Why Do You Reject Jesus?

[Jimmy]

Karma is not about it ensuring that good things happen to good PPL and bad things happen to bad people. Karma is the awareness that actions bind a person, physically with their consequences, and mentally, through creating habits and modes of acting that reduce their freedom to do otherwise. Thus human actions and reactions become predictable, like that of inanimate matter, as we loose the ability to act, think and behave with the freedom that we truly possess. If we are bound like inanimate matter, we would be treated by the universe like inanimate matter....she will make us and break us like the mountains and the sea. And THAT is why we suffer. Rocks don't feel happy or suffer as they rise with the mountains or fall into the sea. But we are happy as we rise in status and circumstances and are sad when we fall into poverty or sickness.
Thus Karma Yoga is the skill that is taught on how to act without causing those actions to bind you physically or mentally, to regain and retain your freedom of will from the chain of habits and conditioning. For a skillful one, the making and unmaking that is the cycle of natural life is no longer a cause of either exhuberence or depression. And freedom brings with it the unconditioned joy that is the first step in path of a true spiritual awakening.

This is basically what I said, only more eloquently.

 

[Whateverist]

Deleted. Not worth the effort.

 

[Ebionite]

Read Isaiah 53. Jews believe it is about Israel

Israel is described as a servant, but never as a righteous servant. Isaiah 53 refers to the righteous servant being taken from prison and from judgment, which is consistent with Zechariah 3 which describes Yahushua being taken from the fire. The name of Yeshua is from the stem whic means rescue or liberation. AFAIK none of that can be said to apply to Baha’u’llah.

He did not see his seed and His days were not prolongedHe was not rejected by most men.

According to the gospel story he was rejected by the people in favour of Barabbas.

Isaiah 53:9 and Isaiah 53:10 cannot apply to Jesus because Jesus did not make His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death.

The wicked one was the crucified man described in Psalm 22 and 69.

But I [am] a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
Psalms 22:6

O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee.
Psalms 69:5

He did not see his seed and His days were not prolonged

Not according to the Christian tradition, but having a family is consistent with prosperity.

Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let YHWH be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant.
Psalms 35:27

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What is your reason for not accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savior? The one who saves us all from eternal death—separation from God—according to the Holy Bible.

1. God is ECHAD, one, not three in one. Christianity teaches Trinitarianism, which although it is monotheism, is a muddied monotheism. Judaism on the other hand teaches a pure and simple monotheism. Anything that comprises the oneness of God is unthinkable.
2. God is not a man. This is the nature of God, and the nature of God is unchanging. It is stated four times in the Tanakh: twice in Numbers 23:19, again in 1 Samuel 15:29, a third time in Job 9:32 and a fourth time in Hosea 11:9. For something to be reiterated four times -- it must be of great importance. Christianity on the other hand, claims that Jesus is "fully God and fully man," at least in the orthodox version. The two are absolutely incompatible. Christians try to claim that "let us create man in our own image" is a reference to the triune nature of God, but in reality it is God talking to the heavenly court. Similarly, the claims of Elohim being a plural are moot -- it is more similar to the royal "we" used by the Queen. When Elohim is used for God, the verbs are singular tense.
3. The New Testament contradicts the teachings of the Tanakh/Torah. The Torah clearly teaches the following of the Law, in order to receive the blessings of prosperity and the land of Canaan. Psalm 19 states that the Law is "perfect....sweeter also than the honey and the honeycomb." Yet Paul teaches that the Law brings a curse. He teaches that circumcision is nothing and keeping the Sabbath is up to the individual, rather than being necessary for the Jew. These views, that of the Tanakh and those of Paul, are utterly incompatible.
4. The New Testament quotes prophecy out of context (i.e. Hosea 11:1, which is about Israel, not the messiah), misquotes prophecy (i.e. Isaiah 7:14 which is rightly translated young maiden, not virgin), and even makes up prophecy out of whole cloth (such as Matthew 2:23, He shall be called a Nazarene aka someone from the city of Nazareth.)
5. Jesus cannot be the Messiah because he simply did not fulfill messianic prophecy. It makes no sense to say, "He will fulfill the rest when he comes back again." After all, anyone can claim to be the messiah and say they will fulfill the prophecies the next time around. The only way we have of determining the messiah is if they fulfill the messianic claims, all of them, and quite frankly Jesus did not; thus he failed in his attempt to be the messiah. For example, the Messiah will usher in an era of worldwide peace between the nations. Jesus did not.
   

