Don't Jews need to be baptize and accept Christ?

[Peebo]

If a Jew does indeed “(go) his whole life without any interior conversion and keeps the Torah…and denies Christ,” would not that itself be an example of invincible ignorance since such Jew’s interpretation of the Torah and his religion would necessarily exclude the divinity of Christ?
**
Besides, I would not be too hasty in relegating ANYONE (Jew, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, heretical Catholic) under ANY circumstances (even Catholic dying in mortal sin without grace) to hell rather than to purgatory or heaven. It is NOT for any of us to judge the destination of another’s immortal soul. It is particularly unbecoming for ANY Christian (or Jew) to do so. We should instead be working on the destination of our OWN soul with charity and mercy toward others. Remember Jesus’ admonition: “Judge not lest ye be judged.” G-d’s mercy far exceeds our own.**

You sound more Catholic than some Catholics…sayyyy…are you trying to convert us to Judaism…lol

 

[meltzerboy]

Peebo:
You sound more Catholic than some Catholics…sayyyy…are you trying to convert us to Judaism…lol

No, I am trying to convert some of you to Catholicism! LOL

 

[rcwitness]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Now a few points. You note that Jesus is “the much anticipated liberator of the Law.” First, I don’t think Jesus agrees with you. He claims not to have come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. Second, according to the Hebrew Scriptures, the Law, far from being a burden, is “sweeter than honey” (Psalms) and, according to Moses, “not too difficult for you” (Deuteronomy). Third, animal sacrifice was NOT the preferred means of atonement even before the time of Jesus; prayer and good deeds were. Many Jews were unable to go to the Temple and thus local synagogues were used instead, as well as flour sacrifices for those who were poor. The shedding of blood was not a requirement for atonement, and the Temple and its animal sacrifices were meant primarily for unintentional sins, not for intentional sins (with one exception). Finally, while the coming of the Messiah is part of Jewish teaching, in Maimonides’ Thirteen Articles of Faith, it is not, and never was, the main mission of Judaism. Even when the Messiah comes, the Torah Law is still to be studied and practiced, and even more so. The Messiah in no way makes the Law irrelevant, but in fact just the opposite.

Thanks for the reply and all the good concerns. If you’d like, I could address them. It would have to be when I have more time.

My initial question when reading this, is do you believe that Jesus did fulfill the Law?

 

[James248]

That word “refuses” may or may not be linked to invincible ignorance, which I believe makes all the difference according to the Church. And the meaning of invincible ignorance is equally important. Does the Church clarify this?

If a person has invincible ignorance they CAN BE SAVED. Not WILL BE.

 

[James248]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Now a few points. You note that Jesus is “the much anticipated liberator of the Law.” First, I don’t think Jesus agrees with you. He claims not to have come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. Second, according to the Hebrew Scriptures, the Law, far from being a burden, is “sweeter than honey” (Psalms) and, according to Moses, “not too difficult for you” (Deuteronomy).

If you read the Sermon on the Mount you can see Jesus is giving HIS New Law. And the Law is a burden because it gives condemnation to those who can’t fulfill it. Can you fulfill the Mosaic Law?

 

[meltzerboy]

If you read the Sermon on the Mount you can see Jesus is giving HIS New Law. And the Law is a burden because it gives condemnation to those who can’t fulfill it. Can you fulfill the Mosaic Law?

The Law itself does not “give” us anything. It exists through G-d’s love. It is NOT a punishment but rather a sanctification. Rabbis and other Jews who interpret the Law most certainly do NOT condemn any Jew for not fulfilling it in its entirety. Judaism does not expect perfection, and never did. Rather, the effort to do whatever one can to study and practice the Law, even in small increments, is believed to be most appreciated by G-d, and He will forgive our not reaching the mark, that is, our sins, particularly when we repent. G-d would never have given us a Law that is unattainable by human means, as Moses pointed out in Deuteronomy. That would make no sense at all. Your words seem to suggest that G-d made a mistake in giving us His first Law and Jesus is rectifying that mistake with a new Law, which cannot be the case, as you well know, since G-d does not make mistakes. But since we are all human, we err and we therefore seek forgiveness, which we trust G-d in His infinite mercy and goodness will grant us if we are sincere in turning away from our misdeeds. That is the Jewish way of life.

