Torah in Christianity

[Brian2]

Did Jesus himself say it, please that Moses teachings were imperfect, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Jesus own writing in first person. Right?

Regards

Do you believe it more when Jesus said it?
What if Jesus said it and you disagree with Jesus?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Oddly, Jews believe almost the opposite:
If Christians would believe what the Tanach says, then they would not believe at all in the NT.

The Old foretells of the New. So what you say isn't illogical.

 

[Harel13]

The Old foretells of the New. So what you say isn't illogical.

To you the Tanach foretells of the NT because you presuppose that the NT is true. Out of the reading of the NT you approach the Bible and suddenly everything fits. Like magic. That was not my argument at all.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Why do you stop there, it goes on!...

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

If you say that all has been fulfilled, then you don't expect any second coming, right?

All means all. Either all is done or it's not, you can't have it both ways.

So you are saying the 2nd coming is part of the law?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

To you the Tanach foretells of the NT because you presuppose that the NT is true. Out of the reading of the NT you approach the Bible and suddenly everything fits. Like magic. That was not my argument at all.

The old foretells of the new in places like Jeremiah 31:31

 

[Harel13]

The old foretells of the new in places like Jeremiah 31:31

Yeah, yeah. Heard it once, heard it a thousand times.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Actually the reason Christian translations are so different in some places (including places where Chrisitans mistakenly think there are messianic prophecies) is due to the fact that almost all Christian translations use a Greek translation called the Septuagint as a source, rather than the Hebrew Text. All translations are inferior, but the Septuagint in particular deviates significantly in certain places. One famous difference is that the Hebrew says a young woman has conceived, and the Septuagint says a virgin will conceive.

Wasn't the Septuagint based on an earlier version of Hebrew and translated by JEWS?

 

[Rival]

Wasn't the Septuagint based on an earlier version of Hebrew and translated by JEWS?

Only the Torah, and we no longer have the original. Only Christian copies of the whole Greek Tanakh.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Yeah, yeah. Heard it once, heard it a thousand times.

Then since you know it's foretold there, isn't it just possible that it came and is true?

 

[Harel13]

Then since you know it's foretold there, isn't it just possible that it came and is true?

I said I heard this Christian idea many times over. Doesn't mean I believe it or that I even agree with that interpretation of the text.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Only the Torah, and we no longer have the original. Only Christian copies of the whole Greek Tanakh.

That means virgin could be correct and could have been changed.

I said I heard this Christian idea many times over. Doesn't mean I believe it or that I even agree with that interpretation of the text.

It's not just an idea, it is IN your text. Whether you believe your text or not is a different issue.

 

[Rival]

That means virgin could be correct and could have been changed.


It's not just an idea, it is IN your text. Whether you believe your text or not is a different issue.

The LXX calls Dinah a parthenos after she's been raped, so the word clearly does not mean virgin.

 

[Harel13]

It's not just an idea, it is IN your text. Whether you believe your text or not is a different issue.

There is a certain phrase in my text which you believe should be interpreted as referring to the NT. I disagree with that interpretation. Since Jews have managed to hold onto our interpretation for thousands of years now, at the very least, that makes the phrase ambiguous.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

As I told Brian2 in a previous post: Torah in Christianity

Matt 5:17-18 'Til all be fulfilled' ... if you claim that all has been fulfilled, (as you just did)
to that I say, 'then you don't expect any second coming!' right?
All means all. Either all is done or it's not, you can't have it both ways.


Yes, you began with "I accept the Old." but I have to ask... how? What do you do with
that acceptance? For example, do you observe Shabbat on the seventh day? Surely
you see how important that is to G-d, right? Or do you observe a Sunday sabbath as
many do? Which has no basis in 'old' or 'new'?

A 2nd coming wasn't a part of the law of Moses.

The law was a type/shadow of good things to come in the NEW covenant. Resting on the Sabbath day in the Old was required, because it represented the eternal day of rest for which I am waiting on in the New. When that eternal day of rest comes I will definitely observe it.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The LXX calls Dinah a parthenos after she's been raped, so the word clearly does not mean virgin.

I think we BOTH know that was not the word used in the passage I was referring to.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Wasn't the Septuagint based on an earlier version of Hebrew and translated by JEWS?

Well there is the traditional story, which isn't exactly the same as history. Yes, the Septuagint is a pretty poor translation from the Hebrew into Greek. The translation of the Torah is good, but the rest of it is not the best quality -- there are quite a few mistakes made, like translating almah as virgin (wrong) instead of young woman (correct). The traditional story is that you had 72 translators taken from all the twelve tribes to translate the Torah. As the story goes, when they were done, they compared notes, and found that they had translated it exactly the same. A miracle! LOL

 

[Sedim Haba]

A 2nd coming wasn't a part of the law of Moses.

None of the prophecy of a King Messiah was accomplished, so for those to be accomplished by
Yeshua a 'second coming' would be required. And the appointment of a King is most certainly in
the Torah.

The law was a type/shadow of good things to come in the NEW covenant. Resting on the Sabbath day in the Old was required, because it represented the eternal day of rest for which I am waiting on in the New. When that eternal day of rest comes I will definitely observe it.

This laughable excuse can be used to negate ANY law of G-d in the Torah!

'The command not to steal was a type/shadow bla bla bla so I can shoplift all I want, but when
that NEW covenant comes I will definitely observe it!'

I'm quite done with Xian 'justifications' of ignoring the commandments of G-d and teachings of
Yeshua and accepting instead the Covenant of Paul and Roman church 'doctrine'.

I remember now why I left my MJ Synagogue when Xians took over the 'leadership'.

I will no longer interact with Xians, because there is no point with those who deny Torah.

 

[muhammad_isa]

None of the prophecy of a King Messiah was accomplished, so for those to be accomplished by Yeshua a 'second coming' would be required. And the appointment of a King is most certainly in the Torah..

Agreed upon..

I will no longer interact with Xians, because there is no point with those who deny Torah.

No .. you shouldn't become angry and dismissive..
We are all a product of environment .. and tend to be tribal in nature.
..and even though people tend to argue their "side", it doesn't mean that they aren't considering what another might be saying .. in the long run.

 

[Sedim Haba]

No .. you shouldn't become angry and dismissive..
We are all a product of environment .. and tend to be tribal in nature.
..and even though people tend to argue their "side", it doesn't mean that they aren't considering what another might be saying .. in the long run.

I am not angry, I simply realize the futility in it all. I have quite a bit of experience with the positions
they hold, as when they came into my synagogue I found out exactly where they stand. I was out.

We have irreconcilable differences, and that will not ever change.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

None of these verse say non-Jews will be part of God's people. God's people are the Jews. These verses say non-Jews will worship the Jewish God. Noahides already do, but it doesn't make them God's people. That is a role applied only to Israel.

You can choose to believe you can't be one of his people if you want. I know I am. There are many verses in the new Covenant that prove that. He is not the God of the Jews only. Abraham was one of his people before Israel even existed.