Judaism / Christianity

[KenEOTE]

Here is a confession of an ex-Muslim:

**I quit Islam because the idea that the almighty Allah provided prostitutes for Muslim men in His heaven bothered me a lot. I asked a Muslim why Allah would allow fornication and pornography in His holy Heaven. The answer was shocking enough: Mohammad had sex with his slaves in Kaaba to prove that Allah’s promise for sex in Heaven was true and trustworthy. OMG!
**
Fornication in Allah’s presence is a scandalous belief!!! Islam is Satanic indeed.

You Changed my mind. Iam becoming a Muslim!

Aaron why are you ashamed of your religion?

 

[Angelos]

You Changed my mind. Iam becoming a Muslim!

Aaron why are you ashamed of your religion?

Harun is ashamed of Islam and is taking refuge in a false Jewish identity. If Mohammad saw this, he would get so mad that he would bury Harun alive into the ruins of the Holy Temple.

 

[KenEOTE]

Harun is ashamed of Islam and is taking refuge in a false Jewish identity. If Mohammad saw this, he would get so mad that he would bury Harun alive into the ruins of the Holy Temple.

Or he might get so upset he would put a bomb under his turban like that danish cartoon.

 

[Angelos]

Or he might get so upset he would put a bomb under his turban like that danish cartoon.

LOL

 

[aaronjo]

Let’s see how a young Jewess girl (of 12 to 16 years) proved that she was a virgin and how people around her accepted her as a virgin.

 

[KenEOTE]

Let’s see how a young Jewess girl (of 12 to 16 years) proved that she was a virgin and how people around her accepted her as a virgin.

Well Joseph protacted her and kept her safe.

What do you have against this young Jewish Girl?

At least someone wasn’t having sex with her at the age of 9. That only occured to one of Mo’s wife. I find interesting since some muslims claim they follow Mosaic Law yet, they ignore the law that says to have one wife.

 

[Angelos]

Let’s see how a young Jewess girl (of 12 to 16 years) proved that she was a virgin and how people around her accepted her as a virgin.

You are confusing your Koran with the Gospels again. Mary did not need to prove Her virginity. LOL

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Harun is ashamed of Islam and is taking refuge in a false Jewish identity. If Mohammad saw this, he would get so mad that he would bury Harun alive into the ruins of the Holy Temple.

No he wouldn’t. Taqiyah dissimulation is promoted in the name of Islam.

 

[inJESUS]

Let’s see how a young Jewess girl (of 12 to 16 years) proved that she was a virgin and how people around her accepted her as a virgin.

she did not have to prove anything. It is not a miracle for people that is why Muslims have no answers as to the meaning of a miracle that cannot be seen nor proved nor serves any purpose for humanity

 

[KenEOTE]

she did not have to prove anything. It is not a miracle for people that is why Muslims have no answers as to the meaning of a miracle that cannot be seen nor proved nor serves any purpose for humanity

I thought even Muslims taught that she was a virgin.

 

[inJESUS]

I thought even Muslims taught that she was a virgin.

yes Muslims do believe in the miraculous birth, but they don’t understand why or at least they just call it a miracle and move on.

 

[strngrnrth]

Nothing even faintly rational or plausible has been brought against Christianity on this thread.
I get a little kick sometimes out of reading the “Tear off the front page” outburts of people who haven’t been reading long enough to know that we have refuted “pagan copycat” allegations many times a year around here (and out in the rest of the world too), that the Virgin Birth has been defended logically and firmly many times over, again here and elsewhere, that the existence of other religions and the existence of their attempts to tear down Christianity is far from being new, and that we aren’t going to vanish into thin air at the news that not everyone believes what we have to say.
Hijacking a thread about Christianity’s popularity among Gentiles in order to attack Christianity without reference to facts or reason will not undermine the popularity of Christianity. If the person doing so is paying for computer use or long-distance charges, it is a waste of that person’s time and money.

 

[reen12]

do you believe Jesus existed, was crucified , and resurrected?

