Jewish salvation beliefs

[Kaninchen]

I was as precise as possible and careful to express what were expectations, and what were not (as far as we can tell) in responding to the idea of the messiah as a “savior” or deliverer. I believe I acknowledged in my prior posts that I was not suggesting there was a defined jewish idea of “savior” in terms of salvation (eternal life with God - to answer your last question) - then again, jewish ideas of the messiah were and are varied and not always in harmony.

I do have a perspective as a believer - clearly - but I do try to be objective. Its something we all need to work hard on as its human nature to advocate for what we believe in.

Blessings,

Brian

This is a key issue, it’s a key issue in understanding the difference between the two religions and paradigmatic differences can be fudged if one is not very careful. That’s why the continued question of ‘Saved from what?’

In the answer to that question lies one of the fundamental differences - as you know, we don’t think we (or anybody else) needs saving in the Christian sense, physical peril is another thing altogether.

To make the statements you tend to make, you need to show that a major theme amongst significant groups of Jews (not just a few guys sitting in the desert somewhere) at that time was that we were all doomed to eternal punishment unless Messiah turned up and ‘saved us’ spiritually as opposed to driving the Romans out etc.

 

[Robbinson]

This is a key issue, it’s a key issue in understanding the difference between the two religions and paradigmatic differences can be fudged if one is not very careful. That’s why the continued question of ‘Saved from what?’

In the answer to that question lies one of the fundamental differences - as you know, we don’t think we (or anybody else) needs saving in the Christian sense, physical peril is another thing altogether.

To make the statements you tend to make, you need to show that a major theme amongst significant groups of Jews (not just a few guys sitting in the desert somewhere) at that time was that we were all doomed to eternal punishment unless Messiah turned up and ‘saved us’ spiritually as opposed to driving the Romans out etc.

Fair enough - another way perhaps to address the question is as follows:

1. Judaism is not an exclusively works based religion - being right with God requires “faith in God” as the mosaic law includes the 10 commandments, and commandment number 1 is focused on acknowledging and believing in God. (Stated another way - not many jews would accept the premise (although I’m sure some would) that a jew who does not believe in God (who lacks faith and violates, without repentance) the first commandment, will have eternal life at the day of judgement.
2. The hebrew scriptures fortold of the coming of another prophet, like moses, and God said that those who do not listen to him will be held accountable.

"I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account" (Deut 18:18)

I believe, (I will confirm when I get home and can consult the Talmud) that there is talmudic and/or rabbinic teaching that this prophet was referring to the Messiah. Thus, God is telling Israel that those who do not listen to the messiah will be held accountable by God" - A fair (albeit not only) reading/interpretation of being held accountable by God for not listening to the messiah would be accountable in the after-life. This would be an example of scriptural support and “jewish” thought linking following the instruction of the messiah and “salvation” or eternal life.

Historically - since the early church was exclusively jewish (as were Jesus, and all 12 of the apostles), there is actually an historical record of jews from 2,000 plus years ago who believed that the messiah would be a savior and believed it to be Yeshua.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[Kaninchen]

Fair enough - another way perhaps to address the question is as follows:

1. Judaism is not an exclusively works based religion - being right with God requires “faith in God” as the mosaic law includes the 10 commandments, and commandment number 1 is focused on acknowledging and believing in God. (Stated another way - not many jews would accept the premise (although I’m sure some would) that a jew who does not believe in God (who lacks faith and violates, without repentance) the first commandment, will have eternal life at the day of judgement.
2. The hebrew scriptures fortold of the coming of another prophet, like moses, and God said that those who do not listen to him will be held accountable.

"I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account" (Deut 18:18)

I believe, (I will confirm when I get home and can consult the Talmud) that there is talmudic and/or rabbinic teaching that this prophet was referring to the Messiah. Thus, God is telling Israel that those who do not listen to the messiah will be held accountable by God" - A fair (albeit not only) reading/interpretation of being held accountable by God for not listening to the messiah would be accountable in the after-life. This would be an example of scriptural support and “jewish” thought linking following the instruction of the messiah and “salvation” or eternal life.

Historically - since the early church was exclusively jewish (as were Jesus, and all 12 of the apostles), there is actually an historical record of jews from 2,000 plus years ago who believed that the messiah would be a savior and believed it to be Yeshua.

Blessings,

Brian

It’s working-backwards stuff, isn’t it? You start with a text we don’t accept (the NT) and scrabble around the Tanakh trying to make Jesus ‘fit’, a process, we might argue, that constructed the NT and the figure of Jesus depicted in it in the first place.

As to the ‘historical record’, it’s the NT and beyond that text, even in that text, we have no idea of how many Jews accepted the “You’re all eternally doomed if you don’t believe in Jesus” business.

 

[Robbinson]

It’s working-backwards stuff, isn’t it? You start with a text we don’t accept (the NT) and scrabble around the Tanakh trying to make Jesus ‘fit’, a process, we might argue, that constructed the NT and the figure of Jesus depicted in it in the first place.

