Mother mary without sin?

[blü 2]

You're not nearly as smart as you think you are. I do not like Christianity or Islam but I would never ever call Jesus/Muhammad rapists, or denigrate their leaders. I especially will not put up with those types of comments about HaShem. Since I already expressed my extreme intolerance for that type of talk which you ignored, now I am blocking you.

There are five versions of Jesus in the NT and each of them both denies that he's God and never claims to be God. Jesus doesn't become God until the politics of the early church lead to the adoption of the Trinity doctrine in the 4th century.

And you didn't answer my question, relating to the Mary of Matthew and the Mary of Luke but not any others: what term would you prefer for impregnating a woman without her consent?

 

[paarsurrey]

There are five versions of Jesus in the NT and each of them both denies that he's God and never claims to be God. Jesus doesn't become God until the politics of the early church lead to the adoption of the Trinity doctrine in the 4th century.

Very truly said.

Regards

 

[metis]

She is ascribed many traits of a deity, is prayed to and called mother of G-D. Catholics insist they don't worship her, but their practices show otherwise.

And how could you possibly know a person's intent unless they tell you?

I go by the Torah, and HaShem is pretty clear. Regardless I think all Christianity is Idolatry, Catholic or otherwise.

You obviously can believe in whatever you want but I don't much get into who's religion is true and who's is false.

As for me, I'm far more interested on how people treat people as how many people have been shunned or died because of judgementalism, and this problem, has also reared its ugly head within Judaism as times.

What, is it supposed to be too much for my widdle head? If you think the Tanakh is not divine and contains errors then that's the end of the line, since the Christian bible is predicated on the belief in said divinity.

I do not believe in scriptural inerrancy, nor do I believe any religion has a monopoly on the truth, whatever that may be.

BTW, I was not in any way trying to insult you so I can't figure out how you got that out of what I posted.

 

[Eliana]

And how could you possibly know a person's intent unless they tell you?

I'm not interested in games and I stated my reasons why I believe they deify her. I really don't care if that rankles others, it's my opinion.

You obviously can believe in whatever you want but I don't much get into who's religion is true and who's is false.

Jews don't proselytize and I don't care what others believe. At no point did you ever see me on this message board try to convince anyone to be Jewish or adopt Jewish beliefs.

As for me, I'm far more interested on how people treat people as how many people have been shunned or died because of judgementalism, and this problem, has also reared its ugly head within Judaism as times.

Hyperbole much? I don't recall ever saying something should be done to Catholics or Christians. In fact I've repeatedly said live and let live.

I do not believe in scriptural inerrancy, nor do I believe any religion has a monopoly on the truth, whatever that may be.

I care why? If you wish to make up your own religion via cherry picking what you like out of religious scriptures, that's your prerogative.

BTW, I was not in any way trying to insult you so I can't figure out how you got that out of what I posted.

You said:

BTW, personally, I'm pretty much a Spinoza Catholic, so see it you can figure that out.

As if this was some deep theological concept that I wouldn't be able to get my head around. How else should "see if you can figure that out... winky face" be interpreted? I wasn't insulted in the slightest, all I said was if you don't believe in the divinity of the Tanakh then that's kind of the end the road theologically speaking. It's a mere statement of fact and your beliefs don't affect me one iota either way.

 

[Balthazzar]

I don't believe in sin, so yes.

I do, so no she was not without sin.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

And how could you possibly know a person's intent unless they tell you?

This forum is chock full of people who can read minds. Honestly, we ought to get the CIA in here to study them.

 

[Betho_br]

Again, you are deviating from the topic. I asked you to explain your remark, which I'm pasting now:

This remark made no sense to me, so I asked some questions about it.
1. You use the expression "teraphim" of the saints. This makes no sense, since a teraphim is a statue of a god, not a saint.
2. You said statues of saints in churches increased under Constantine. The truth is, the churches built in the fourth century did not have statues of saints.

In this post, you go off on a tangent about the Good Shepherd iconography. It doesn't in any way address my comments.
1. The Good Shepherd is a symbol of Jesus. It is not a saint.
2. Your examples are not in any fourth century churches.

IOW you still have not provided any evidence of statues of saints in 4th century churches. You also have not addressed my remark that a teraphim is not a statue of a saint.

I looked this up. It's not a statue. It's a drawing on a stone. Yes, Christians used drawings from the beginning. We have all sorts of Christian drawings in the catacombs, including the good shepherd.

What I'm expecting from you and not finding is evidence that fourth century churches had statues of saints, and that this had something to do with Constantine, since that is what you claimed.


This was found in the catacombs (an underground mausoleum), not a church. Again, the Good Shepherd is a symbol of Jesus, not a statue of a saint.