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Well, maybe you could be a little more sure if you ask God. I’m not being snide, I’m being serious.

I know you are, and I'm SMH. I don't hear any audible voice of God. When I was young, I used to think that the inner dialogue in my head was God speaking to me, but now I understand it is just me talking to myself in more than one voice, kind of a combination of a good imagination and just a touch of dissociation. Talking to God is not possible.

The verses from the Tanakh were likely passed down from oral tradition, but they came from somewhere, from somebody’s mind.. so I’m sure your mind could get some answers as well no?

I'm all for paying attention to wisdom that has stood the test of time. But I would not say that the authors of the Bible were God speaking, even though those authors did the very best they could to say what God would want.

All you have to do is ask. It might take a lot of time, but the answers will come. I think at some point a little bit of common sense, soul searching and wisdom of our own reality must come in to play and be applied to one’s spiritual beliefs. Know what I mean? So that’s the best answer I can give you to your question.

Honestly, i used to think just like you. I'm very very very much the soul searching person. Over the decades, it led me away from this sort of thinking.

 

[Jimmy]

I know you are, and I'm SMH. I don't hear any audible voice of God. When I was young, I used to think that the inner dialogue in my head was God speaking to me, but now I understand it is just me talking to myself in more than one voice, kind of a combination of a good imagination and just a touch of dissociation. Talking to God is not possible.

I'm all for paying attention to wisdom that has stood the test of time. But I would not say that the authors of the Bible were God speaking, even though those authors did the very best they could to say what God would want.

Honestly, i used to think just like you. I'm very very very much the soul searching person. Over the decades, it led me away from this sort of thinking.

“What” led you away from “what” sort of thinking? Also, did you ever think that talking to yourself was talking to God?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

“What” led you away from “what” sort of thinking?

From YOUR sort of thinking.

Also, did you ever think that talking to yourself was talking to God?

I didn't think at that time that I was talking to myself. I believed that the other voice in my head, which I was not consciously controlling, was the voice of God. I only realized much later in my life that this voice was my own inner dialogue.

 

[blü 2]

What is your reason for not accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savior? The one who saves us all from eternal death—separation from God—according to the Holy Bible.

I've never been able to figure out what it is that Jesus is said to have achieved.

The idea that Jesus is God's human sacrifice to [him]self is both grotesque and inexplicable.

After all, God is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent so [he] could bring about any situation [he] desired with one snap of those omnipotent fingers. For what coherent reason would [he] send [his] son on a suicide mission (as clearly it's expressed to be eg Mark 2:20, Mark 8:31, all four gospels with a 'let this cup pass from me' scene &c)?

And behind all that is the unanswered question, what real entity is God? ─ as distinct from the usual version described only in imaginary terms like omnipotent, omniscient, perfect, eternal, infinite and so on. Why if God created the world is it always in one kind of mess or another? How can that not be God's fault, God's incompetence (such as [he] owned to when [he] sent the Flood to wipe out [his] earlier mess)?

Once again I quote FitzGerald's Omar ─

The Revelations of Devout and Learn'd
Who rose before us and as Prophets burn'd

Are all but Stories, which, awoke from Sleep​

They told their comrades, and to Sleep return'd.​

 

[Sargonski]

Since you can't be respectful I'm not going to engage you.

Thanks for the heads up ?!

 

[sayak83]

This is basically what I said, only more eloquently.