As to the ‘historical record’, it’s the NT and beyond that text, even in that text, we have no idea of how many Jews accepted the “You’re all eternally doomed if you don’t believe in Jesus” business.

Not quite - while jews (jews who do not believe in Yeshua as messiah) don’t accept the theological teaching of the NT - not many jewsish scholars deny its hisotrical accuracy (at least the existence of Jesus and the teachings of his disciples) (although there are some jewish apologists who lose credibility by questioning whether Jesus actually existed not withstanding a robust historical record) and the jewish historian Josephesus and others cooberate it. So its fair, I think, to point to the NT as evidence that there were “jews” who believed in a saviour messiah figure and that it was jesus. Since you asked for any evidence of this thought in jewish thinking - its a fair example.

As to numbers - the NT points to 3,000 plus who came to faith at Shavout/Pentecost - but, outside of the NT itself I can’t corroborate it. In any event, sufficeient numbers of jews believed for a “church” body to be formed in any event. History shows us these “jews” continued as part of the larger jewish community well into the 1st century.

Thanks for the posts -

Blessings,

Brian

 

[meltzerboy]

Fair enough - another way perhaps to address the question is as follows:

1. Judaism is not an exclusively works based religion - being right with God requires “faith in God” as the mosaic law includes the 10 commandments, and commandment number 1 is focused on acknowledging and believing in God. (Stated another way - not many jews would accept the premise (although I’m sure some would) that a jew who does not believe in God (who lacks faith and violates, without repentance) the first commandment, will have eternal life at the day of judgement.
2. The hebrew scriptures fortold of the coming of another prophet, like moses, and God said that those who do not listen to him will be held accountable.

"I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account" (Deut 18:18)

I believe, (I will confirm when I get home and can consult the Talmud) that there is talmudic and/or rabbinic teaching that this prophet was referring to the Messiah. Thus, God is telling Israel that those who do not listen to the messiah will be held accountable by God" - A fair (albeit not only) reading/interpretation of being held accountable by God for not listening to the messiah would be accountable in the after-life. This would be an example of scriptural support and “jewish” thought linking following the instruction of the messiah and “salvation” or eternal life.

Historically - since the early church was exclusively jewish (as were Jesus, and all 12 of the apostles), there is actually an historical record of jews from 2,000 plus years ago who believed that the messiah would be a savior and believed it to be Yeshua.

Blessings,

Brian

Brian, this verse from Deuteronomy is generally interpreted by Jewish biblical scholars as meaning successive prophets in the generations following Moses, rather than referring to a specific prophet. The Hebrew leaves out the definite article that would refer to a specific individual prophet. This succession of prophets would include several different prophets, such as Isaiah and Jeremiah, who constitute the position or office of prophecy. The context of the whole passage in Deuteronomy focuses on Moses’ cautioning the Jewish people to differentiate between true and false prophets. In the verse that follows, Moses tells of the consequences that befall the false prophet. I don’t think Christians would wish to say that this verse also refers to Jesus and His crucifixion for being a false prophet! Muslims interpret the original verse as prophesying Muhammad based on the phrase, from among your brethren, which they believe refers to the tribe of Ishmael.

 

[AbideWithMe]

As to the ‘historical record’, it’s the NT and beyond that text, even in that text, we have no idea of how many Jews accepted the “You’re all eternally doomed if you don’t believe in Jesus” business.

Kaninchen—

This is a bit off topic…but arguably, from the beginning, the idea of salvation in Christianity has much less to do with the idea of being spared hell than “You’re all eternally doomed if you don’t believe in Jesus” makes it look. To be fair, some passages from the NT say something similar; but on the whole salvation in Christianity has been from the start about theosis, redemption, and healing and wholeness.

I enjoy your answers and your forthrightness ( and your rabbits). But, the idea that Christianity “invented an illness and then claimed to have the only cure” is a mere caricature of the heart of Christian theology. It’s no more accurate than the many misunderstandings of Judaism that Christians often hold.

 

[Kaninchen]

Not quite - while jews (jews who do not believe in Yeshua as messiah) don’t accept the theological teaching of the NT - not many jewsish scholars deny its hisotrical accuracy (at least the existence of Jesus and the teachings of his disciples) (although there are some jewish apologists who lose credibility by questioning whether Jesus actually existed not withstanding a robust historical record) and the jewish historian Josephesus and others cooberate it. So its fair, I think, to point to the NT as evidence that there were “jews” who believed in a saviour messiah figure and that it was jesus. Since you asked for any evidence of this thought in jewish thinking - its a fair example.

I’m quite open to Achilles having existed, it’s the heel bit that’s doubtful.

The ‘Jesus existed’ question is a ‘red herring’ in the question of the construction of the NT, I’m certainly not denying that he existed - hanging on the ‘teachings of his disciples’ is the questionable move here. Do scholars accept that the NT says things? No. Do scholars accept that it’s an accurate record of anything? That’s another issue.