 

[James248]

The Law itself does not “give” us anything. It exists through G-d’s love. It is NOT a punishment but rather a sanctification. Rabbis and other Jews who interpret the Law most certainly do NOT condemn any Jew for not fulfilling it in its entirety. Judaism does not expect perfection, and never did. Rather, the effort to do whatever one can to study and practice the Law, even in small increments, is believed to be most appreciated by G-d, and He will forgive our not reaching the mark, that is, our sins, particularly when we repent. G-d would never have given us a Law that is unattainable by human means, as Moses pointed out in Deuteronomy. That would make no sense at all. Your words seem to suggest that G-d made a mistake in giving us His first Law and Jesus is rectifying that mistake with a new Law, which cannot be the case, as you well know, since G-d does not make mistakes. But since we are all human, we err and we therefore seek forgiveness, which we trust G-d in His infinite mercy and goodness will grant us if we are sincere in turning away from our misdeeds. That is the Jewish way of life.

God gave Ten Commandments. The 613 precepts and the ministerial priesthood of the Levites were given after Israel’s sin in worshipping the Golden Calf. The Mosaic Law CANNOT justify ANYONE.

Galatians 3

10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law; for “The one who is righteous will live by faith.”** 12 But the law does not rest on faith; on the contrary, “Whoever does the works of the law[c] will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”— 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.**

 

[meltzerboy]

God gave Ten Commandments. The 613 precepts and the ministerial priesthood of the Levites were given after Israel’s sin in worshipping the Golden Calf. The Mosaic Law CANNOT justify ANYONE.

Galatians 3

10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law; for “The one who is righteous will live by faith.”** 12 But the law does not rest on faith; on the contrary, “Whoever does the works of the law[c] will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”— 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.**

This passage from Galatians, if interpreted in isolation, has all the earmarks of sola fide, that is, justification by faith alone without works, which is rejected by both Catholicism and Judaism.

It is not the Law that is a curse, nor the people living under the Law. No, the admonition by Moses in Deuteronomy is that those who do not practice the Law are accursed by G-d. Strong language, to be sure, but Moses, Paul, and Jesus all realized that the Law itself is not a curse, a burden, an insurmountable obstacle. Rather, the Law is a “tree of life to those who cling to it,” as the Oral Torah proclaims. It guides our actions by pointing us in the morally right direction. Thus we cannot be freed from the Law for freedom does not exist apart from the Law. However–and here is the key element–that freedom must be learned and earned, bit by bit, just as responsibility in the secular world cannot simply be thrust upon us without our assuming it.

In a broader sense, the Written Law (Torah) cannot be fully appreciated without also studying the Oral Law (Talmud), just as the Gospel cannot be fully appreciated without understanding the teachings of the Church (the Magisterium).

And the French proverb might also help us understand: “Qui aime bien, chatie bien.” (“Who loves well, punishes well.”) The emphasis is on the parent’s love, not the punishment.

 

[James248]

This passage from Galatians, if interpreted in isolation, has all the earmarks of sola fide, that is, justification by faith alone without works, which is rejected by both Catholicism and Judaism.

Sola fide is irrelevant to this thread. Whether one believes in it or not, Paul’s message is clear: the Mosaic Law does not justify.

 

[rcwitness]

… Now a few points. You note that Jesus is “the much anticipated liberator of the Law.” First, I don’t think Jesus agrees with you. He claims not to have come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.

You are right. I did not mean that in the sense that Jesus “abolished” the Law. Tather, I meant that Jesus liberated us from the consequences of the Law.

Luke 4
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

Second, according to the Hebrew Scriptures, the Law, far from being a burden, is “sweeter than honey” (Psalms) and, according to Moses, “not too difficult for you” (Deuteronomy).

