simply contradicting yourself.

Thanks for the conversation, but I think I'm done.
I've never really enjoyed beating my head against a wall.

Proven himself to be less then honest, caught red handed earlier in the thread.

 

[ZenMonkey]

Now you're simply contradicting yourself.

Thanks for the conversation, but I think I'm done.
I've never really enjoyed beating my head against a wall.

There's no contradiction unless you are trying to equate 1st century or even Judaism to one belonging to the Jewish faith. For example, Paul belonged to the Jewish faith throughout his entire life. He divorced himself from the laws and customs prevalent in Judaism post Damascus, but he still belonged to the Jewish faith. It may not have been Judaism according to the precepts of Jewish law, but it was rather a progression from law to spirit, from self will to grace. It would still be considered Jewish in faith if only for the reason that he believed Jesus was the promised messiah spoken of by Jewish prophets.

 

[Akivah]

Paul taught a progression of the Jewish faith instead of a conversion to another religion.

I never suggested that it was Judaism, so I'm not sure your point.

It seems that you have learned a bit about Judaism and you now realize that Paul's teaching have nothing to do with Judaism. Good show!

 

[outhouse]

I'm not a Christian..

That explains the severe ignorance .

 

[ZenMonkey]

Proven himself to be less then honest, caught red handed earlier in the thread.

I might suggest that we've had a couple misunderstandings due to comprehension weaknesses on both sides. You cry foul and attack the poster instead of the arguments being made. You're not a very effective debater are you? You like to use straw man arguments and personal attacks in attempt to make your opponents seem less informed and/or less trust worthy than yourself. Tearing others down in attempt to make yourself look better is juvenile at best. Good luck with that eh? Keep it up though. I'm sure some will fall for the facade hook, line, sinker. :yes:

 

[ZenMonkey]

It seems that you have learned a bit about Judaism and you now realize that Paul's teaching have nothing to do with Judaism. Good show!

Judaism? No. The Jewish faith? Certainly. I've said nothing short of this and have repeated such sentiments throughout this thread.

 

[ZenMonkey]

That explains the severe ignorance .

 

[Sees]

Judaism? No. The Jewish faith? Certainly. I've said nothing short of this and have repeated such sentiments throughout this thread.

Synonymous, especially when you say The Jewish Faith...Judaism and Jewish faith - dinner and supper.

 

[CMike]

Your point is? You speak of Judaism, when I am (again) speaking of a progression of the Jewish faith by Paul who is believed to be of Jewish descent. There's certainly a difference between Judaism and the direction Paul took the Jewish faith. Paul once practiced Judaic laws and customs as I understand it, then he had a change of heart (spiritually speaking) and pioneered a progression of the faith he belonged to. It has come to be known as Christianity, but Christianity as it exists today is a shadow of its formal self (imo). Judaism is a shadow of what Paul envisioned for the Jewish faith also. None of these can lay claim of being the true faith, only that they are different in practice.

You smug disposition suits you. :clap

This is why I object to calling the Torah, the "Old Testament". It's insulting.

It presumes that the Torah is "old" and therefore outdated to be replaced by the "new" testament.

Christianity is not a progression. It's an entirely different religion that worships multiple dieties. It has virtually nothing to do with Judaism and Jewish beliefs.

Also you want to compare how many millions of people were murdered in the name of Christianity vs how many people were murdered in the name of Judaism in the last 2,000 years?

 

[CMike]

Christians don't circumcise, or respect the sabbath or even follow kosher or restricted diets. Christians don't covert the land of their neighbours or send missiles into civilian populations killing innocent women and children.

There is even doubt there are Jews left from the seed of Abraham. The temple was destroyed in 70AD.

You hold a minority view. But your people did kill your own messiah which is the majority view.

Jews didn't "convert" the land of their neighbors, and it's enemy government that used their own civilians as human shields.

However, Christians have tortured, burned, hanged, flayed, and murdered millions of people.

Spanish Inquisition ring a bell?

How about Christians blaming Jews for the Black Plague, and therefore murdering thousands of them?

You really want to make a comparison?

 

[CMike]

Your point is? You speak of Judaism, when I am (again) speaking of a progression of the Jewish faith by Paul who is believed to be of Jewish descent. There's certainly a difference between Judaism and the direction Paul took the Jewish faith. Paul once practiced Judaic laws and customs as I understand it, then he had a change of heart (spiritually speaking) and pioneered a progression of the faith he belonged to. It has come to be known as Christianity, but Christianity as it exists today is a shadow of its formal self (imo). Judaism is a shadow of what Paul envisioned for the Jewish faith also. None of these can lay claim of being the true faith, only that they are different in practice.

You smug disposition suits you. :clap

Paul didn't take the Jewish faith in any direction. He created another religion.

 

[ZenMonkey]

Paul didn't take the Jewish faith in any direction. He created another religion.

18 pages of insults, a few I'm right your wrong sentiments, and people trying to lay claim to what must be believed/practiced in order to belong to the Jewish faith. Paul came from a Jewish heritage. Paul believed Jesus to be the promised Jewish messiah. Paul taught according to "his" Jewish faith in relation to his beliefs that Jesus was the promised one. I never claimed Paul represented Judaism, only that he belonged to the Jewish faith and pioneered some growth in the views, practices, and beliefs held. I think some are being contrary for sake of being contrary. Others don't seem to be interested in discussion at all, yet can't help from being insincere by clipping posts instead of addressing full content. Narrow sighted/minded comes to mind actually. What Paul taught was a new way to practice an old religion. What Paul taught isn't an entirely new religion being that the believed Jewish messiah is the reason behind the faith.

 

[outhouse]

. Paul came from a Jewish heritage.
.

What evidence do you know?

Paul believed Jesus to be the promised Jewish messiah.

Not relevant

What Paul taught was a new way to practice an old religion.

So did muhammad

 

[outhouse]

18 pages of insults,.

Goes with 18 pages of ignorance, by almost a majority of replies.

 

[paarsurrey]

18 pages of insults, a few I'm right your wrong sentiments, and people trying to lay claim to what must be believed/practiced in order to belong to the Jewish faith. Paul came from a Jewish heritage. Paul believed Jesus to be the promised Jewish messiah. Paul taught according to "his" Jewish faith in relation to his beliefs that Jesus was the promised one. I never claimed Paul represented Judaism, only that he belonged to the Jewish faith and pioneered some growth in the views, practices, and beliefs held. I think some are being contrary for sake of being contrary. Others don't seem to be interested in discussion at all, yet can't help from being insincere by clipping posts instead of addressing full content. Narrow sighted/minded comes to mind actually. What Paul taught was a new way to practice an old religion. What Paul taught isn't an entirely new religion being that the believed Jewish messiah is the reason behind the faith.

I don't agree with you.

Regards