Messiah (pbuh) important to come(come back) to Jews and Chritians ?

[InChrist]

Anti-Catholic rubbish. I'm very disappointed in you. What's next, a Jack Chick tract? That's just as bad.

History is history and the article only discusses accurate history and actions of the Catholic Church. I'd post the same kind of information on any group, including Protestants, who have their share of anti-Semitim history also.

 

[InChrist]

Tried to follow the link, but CenturyLink keeps refusing to send me there. Its got to be the worst DNS service on the face of the Earth!

Ok that was a little off topic.

I can't figure out why the link doesn't work. It works elsewhere.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

History is history and the article only discusses accurate history and actions of the Catholic Church. I'd post the same kind of information on any group, including Protestants, who have their share of anti-Semitim history also.

That is not "history". That is a pack of lies and you should be ashamed of peddling that hateful **** around. Those articles make the Church out to effectively be the Devil and that the Popes are Antichrist. I'm not sure who you're trying to fool, but keep your hatred to yourself. I'm not interested and I'm not going to give it the time of day.

 

[xkatz]

that's what only God knows .

God sent many prophets and many books .

that's what only God wishes , since there , why He sent Prophet to jews , if HE Know, they (the prophets) would be killed by Jews in the first place ?
Good, before you start argue me

Why would G-d though send newer scripture that contradicts the older one? If He is all knowing, he should've known to just start w/ the Quran. It seems that by claiming that the later scripture (which was revealed ONLY to Muhammad) is correct, while its predecessor's are wrong, you are making your "case" for Islam and the Quran more complex than necessary.

I have notice about (G-d).
I find it a dirty respect manner to put (-) inside "our" Lord label in English !!!?
why you did not do the same , by put (-) instead of (o) in these words too ? :Moshiach ,Torah , Moses , Yehoshua ....etc.

I call it dirty respect , because there is no close express to it , except that sense.

G-d's name is considered utterly sacred. It is a sin to take it in vain, regardless of intention. Even to the point that Torahs are traditionally given the same burial as people b/c they have the name of G-d in them. So in order to avoid taking the name in vain in writing, it's hyphenated. It's not done for other words b/c it would then seem to make those subjects as sacred as G-d, which is idolatry.

That's how most Jewish people roll.

 

[Thana]

That is not "history". That is a pack of lies and you should be ashamed of peddling that hateful **** around.

Well, it is history as in it did happen, I had a quick look on wiki.

But you are right, Just because the Church did things in the past doesn't have much to do with you or the Church today.

Except about the Church still believing it's Israel, But we've already been there done that and got the T-Shirt with that debate.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well, it is history as in it did happen, I had a quick look on wiki.

But you are right, Just because the Church did things in the past doesn't have much to do with you or the Church today.

Except about the Church still believing it's Israel, But we've already been there done that and got the T-Shirt with that debate.

That site is trying to condense centuries of history across continents and nations into "the Church is completely evil!". All those events it brings up are complicated and the truth is somewhere in the middle. It would take multiple tomes to get through all of it. Yes, there have been Catholics and there have been good Catholics. There have been bad Popes and there have been good Popes. We're human beings so what do you expect? All religions have the same problem - humans.

Also, the Vatican is not the Church. That's just where the (earthly) leadership is and sometimes they screw up. The Church is all Catholics combined. Also, that site completely ignores the fact that we have been persecuted many times throughout history, including by Protestants. So if they want to play that card, then they're drunk on the blood of Saints, as well. Nevermind that they also accuse us of being "pagans", which shows that they don't even understand the roots of their own religion.

 

[Thana]

That site is trying to condense centuries of history across continents and nations into "the Church is completely evil!". All those events it brings up are complicated and the truth is somewhere in the middle. It would take multiple tomes to get through all of it. Yes, there have been Catholics and there have been good Catholics. There have been bad Popes and there have been good Popes. We're human beings so what do you expect? All religions have the same problem - humans.

Also, the Vatican is not the Church. That's just where the (earthly) leadership is and sometimes they screw up. The Church is all Catholics combined. Also, that site completely ignores the fact that we have been persecuted many times throughout history, including by Protestants. So if they want to play that card, then they're drunk on the blood of Saints, as well. Nevermind that they also accuse us of being "pagans", which shows that they don't even understand the roots of their own religion.

Mm.. Don't forget that Protestants were burned as heretics by the Catholics, But we don't really need to get into 'Who had it worse'.

And well... I mean... The Pagan stuff is pretty much true... Agh but I don't want to debate this. Protestants and Catholics.. We're just too different to understand each other imo.

But I agree, We're all humans, all fallible, And all religions have the crazies and the stains on their history.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Mm.. Don't forget that Protestants were burned as heretics by the Catholics, But we don't really need to get into 'Who had it worse'.

I said that because that site conveniently failed to mention Protestant persecutions of others. Catholics are always reminded of the bad parts of our history and we're always the ones apologizing all the time. We hear it all the time. It's trendy to bash us and guilt us, especially in America. Here, we get bashed from everyone - the media including Hollywood and the "art" world, Protestants, atheists, etc.