Do I need be a Democrat, to assess their platform - in terms
of plans for the economy? :coffeeread:

Let’s take a look at Christian theology’s ‘economy of salvation.’

---

The Christian belief that Jesus was a God/man, savior - said to
save man… from a non-existent reality [original sin]

…is hardly an unmitigated boon to mankind.

However confused, Yeshua knew that the true religion, Judaism,
said nothing - about the need for a ‘savior,’ from both and ontological sin,
and personal sin. The God of Israel had granted forgiveness and mercy.

messiah does not = ‘savior’
messiah = ‘the anointed’

The God of Israel is savior:

beingjewish.com/toshuv/salvation.html

reen12

 

[reen12]

The reality that will express - when the wholly human messiah [Moshiach] comes, will be the establishment of God’s kingdom.

Up close and personal, easily seen.

Not a kingdom ‘hidden’ within - waiting a return appearance of Jeshua - the parousia.

When God moves in human history - to establish His Kingdom,
there will be nothing ‘unseen’ about it.

As He empowerd David, the shepherd - His anointed - to lead His people.
[David having been anointed - at God’s command, by Samuel.]

“This could never be! This is the modern world!”

With God - as Yeshua, that nice man, noted:

'“With God, all things are possible.”

reen12

 

[reen12]

Neither Judaism nor Christianity - in terms of
an 'all good God" - can defend the suffering of innocents,
especially the suffering of a child, who is all alone, in his/her
suffering. We see these awful realities noted on newscasts.

As to which is the ‘true’ faith -

There can be no such reality as an ‘all good God.’
Not when his purported ‘plan’ leaves innocent
children to to suffer hellish realities, sometimes
all alone.
[That is the ‘price’ of his plan of salvation?]

Trying to assert the claim that - a grown man,
at the height of his powers, suffered agony for
several hours - and that this somehow ‘justifies’ the
suffering of innocents, is a bootless attempt to
deal with the harsh reality. Innocents suffer.

God set this world in motion.
He knew that innocents would suffer, sometimes
little ones who are all alone.
God is responsible for the suffering of these innocents.
He foresaw their suffering, from all eternity, and
His ‘plan’ is more important to Him than these little ones.

As to both Judaism and Christianity:

quote: reen12, from another thread

I think that the Judeo-Christian scriptures at least convey
some idea of Who God is. In both Judaism and Catholicism,
the add-ers, the over-explainers, the definers, the sure and the certain, took over -
and before Moses was off the mountain, a 2nd time, the festooning began,
eventuating in 613 mitzvoth.
By the time the Scholastics finished, the God of Sinai, in the person of Jesus,
sounded more like the God of philosophy and calculus, not the triune I AM.

reen12

 

[aaronjo]

Well Joseph protacted her and kept her safe.

What do you have against this young Jewish Girl?

The Supposed Virgin Birth
The Virgin Birth is a fundamental tenet of most forms of Christianity. Yet it is very odd that none of the earlier Christian books mention it. The book of Mark, probably the first written, makes no mention of it at all. One would think that it would be worth at least one sentence, if not the amount spent on it by the book of Matthew. It is evident that Mark had never heard of the Virgin Birth. The book of John does not mention it either.

The reason that the virgin birth concept was added to Christianity was because the first Christians were very unsuccessful at converting Jews. Most Jews knew they had something better, so they would not leave Judaism for Christianity. Remember: at the beginning it was nothing more than a very small messianic movement within Judaism, and after their “messiah” died, it was rather hard to convert Jews to their movement.

So they began to reach out to the pagans, the non-Jews. But those pagans attracted to Judaism had already joined Judaism, and the new ones would not be very likely to join a tiny fringe group that had lost all real meaning since their false messiah-leader had died. Anyone interested in Judaism would more likely be interested in mainstream Judaism.