I agree! The Law is not burdensome. Our trespass against the Law is burdensome. And who is free from trespasses against the Law?

Third, animal sacrifice was NOT the preferred means of atonement even before the time of Jesus; prayer and good deeds were. Many Jews were unable to go to the Temple and thus local synagogues were used instead, as well as flour sacrifices for those who were poor. The shedding of blood was not a requirement for atonement, and the Temple and its animal sacrifices were meant primarily for unintentional sins, not for intentional sins (with one exception).

The Jews were justified through the High Priest’s atonement. This was accomplished through a blood sacrifice, no?
Exodus 30
You shall offer no unholy incense thereon, nor burnt offering, nor cereal offering; and you shall pour no libation thereon. Aaron shall make atonement upon its horns once a year; **with the blood of the sin offering of atonement he shall make atonement for it once in the year throughout your generations; it is most holy to the Lord.”

Hebrews 10
For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices which are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered? If the worshipers had once been cleansed, they would no longer have any consciousness of sin. But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sin year after year. For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.

Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said,

“Sacrifices and offerings thou hast not desired,
but a body hast thou prepared for me;
in burnt offerings and sin offerings thou hast taken no pleasure.
Then I said, ‘Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God,’
as it is written of me in the roll of the book.”

When he said above, “Thou hast neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Lo, I have come to do thy will.” He abolishes the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, then to wait until his enemies should be made a stool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,

“This is the covenant that I will make with them
after those days, says the Lord:
I will put my laws on their hearts,
and write them on their minds,”

then he adds,

“I will remember their sins and their misdeeds no more.”

Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

Finally, while the coming of the Messiah is part of Jewish teaching, in Maimonides’ Thirteen Articles of Faith, it is not, and never was, the main mission of Judaism. Even when the Messiah comes, the Torah Law is still to be studied and practiced, and even more so. The Messiah in no way makes the Law irrelevant, but in fact just the opposite.

The Messiah provides forgiveness and redemption from transgression the Law. His Law is based on Love and sacrifice, as a pure Lamb according to the Law.**

 

[HolyCrusader007]

Judaism was a word invented years after Abraham preached the message of love and tolerance to the Israelites. The Ancient Israelite religion was also glorified and loved by Jesus in Christianity and Muhammad in Islam. The threads question will be answered differently depending on which person answers…I can pull quotes from the Torah, NT, and Quran stating that righteous people or do gooders can get into heaven. Therefore I have a difficult time answering the OP as due to not wanting to hurt anyones feelings I would have a difficult time answering the question if the word Jew was replaced with Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon or any religious person. I certainly want other people to embrace our Lord Jesus but at the same time I dont want to offend people…it can be a difficult process to deal with this issue of getting the message of Jesus to non Christians.

 

[rcwitness]

Third, animal sacrifice was NOT the preferred means of atonement even before the time of Jesus; prayer and good deeds were. Many Jews were unable to go to the Temple and thus local synagogues were used instead, as well as flour sacrifices for those who were poor. The shedding of blood was not a requirement for atonement, and the Temple and its animal sacrifices were meant primarily for unintentional sins, not for intentional sins (with one exception).

Leviticus 17
For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement, by reason of the life.

 

[meltzerboy]

Leviticus 17
For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement, by reason of the life.

There are so many points here and elsewhere that I am not sure I have the space to speak about all of them.