And well... I mean... The Pagan stuff is pretty much true... Agh but I don't want to debate this. Protestants and Catholics.. We're just too different to understand each other imo.

No, it's not true. The "pagan" accusations are made up lies from anti-Catholics who have no idea of what they're talking about. There's no problems in understanding each other if people would actually do research from reputable sources and listen to each other.

But I agree, We're all humans, all fallible, And all religions have the crazies and the stains on their history.

Mmhmm.

 

[Thana]

I said that because that site conveniently failed to mention Protestant persecutions of others. Catholics are always reminded of the bad parts of our history and we're always the ones apologizing all the time. We hear it all the time. It's trendy to bash us and guilt us, especially in America. Here, we get bashed from everyone - the media including Hollywood and the "art" world, Protestants, atheists, etc.

No, it's not true. The "pagan" accusations are made up lies from anti-Catholics who have no idea of what they're talking about. There's no problems in understanding each other if people would actually do research from reputable sources and listen to each other.

Agree to disgree yeah?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Agree to disgree yeah?

Fine. This is off-topic, anyway.

 

[metis]

God exists in Three Persons - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Father is not the Son and vice versa and so on. That is why He referred to the Father apart from Himself, because they're not the same Person. However, they are all God and all share the same Divine Essence.

When it comes to Him not knowing when the end will come, He said that the Father only knows that. When He said that, He was answering from His human nature. Jesus has two natures - Divine and human, and He is fully Divine and fully human. When He answered that question, He answered from His human nature because humans are not meant to know when it will happen while further driving home the point that such things are to left in God's hands. As God, of course, He knows all things. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all equal in knowledge, power and stature. They just have different roles.

Oh, and the part when the Jews tried to stone Him was when He said "before Abraham was, I AM":
58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” 59 So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple. John 8:58-59

He was making an obvious allusion to the Tetragrammaton and His audience realized that.

A different conversation on a different thread on a different day.

However, I'm always reluctant to get into such a conversation to any significant degree largely because our approach in Judaism teaches that we shouldn't undermine another's religious beliefs as long as they are basically moral. To me, it creates a tightrope situation in terms of having a good conversation and exchanging ideas versus maybe undermining another's faith, and with most of these type of conversations I tend to tread very carefully.

 

[Godobeyer]

Why would G-d though send newer scripture that contradicts the older one? If He is all knowing, he should've known to just start w/ the Quran. It seems that by claiming that the later scripture (which was revealed ONLY to Muhammad) is correct, while its predecessor's are wrong, you are making your "case" for Islam and the Quran more complex than necessary.

You misundersand us :

For the Torah ,or Talmud , or New Testement , we the muslims accept only the verses (Parts) that correspond with our faiths, because we believe they are corrupted by humans, so they maybe had some truth .

I told you before that God wish
let me explian one more time :

God sent many scriptures and Prophets to Jews , so why God did not sent Just one scripture and one Prophet to the Jews ?

G-d's name is considered utterly sacred. It is a sin to take it in vain, regardless of intention. Even to the point that Torahs are traditionally given the same burial as people b/c they have the name of G-d in them. So in order to avoid taking the name in vain in writing, it's hyphenated. It's not done for other words b/c it would then seem to make those subjects as sacred as G-d, which is idolatry.

That's how most Jewish people roll.

thanks for this explain

but honestly i am not convinced , I tell you why

because the word (GOD) is English , nor Hebrew , nor Aramaic , so suppose it's not sacred as the Jewish one ( Yehoshua )

 

[xkatz]

because the word (GOD) is English , nor Hebrew , nor Aramaic , so suppose it's not sacred as the Jewish one ( Yehoshua )

I have to get going somewhere in a moment, so I will respond to the rest of your post later. But I wanted to quickly clarify two things that bothered me here:

1) G-d is the name of G-d in english. It is just as important to respect His name in any language IMO.

2) Yehoshua is not the name of G-d in Hebrew. It's the name of Jesus Christ in Hebrew.

 

[Godobeyer]

I have to get going somewhere in a moment, so I will respond to the rest of your post later. But I wanted to quickly clarify two things that bothered me here:

1) G-d is the name of G-d in english. It is just as important to respect His name in any language IMO.

2) Yehoshua is not the name of G-d in Hebrew. It's the name of Jesus Christ in Hebrew.

ok , take your time

Just was maybe a video translation mistake :

I just notice in this video they wrote Yehoshua to refer to God , it's maybe it's close to the spelling Jesus (pbuh) ?

roll to 9:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCUxTFt8pB0

 

[Godobeyer]

I have no idea what you are talking about, are you referencing the Israeli flag?

Edited error type :

Yes , Some Jews claim that the land of Israel is not from Iraq river to Nile river (two blue line) in the Israeli flag , it's about Tallit "clothes" .

Exile

really !!! that would cool NOT end , at all.

Well traditionally it's been viewed the Moshiach, then the Temple, but there is some debate about it, especially amongst religious Zionists who want to start now, but I don't think it represents the mainstream of rabbinic thought

for your opinion what is the majority jews believe in ?