If you are saying that the Good Shepherd was a common Christian symbol for Jesus, I heartily agree.

That's not what the issue is. You mentioned statues (you incorrectly used the word teraphim) of saints in fourth century churches. So far, you have not provided any evidence of this.

It is true that after the Edict of Milan which legalized Christianity, Christians did begin building churches. But these churches did not contain all the statues of saints like you find today. That practice began in the western churches around the ninth century.

Certainly. It seems that I do not yet possess sufficient evidence to substantiate a clear transition of this cultural practice into the Jewish church.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Certainly. It seems that I do not yet possess sufficient evidence to substantiate a clear transition of this cultural practice into the Jewish church.

Good to see you again. The word "church" refers to a Christian house of worship. We Jews do not have churches, nor do we refer to ourselves as a church. We are a tribal people. Those of us who are religious worship in synagogues.

 

[metis]

I'm not interested in games and I stated my reasons why I believe they deify her. I really don't care if that rankles others, it's my opinion.



Jews don't proselytize and I don't care what others believe. At no point did you ever see me on this message board try to convince anyone to be Jewish or adopt Jewish beliefs.



Hyperbole much? I don't recall ever saying something should be done to Catholics or Christians. In fact I've repeatedly said live and let live.



I care why? If you wish to make up your own religion via cherry picking what you like out of religious scriptures, that's your prerogative.



You said:



As if this was some deep theological concept that I wouldn't be able to get my head around. How else should "see if you can figure that out... winky face" be interpreted? I wasn't insulted in the slightest, all I said was if you don't believe in the divinity of the Tanakh then that's kind of the end the road theologically speaking. It's a mere statement of fact and your beliefs don't affect me one iota either way.

All you have done with the above is to twist what I posted beyond what I actually posted and then assuming I must have some sort of "agenda". And in my last post, there was this at the end [] to indicate I was using a tongue-in-cheek approach, thus not demeaning you. So, why did you assume I was?

Since you seem to blindly believe I have some sort of agenda beyond some basic explanations of where I'm coming from and why, I see no reason to continue this discussion.

BTW, I belonged to a synagogue for over 20 years and even taught in it, and much of my heart is still there. I still talk with some members literally every week.

Take care.

 

[Betho_br]

Good to see you again. The word "church" refers to a Christian house of worship. We Jews do not have churches, nor do we refer to ourselves as a church. We are a tribal people. Those of us who are religious worship in synagogues.

Yes, but I referred to this church of circumcised Jews:

Acts 21:20-21 kJV

And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

The reasons why they did not prosper are written in the Christian Bible itself.

1) The insistence on blaming the Jewish leaders for the death of the righteous man (Jesus), when in fact it was Jesus who meticulously planned his death.

2) Not having supported the Jews against the Romans in the siege of Jerusalem +- 70 AD, fulfilling Jesus' instructions to flee to the hills:

Luke 21:20-21 KJV

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

3) Illiterate leadership.

4) The false apostle Paul, who set fire to Judea against the already weak authorities of Jesus' apostles.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes, but I referred to this church of circumcised Jews:

Acts 21:20-21 kJV

And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

The reasons why they did not prosper are written in the Christian Bible itself.

1) The insistence on blaming the Jewish leaders for the death of the righteous man (Jesus), when in fact it was Jesus who meticulously planned his death.

2) Not having supported the Jews against the Romans in the siege of Jerusalem +- 70 AD, fulfilling Jesus' instructions to flee to the hills:

Luke 21:20-21 KJV

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

3) Illiterate leadership.

4) The false apostle Paul, who set fire to Judea against the already weak authorities of Jesus' apostles.

Good job

 

[Eliana]

All you have done with the above is to twist what I posted beyond what I actually posted and then assuming I must have some sort of "agenda". And in my last post, there was this at the end [] to indicate I was using a tongue-in-cheek approach, thus not demeaning you. So, why did you assume I was?

Since you seem to blindly believe I have some sort of agenda beyond some basic explanations of where I'm coming from and why, I see no reason to continue this discussion.

BTW, I belonged to a synagogue for over 20 years and even taught in it, and much of my heart is still there. I still talk with some members literally every week.

Take care.

Welcome to the internet, where the written word carries no tone and may be precieved differently then the writer intended.

I asked you to clarify your intent and stated how I interpreted it. You elected not to clarify so I assume my interpretation was correct. Nor did I claim you had an agenda, the subject is a philosophical and theological one and therefore one cannot have an "agenda".

The rest is my view on your views. You not liking them does not equate twisting your words.