First, Leviticus 17 is not a discussion central to the topic of atonement from sin but rather an admonition against the consumption of blood, as well as a summary of the dietary laws. The life-blood of the animal is mentioned only parenthetically. Second, other passages in the Hebrew Bible, such as Exodus and Numbers, which place Leviticus in context, reveal very definitely that blood is NOT necessary for atonement. Yes, blood offering can atone for sin (that is, unintentional sin), but so many other verses in the Torah point out that prayer, repentance, almsgiving, and incense are equally as good an atonement. Finally, you note, in keeping with Christian belief, that Jesus is the “Lamb of G-d.” However, the Passover lamb and its blood are NOT the means of atonement for sins according to the Hebrew Bible. The lamb protects only the first-born male child from death but does not absolve anyone from sin, nor does it protect other family members. Indeed, the lamb itself was an Egyptian god, and the Jews who spread lamb’s blood on their doorposts were doing so in defiance of Egypt’s god according to several Jewish biblical scholars. In short, the Passover sacrifice is not an appropriate sacrifice for atonement of sins, while the Yom Kippur sacrifice, in which the sins of the people are placed on the head of the animal, who is set free rather than killed, is much more appropriate.

There is much more to say, but I will stop for now.

N.B. It is not my intention to engage in Jewish apologetics. I find it somewhat unbecoming to do so on a Catholic Forum. I first became a member of CAF to learn more about Catholicism, not to debate. Nonetheless, I have done so here and, on occasion, in the past, but only when there is a thread, such as this, that begs such discussion.

 

[rcwitness]

I think this passage from Romans is the most appropriate for this discussion:

I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Eli′jah, how he pleads with God against Israel? “Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have demolished thy altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Ba′al.” So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

What then? Israel failed to obtain what it sought. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, as it is written,

“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that should not see and ears that should not hear,
down to this very day.”

And David says,

“Let their feast become a snare and a trap,
a pitfall and a retribution for them;
let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see,
and bend their backs for ever.”

The Salvation of the Gentiles

So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!

Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? If the dough offered as first fruits is holy, so is the whole lump; and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share the richness of the olive tree, do not boast over the branches. If you do boast, remember it is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you. You will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree.

 

[rcwitness]

There are so many points here and elsewhere that I am not sure I have the space to speak about all of them.

First, Leviticus 17 is not a discussion central to the topic of atonement from sin but rather an admonition against the consumption of blood, as well as a summary of the dietary laws. The life-blood of the animal is mentioned only parenthetically. Second, other passages in the Hebrew Bible, such as Exodus and Numbers, which place Leviticus in context, reveal very definitely that blood is NOT necessary for atonement. Yes, blood offering can atone for sin (that is, unintentional sin), but so many other verses in the Torah point out that prayer, repentance, almsgiving, and incense are equally as good an atonement. Finally, you note, in keeping with Christian belief, that Jesus is the “Lamb of G-d.” However, the Passover lamb and its blood are NOT the means of atonement for sins according to the Hebrew Bible. The lamb protects only the first-born male child from death but does not absolve anyone from sin, nor does it protect other family members. Indeed, the lamb itself was an Egyptian god, and the Jews who spread lamb’s blood on their doorposts were doing so in defiance of Egypt’s god according to several Jewish biblical scholars. In short, the Passover sacrifice is not an appropriate sacrifice for atonement of sins, while the Yom Kippur sacrifice, in which the sins of the people are placed on the head of the animal, who is set free rather than killed, is much more appropriate.

There is much more to say, but I will stop for now.

N.B. It is not my intention to engage in Jewish apologetics. I find it somewhat unbecoming to do so on a Catholic Forum. I first became a member of CAF to learn more about Catholicism, not to debate. Nonetheless, I have done so here and, on occasion, in the past, but only when there is a thread, such as this, that begs such discussion.

Thanks for your reply. I see some of your point. And it does get deep into things that I admit I am not well versed in.

I am curious as to what you believe the purpose of the Christ is? Is that ok to ask, or does it push away from the thread?

 

[Peter_J]

Don’t Jews need to be baptize and accept Christ?

I guess such a proposal would be very popular on this forum.

 

[rcwitness]

I guess such a proposal would be very popular on this forum.

I think the title should ask, "Don’t Jews get to be Baptized and accept Jesus too?"

 

[Peter_J]

I think the title should ask, “Don’t Jews get to be Baptized and accept Jesus too?”

LOL.

Though I probably shouldn’t laugh…