Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Modern Judaism has run away from the Pharisees, possibly to a fault.
It's much more accurate to say that Christianity is the Pharisees because Christian theology comes from Paul the Pharisee who wrote the epistles.
If you have a problem with the Pharisees, you should have a problem with the Gospel of John and the epistles. So? Do you?
^^ Self-Promotion ^^
That's not the original language.
You're not reading the word of The Most High.
In fact, you seem to be running away from it.
You're wrong. You don't know the Torah or the post Biblical tradition. You're parroting man-made anti-Jewish doctrine.
Paul was quoting the Septuagint.Sorry, I don't understand why do you think he is referring to Psalm 51.
Interesting .. the NT did not exist in the time of Jesus, and he preached as a Rabbi in synagogues,
and was known as 'King of the Jews' in the Holy land where he resided.
..so what else could Jesus be, other than a Jew, believing in the God of Abraham?
..despite him contesting some of the exaggeration of the Sanhedrin at the time.
That's not the right attitude of a believer .. just caring about your own.
There are no Jews who believe in Jesus. They are called Christians.I believe there are many Jews who believe Jesus is the Messiah. Perhaps the problem is that Christianity is viewed as a competing religion rather than as a progression from Jewish belief.
It's official doctrine, regardless of the bad theology."Original sin" has been very controversial since how could a newborn have "original sin" if it's never made immoral choices? There's a lot of Christian commentary with plenty of disagreement on this.
Wrong, the Bible also describes the title being used in a positive sense:No... Christians call him king of the Jews, and even according to their own bible he was called this only to mock him.
Why didn't they include them? Why don't they match?
Wrong, the Bible also describes the title being used in a positive sense:
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
Matthew 2:1-2
The star of Bethlehem relates to Balaam's vision.
No, Matthew doesn't refer to Balaam's vision or to the the astrological connection between the star and the king of the jews.You mean Matthew repurposes a line from Numbers 24:16 (much as he repurposes Isaiah 7:14). Therefore?
..but the disciples of Jesus were not called Christians .. they were Jews who attendedNo... Christians call him king of the Jews..
..but the disciples of Jesus were not called Christians .. they were Jews who attended
a synagogue, and believed that Jesus was the Messiah.
I know you don't believe Jesus was sent by God .. nor John the Baptist .. but surely, you are
not saying that it's all made up .. are you?
It makes no sense to me that you believe in the God of Abraham, but believe that the two most
populous religions in the world are based on falsehood.
Considering that they pretty much exclude each other, we don't have the option of doubting that at least one of the two is indeed based on falsehood.It makes no sense to me that you believe in the God of Abraham, but believe that the two most
populous religions in the world are based on falsehood.
Is there scripture where it is said directly what sin means? If it is not directly said, it can be vague, because people can then make interpretations and get different meanings and disputes on what it truly means. But, that doesn't mean that some people could not have clear understanding, only that there can be different ideas and it may be difficult for some to find the correct meaning.The word 'sin' is not in the Torah. The concept you're referring to is not vague if you read the Torah in Hebrew.
Thank you. Now I see the connection in that. But, I don't think it is misinterpreting in this case from Paul, because he doesn't say it means something else.Paul was quoting the Septuagint.
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Romans 3:4
Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done [this] evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, [and] be clear when thou judgest.
Psalms 51:4
Against thee only have I sinned, and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Psalms 50:4, LXX