So....you do not care for it as it does not stop bad things from happening to good people. But why would you have that expectation at the first place?

 

[Jimmy]

I know you are, and I'm SMH. I don't hear any audible voice of God. When I was young, I used to think that the inner dialogue in my head was God speaking to me, but now I understand it is just me talking to myself in more than one voice, kind of a combination of a good imagination and just a touch of dissociation. Talking to God is not possible.

I'm all for paying attention to wisdom that has stood the test of time. But I would not say that the authors of the Bible were God speaking, even though those authors did the very best they could to say what God would want.

Honestly, i used to think just like you. I'm very very very much the soul searching person. Over the decades, it led me away from this sort of thinking.

So....you do not care for it as it does not stop bad things from happening to good people. But why would you have that expectation at the first place?

No expectation, just a reality.

 

[Eliana]

Thanks for the heads up ?!

You are very welcome!

 

[Ebionite]

No, he isn't.

Who do you you think the righteous servant is? Israel is called a servant, but never a righteous one.

 

[Eliana]

Who do you you think the righteous servant is? Israel is called a servant, but never a righteous one.

Christians need new material. This has been answered many times.

Isaiah 53 - A Jewish Perspective

Wasn't the Prophet referring to Jesus in Isaiah 53? Explore the Jewish perspective of a chapter which has become a cornerstone of Christian evangelism to Jews.

www.jewsforjudaism.org

 

[Ebionite]

Christians need new material. This has been answered many times.

I don't care what you think Christians need, my question has not been answered. Your article assumes that the servant that is identified as Israel is the righteous servant, but this assumption is not consistent with sinful Israel:

The ox knoweth his owner, and the *** his master's crib: [but] Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.
Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken YHWH, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.
Isaiah 1:3-4

 

[SalixIncendium]

Why Salix? Why one, but not another? You speak of evidence right? Can you explain why you could accept Jesus was a teacher etc but no lord or savior? Is that based on evidence or your predisposition?

For the same reasons I would accept Adi Shankara, the Buddha, Muhammad, etc as "teacher(s) etc." Evidence points toward the existence of Jesus as historical as figure.

That said, there is no evidence of his having a greater level of divinity than anyone else that walks the earth.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don't care what you think Christians need, my question has not been answered. Your article assumes that the servant that is identified as Israel is the righteous servant, but this assumption is not consistent with sinful Israel:

When people write, especially when they write the kinds of texts that include motifs and metaphors, they don't change the meaning of the metaphor midstream. The "servant" motif runs all through Isaiah. It doesn't change its meaning. If it is identified as Israel, then it means Israel each time, including chapter 53.

 

[Eliana]

I don't care what you think Christians need, my question has not been answered. Your article assumes that the servant that is identified as Israel is the righteous servant, but this assumption is not consistent with sinful Israel:

The ox knoweth his owner, and the *** his master's crib: [but] Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.
Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken ____, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.
Isaiah 1:3-4

Well what a coincidence, I don't care what apostates and fake Jews think either. Glad we had this talk.

 

[Ebionite]

Well what a coincidence, I don't care what apostates and fake Jews think either. Glad we had this talk.

Labelling me won't work because you don't know what I believe. The point is that you have no viable argument for rejecting the idea that the man called Jesus is the righteous servant.

 

[Eliana]

Labelling me won't work because you don't know what I believe. The point is that you have no viable argument for rejecting the idea that the man called Jesus is the righteous servant.

You call yourself an Ebionite which is a form of Messianic "Judaism". I'm labeling you in the same sense calling a follower of Muhammad a Muslim is "labeling" them. I also make no secret that I despise Messianic "Judaism".

I don't need to make an argument because you are the one making the assertation that Isaiah 53 is about Jesus. It's not my job to prove you wrong, it's your job to prove you're correct. My argument for rejecting Jesus is because he's an apostate and Christianity contradicts the Torah, I don't need anything else.