You having taught in a synagogue means little. If one is not a Halakha observant Jew then I consider them apostate. If you're not a Jew at all then I fail to see the relevance. Since the subject is Mary, a Christian figure, and not Jewish theology I fail to see the connection even if you weren't apostate.

 

[paarsurrey]

Mother mary without sin?

synagogue

In which synagogue did Moses got education/taught, please, right??
Was Moses a "Jew" , right, please??

Regards

 

[Eliana]

Mother mary without sin?

In which synagogue did Moses got education/taught, please, right??
Was Moses a "Jew" , right, please??

Regards

That's the opposite of an amazing question! Glad to answer!

Moses was a Jew because he followed Judaism... duh.

The "Synagogue" he attended was on Mount Sinai at the foot of Hashem.

 

[Betho_br]

In this discussion, we've already touched on "kecharitomene" and its interpretation, which differs between Catholics and Protestants. What I want to talk about now is the traumatic conception of Mary. She was visited by an angel, so she thought the child was from the angel. She told all her relatives; notice that Elizabeth, who lived far away, knew (Luke 1:45). Then the angel returned and told Mary that the embryo wasn’t his, but from the Holy Spirit, a gender-neutral entity in Greek and feminine in Hebrew. What does this mean? That there wouldn’t be adultery against celestial dignities, so Joseph could marry Mary. Imagine the commotion among all who witnessed these events. It’s likely from these conflicting interpretations that the legend of Yeshu ben Pantera arose. The editor of Matthew's Gospel, aimed at a Jewish audience, curiously includes four matriarchs of questionable reputation in Jesus's genealogy, even though genealogies traditionally focused solely on men. This seems to be an attempt to safeguard Mary's reputation as a Jewish mother, especially for those who did not accept the belief in the virgin birth.

 

[metis]

You having taught in a synagogue means little. If one is not a Halakha observant Jew then I consider them apostate. If you're not a Jew at all then I fail to see the relevance. Since the subjectbis Mary, a Christian figure, and not Jewish theology I fail to see the connection even if you weren't apostate.

I was just explaining that I am familiar with the various positions dealing with halacha, and my general opinion is to each his/her own.

IMO, it is narrow-minded to take the "I'm right-- you're wrong" position when it comes to religion as ultimately nothing is provable as it is based on the faith one chooses. We can't even objectively establish that God exists-- or is it God's? How could one possibly know for sure?

Instead, I pretty much drift in the direction of "Spinoza's God" as Einstein said he basically accepted.

 

[Eliana]

I was just explaining that I am familiar with the various positions dealing with halacha, and my general opinion is to each his/her own.

IMO, it is narrow-minded to take the "I'm right-- you're wrong" position when it comes to religion as ultimately nothing is provable as it is based on the faith one chooses. We can't even objectively establish that God exists-- or is it God's? How could one possibly know for sure?

Instead, I pretty much drift in the direction of "Spinoza's God" as Einstein said he basically accepted.

I don't care what you believe about G-d. I'm not trying to change your mind and I didn't ask you to change mine.

Either the Torah is true or it isn't and it does not allow for pluralism. Once one takes a position that the Torah is not divine then that's the end of the line theologically speaking. Either one observes Halakha or they do not, there are no varying positions.

Given your own theological outlook I do not believe you taught in any Halakha observant synagogue, because we don't allow for any teaching that contradicts the Torah.

 

[paarsurrey]

Mother mary without sin?

Moses was a Jew because he followed Judaism

The "Synagogue" he attended was on Mount Sinai

Moses was never a Jew and he never followed any Judaism, please, right?
Moses never attended any "Synagogue", right, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Moses in first person in a straightforward, unequivocal and unambiguous manner, please, right?

Regards

 

[metis]

Either the Torah is true or it isn't and it does not allow for pluralism.

False as some parts may be true and some false.

Once one takes a position that the Torah is not divine then that's the end of the line theologically speaking.

How could one know with any degree of certainty whether it is or is not divine?

Either one observes Halakha or they do not, there are no varying positions.

Again, that's simply not true as some parts may be true and some other parts false.

Given your own theological outlook I do not believe you taught in any Halakha observant synagogue, because we don't allow for any teaching that contradicts the Torah.

Correct, but it's unfortunate that freedom of opinion is absent. In my former synagogue it was much more open, including in Torah study that I was involved with for over a decade.

Personally, I don't think the synagogue should be a place for brainwashing, but to each their own.

 

[Eliana]

Mother mary without sin?


Moses was never a Jew and he never followed any Judaism, please, right?
Moses never attended any "Synagogue", right, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Moses in first person in a straightforward, unequivocal and unambiguous manner, please, right?

Regards

Sorry, I don't have much patience for donkey arguments nor do I like repeating myself. I couldn't care less what you believe.