So the Christians had to do something different. They had to develop appeal. So, they began to assume beliefs that pagan people found attractive. That was how they came up with the concepts of the trinity, transubstantiation, the need to “save” everyone through the resurrection of a messiah, virgin birth, and all the other wacky ideas of Christianity. All these were lifted straight from other religions, some of which preceded Christianity by 700 years! Pagans just lapped up things like demigods, gods having intercourse with humans, virgins giving birth. Such claims meant something to pagans, and they were already familiar with such beliefs from their own cultures. So leaving a pagan religion to join Christianity was not much of a stretch, especially after Paul declared that the pagans did not need to keep the Commandments of the Torah
beingjewish.com/toshuv/virgin.html

 

[KenEOTE]

aaronjo:
Actually this is a false statement. If you recall (which I know you wont since you have never read the Book of acts.) the first real sermon Peter gave 5000 joined the church. Those 5000 were all Jewish. They were there to celebrate the feast day that we now call Pentecost what the Jews call Shavuot.

The Way spread via the Synagogues, for years. Paul when he came along wold always go to the Synagogues first and preach first to the Jew and then to the Gentile. The first century Church was lead by Jewish believers. In Isaiah one of the prophecies of the Messiah deals with him being born of a virgin.

There are many Messianic Prophecies in the Old Testaments. Some of which Christ has fulfilled in his first coming others he will fulfill when he returns.

 

[aaronjo]

The Way spread via the Synagogues, for years. Paul when he came along wold always go to the Synagogues first and preach first to the Jew and then to the Gentile. The first century Church was lead by Jewish believers.

Why via Synagogues? Why not followers of The Way started their own Churches?

 

[aaronjo]

In Isaiah one of the prophecies of the Messiah deals with him being born of a virgin.

That Isaiah verse is not a proof at all.

Let’s examine what Isaiah says there, in plain English.

King Ahaz of Judah was afraid, because the king of Aram and the king of Israel were conspiring to wage war against Judah.

Isaiah prophesied to King Ahaz that within a few years Israel would be taken into exile, and Judah would be left alone. Aram would not bother Judah, and Israel would not be able to.

Isaiah offered King Ahaz a sign that would prove that Isaiah’s words were prophecy from G-d. King Ahaz refused, because that would have caused a greater sanctification of G-d’s Name. Isaiah got angry, and offered his own sign. He predicted the gender of an unborn child. Isaiah indicated a young woman who was nearby – some say it was the king’s wife, and some say it was Isaiah’s wife – and Isaiah said, “The young woman is pregnant. she will give birth to a son, and his mother will call him Emmanuel. Before he is even old enough to know good from evil, before he is even old enough to enjoy delightful food, the two kings will stop invading your land. And this child will grow up to enjoy good and delightful food, because your land will be in peace.”

And it indeed happened that way.

That is what Chapter 7 of Isaiah is about. Now where is there mentioned the Messiah? How does a virgin fit into this?

Even if you can prove that almah means a virgin – and you can’t-- it is STILL not talking about the Messiah. Jesus was born some 700 years later. How would that have answered King Ahaz’s problem? None of the words of that chapter fit into any such interpretation.

Let me restate this, to make sure everyone understands.

Chapter 7 of Isaiah tells of a conversation between King Ahaz and Isaiah, sometime around the year 600 B.C.E.

King Ahaz of Judea was worried. The Kings of Aram and Israel were planning a siege and attack against Judea. G-d told the Prophet Isaiah to reassure Ahaz and tell him not to worry, it will not happen. Aram and Israel will not succeed against Judea.

Isaiah offered a sign. He would foretell an event, and when it came true that would prove that he spoke prophetically. Then Ahaz could cease worrying. What sign did he offer? “This young woman here is pregnant. She will give birth to a son. She will call him Emmanuel. Once he is old enough to have intelligence, he will eat rich foods, because there will be peace in the land. This is because even before he attains intelligence, Aram and Israel will be conquered, and their people will be taken away.”

This last point is important.

Isaiah showed King Ahaz a sign, to reassure him that during the childhood of the boy Emmanuel the two kings will be rendered harmless. As it says there, in verse 16 of that chapter in Isaiah: “For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken.” The prophecy was fulfilled not long after, when Isaiah’s wife gave birth to a son. Isaiah 8:4 therefore says: “Even before the child shall know how to cry ‘Father and Mother!’ the riches of Damascus and Samaria will be taken away by the king of Assyria.”