Messiah (pbuh) required to built temple, or Temple required to let the Messaih (pbuh) come ?

Where I have discussed other topics have all been within the context of explaining Judaism's view of the messiah. As to the murder of prophets, that libel has little baring on Moshiach.

you have discuss the Islam vs Judiasm view that off topic


anyway we could new link to the crucifixion of Jesus (pbuh) , because as the Bible said , the jews Rabbi were involved .

To the Jews as the redeemed of our people, but to the world because his coming will change the world. How exactly is really a matter of speculation, but there are some general ideas, like an end to war.

to the jews , but to the world !!! is that make sence

his coming would be :
Is the benefice of jews and non-jews is the same of his coming ?

btw will the other world exile too , the jews ?

 

[xkatz]

You misundersand us :

For the Torah ,or Talmud , or New Testement , we the muslims accept only the verses (Parts) that correspond with our faiths, because we believe they are corrupted by humans, so they maybe had some truth .

But how do you know that the Quran doesn't suffer from the same problem?

I told you before that God wish
let me explian one more time :

God sent many scriptures and Prophets to Jews , so why God did not sent Just one scripture and one Prophet to the Jews ?

G-d gave the Torah, both the "written" and "oral" Torah. The Jews, having the capacity of free-will as everyone does, strayed from G-d at different time periods, so a prophet would be needed as a "voice of reason" to prevent the Jews from going further astray.

I just notice in this video they wrote Yehoshua to refer to God , it's maybe it's close to the spelling Jesus (pbuh) ?

roll to 9:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCUxTFt8pB0

I looked at the clip you described. It appears that the man is talking about why Jews (both now and back in the time of Jesus), rejected Jesus as HaMoshiach and G-d. To imply that Jesus is G-d means you are going against Judaism by committing avodah zara (the Jewish version of shirk).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

A different conversation on a different thread on a different day.

However, I'm always reluctant to get into such a conversation to any significant degree largely because our approach in Judaism teaches that we shouldn't undermine another's religious beliefs as long as they are basically moral. To me, it creates a tightrope situation in terms of having a good conversation and exchanging ideas versus maybe undermining another's faith, and with most of these type of conversations I tend to tread very carefully.

Fair enough. There's derailments all over this thread. Lol.

 

[Godobeyer]

But how do you know that the Quran doesn't suffer from the same problem?

Because God said in him , that Quran will not suffer from same problem that faced Torah and Gospel .

Just reasonable question : If the Jews could killed many prophets (that God sent to them), how they (the jews) could not edit the messages of God that sent with the Prophets ?

btw
Why the jews killed many prophets of God ?

G-d gave the Torah, both the "written" and "oral" Torah. The Jews, having the capacity of free-will as everyone does, strayed from G-d at different time periods, so a prophet would be needed as a "voice of reason" to prevent the Jews from going further astray.

that's it

SO Torah is compilation of messages (books) from God ,by different prophets,at different time periods ?

I looked at the clip you described. It appears that the man is talking about why Jews (both now and back in the time of Jesus), rejected Jesus as HaMoshiach and G-d. To imply that Jesus is G-d means you are going against Judaism by committing avodah zara (the Jewish version of shirk).

Ok that's maybe my mistake or the mistake of that jewish man ,I am really confused



because that jewish man said " Yehoshua , that created everything"
then he said :
"Yehoshua , the jewish God who created everything "

 

[Brickjectivity]

Ok that's maybe my mistake or the mistake of that jewish man ,I am really confused



because that jewish man said " Yehoshua , that created everything"
then he said :
"Yehoshua , the jewish God who created everything "

The person who told you that Yehoshua was the name of God may have been a Christian. Maybe they were doing some digging into the origin of the name of Jesus.

I think Jesus is literally named after the character Yehoshua from the story of Jericho. Moses gave him this name 'Yehoshua', and he is the leader in the story of the long march around the city of Jericho. In English we call that man 'Joshua'. The Yahoshua name is also the name 'Jesus' in the Christian churches but is spoken differently in different languages. That is where we get 'Jesus' from. For Christians the life of the original Joshua walking around Jericho is one of many templates for the mission of Jesus. Technically they have the same name.

 

[xkatz]

Because God said in him , that Quran will not suffer from same problem that faced Torah and Gospel .

That's circular logic.

Just reasonable question : If the Jews could killed many prophets (that God sent to them), how they (the jews) could not edit the messages of God that sent with the Prophets ?

The Jews didn't kill any prophets AFAIK, and not all Jews weren't listening to prophets. Again, there is free-will amongst Jews as anyone else.

btw
Why the jews killed many prophets of God ?

I don't know what you're talking about in terms of Jews killing prophets. It seems like it is an idea in the Quran that Jews killed prophets. What prophets are we talking about?

SO Torah is compilation of messages (books) from God ,by different prophets,at different time periods ?

No. Torah is considered sacred or divine and is generally considered one piece. Tanakh is Torah PLUS the writings of prophets and such. They help to expound meaning from the Torah and give historical context. Also, commentaries from major rabbis such as Maimonides and Rashi are considered insightful to.