As to numbers - the NT points to 3,000 plus who came to faith at Shavout/Pentecost - but, outside of the NT itself I can’t corroborate it. In any event, sufficeient numbers of jews believed for a “church” body to be formed in any event. History shows us these “jews” continued as part of the larger jewish community well into the 1st century.

Which is no different from numbers of ‘new religions’ even today.

 

[Kaninchen]

Kaninchen—

This is a bit off topic…but arguably, from the beginning, the idea of salvation in Christianity has much less to do with the idea of being spared hell than “You’re all eternally doomed if you don’t believe in Jesus” makes it look. To be fair, some passages from the NT say something similar; but on the whole salvation in Christianity has been from the start about theosis, redemption, and healing and wholeness.

I enjoy your answers and your forthrightness ( and your rabbits). But, the idea that Christianity “invented an illness and then claimed to have the only cure” is a mere caricature of the heart of Christian theology. It’s no more accurate than the many misunderstandings of Judaism that Christians often hold.

Oh, I’d admit that my ‘the triumph of Christianity was inventing an illness and prescribing itself as the only cure’ line is only part of the story but it’s been part of the story, spread and self-maintenance of Christianity throughout. Is Christianity just that? Of course it isn’t, it offers an awful lot more to believers in their daily lives and has generated profound understandings of the human condition.

Kaninchen is German for ‘rabbit’, by the way and ‘Il ruggito della coniglia!’ in my signature is Italian for ‘the roar of the rabbit!’

 

[chosen_people]

Not quite - while jews (jews who do not believe in Yeshua as messiah) don’t accept the theological teaching of the NT - not many jewsish scholars deny its hisotrical accuracy (at least the existence of Jesus and the teachings of his disciples) (although there are some jewish apologists who lose credibility by questioning whether Jesus actually existed not withstanding a robust historical record) and the jewish historian Josephesus and others cooberate it. So its fair, I think, to point to the NT as evidence that there were “jews” who believed in a saviour messiah figure and that it was jesus. Since you asked for any evidence of this thought in jewish thinking - its a fair example.

As to numbers - the NT points to 3,000 plus who came to faith at Shavout/Pentecost - but, outside of the NT itself I can’t corroborate it. In any event, sufficeient numbers of jews believed for a “church” body to be formed in any event. History shows us these “jews” continued as part of the larger jewish community well into the 1st century.

Thanks for the posts -

Blessings,

Brian

Well first, as I have stated on another thread it took some three hundred years and and infighting between Christian groups for the Jesus figure to be designated a god:

We may ask ourselves how it comes about that the Jesus figure came to be recognized as a god in Christianity. As opposed to the Jewish God, it appears that Jesus as a god was anything but obvious. Instead of an entire nation, we have twelve disciples. However, even the name of these 12 disciples are not agreed upon in the Christian scriptures. Even the genealogy of the Jesus figure is not agreed upon. If we search the Christian scriptures, we discover that on the one hand Jesus was born no later then 4 b.c.e. (the death of Herod) and on the other hand he was born 10 years later in 6 c.e (the Roman census).

Of the 41 historians of the first and second centuries of the common era who wrote about Judea and Samaria and whose works survive, none apparently knew or realized that a god had come to earth in human form. None wrote about the apostles or disciples or about all the occurrences and miracles of the Jesus figure. Without any reliable sources for the Jesus figure outside of the Christian scriptures themselves, Christians have turned to a later forgery of certain passages of Josephus and even to trying to interpret Talmudic passages as somehow supporting the historic Jesus figure.

The original Christians, the Ebionites, made up of members of Jesus’ family and disciples, also did not know or acknowledge that Jesus was a god. Neither did the Arian Christians. In fact, it is only when the Roman (Hellenistic) Christians have managed to overcome Arian Christians that in 325 c.e. the Jesus figure is finally recognized as a god in Christianity. It is only in 389 c.e. that the “holy ghost” is added and recognized to form the concept of the Christian Trinity.

 

[Robbinson]

Well first, as I have stated on another thread it took some three hundred years and and infighting between Christian groups for the Jesus figure to be designated a god: /QUOTE]

I’ll have to disagree here - scripture (the NT) defines Jesus as God - the full understanding of the doctrine of the trinity evolved, with the help of the Holy Spirit, through apostolic and authoritiative interpretation through counsels (the same type of authority God gave to moses, and by extension, the Sandhedren - until it was abolished).

We may ask ourselves how it comes about that the Jesus figure came to be recognized as a god in Christianity. As opposed to the Jewish God, it appears that Jesus as a god was anything but obvious. Instead of an entire nation, we have twelve disciples. However, even the name of these 12 disciples are not agreed upon in the Christian scriptures. Even the genealogy of the Jesus figure is not agreed upon. If we search the Christian scriptures, we discover that on the one hand Jesus was born no later then 4 b.c.e. (the death of Herod) and on the other hand he was born 10 years later in 6 c.e (the Roman census).