Isaiah makes it absolutely clear that his prophecy will take place very soon. Not 600 or 700 years later.

So the child being referred to was the son of Isaiah, or the son of the king. It has nothing to do with the Messiah. The entire event: the birth of the child Emmanuel and the exile of the two kings, took place over 600 years before Jesus was born. So the verse is not talking about a virgin, and in any case is not talking about the Messiah, but about a child that was born very shortly thereafter.

But this is considered irrelevant to many Christians. They argue that Isaiah was referring overtly to the problem of the time, but was also alluding to the Messiah.

How do they do this? How can you possibly find in these verses a proof that the Messiah will be born of a virgin?

It’s quite simple. Change the “young woman” to “virgin.” Change “she is pregnant” to “she will become pregnant.” Ignore the reference to “Emanuel.” If you don’t mention it, perhaps no one else will notice it either.

Don’t be concerned that Isaiah makes no mention of the Messiah here. Perhaps the Christian apostles honestly believed that the Messiah is mentioned in this verse, despite the glaring absence of any such reference.

Now, ignore the fact that Isaiah was reassuring Ahaz that in his own time he will have peace. Pretend instead that he was referring to an event 600 years in the future. How that would reassure King Ahaz that he would have peace from Aram and Israel I cannot imagine. Maybe the problem is that I don’t have enough “faith” to believe in a lie.

Typically, Christians ignore the context of the verses in Isaiah, and focus – when forced to – only on the question of what the word almah means.

Any translation that renders almah as “virgin,” is absolutely wrong. That is not the definition of the word. You can argue from today until the middle of next year, but the meaning of the word won’t change.

Some people argue that the Septuagint uses the word “parthenos” in Isaiah 7:14. (The Septuagint was a Greek translation created by a large group of Rabbis sometime around 300 B.C.E.) That would mean, if this is true, that even the Jews translated almah as “virgin.”

Actually, one cannot bring proof from the Septuagint.

beingjewish.com/toshuv/virgin.html

 

[aaronjo]

Actually, one cannot bring proof from the Septuagint. The only existing copies of the Septuagint are nothing like the original version. Though the Septuagint was created by Rabbis, they did it against their will, because King Ptolemy Philadelphus of Egypt forced them to do it. Ptolemy wanted a Greek version for his library. The Septuagint was never used by religious Jews as a source of study. In pre-Christian times, it was not popular at all, and if it was used at all, it was used almost exclusively by non-Jews, and sometimes by assimilated, non-religious, Hellenized Jews.

Non-Jews did not consider it holy, and so they were not careful about preserving it precisely. The Septuagint was therefore not kept in its original form. It was changed many times. Later, the Christians deliberately introduced many changes in the text, in order to bring it in line with their own doctrines.

Some argue that the christians cannot be blamed for misreading it, because the meaning of the Greek word “parthenos” changed. Originally, it meant “young woman,” and later the meaning of the word shifted (as happens in all languages over time) and people began to use it to mean “virgin.” Even if that’s true, that gives a sorry picture of the “wisdom and divine inspiration” of the people (i.e., the christians) who thought that Isaiah was talking about a virgin. It means that they had no idea what the original Hebrew verse was saying. Why, then, should I learn theology from an ignoramus?

The original translators that created the Septuagint were Rabbis. They translated it according to Jewish Tradition. They certainly knew Hebrew, and they knew that almah means “young woman.” They knew it does not mean “virgin.” It makes no sense to believe that the Rabbis of the Septuagint translated it as “virgin,” when no other Rabbi in all of history has ever translated it that way.

But even if we accept that the Septuagint was originally written with the word “parthenos,” and that the Rabbis meant to translate it as “virgin” (which makes no sense), how does that explain what the Christians did to the rest of the passage? Even if it does mean virgin, how did the Messiah get into this prophecy? And how did a prophecy that clearly refers to a contemporary event get applied to an event 600 or 700 years later? There is no logic to this so-called “proof.”
beingjewish.com/toshuv/virgin.html