Judaism / Christianity

[Nickkname]

The other day I was talking to a (Jewish) friend of mine, and she said that the reason for the differences between Christianity and Judaism was that the early Christians tried to convert the Jews and, when it turned out to be a harder task than they had bargained for and they failed, they then turned their attention to the other people. In order to make this new religion easier for them to catch on to and follow (and also purely to differentiate themselves), they then dropped the Mosaic Law and so on.

What would you reply to this?

I thought that the whole point was that, with Jesus, the new covenant was open to everyone, Jew or gentile… However, I know nothing about the history of it really, other than what’s in the Bible (and my Biblical knowledge is really very poor). Is anything else known? Did Christianity really develop in this way?

Thanks!

I would say that she has her facts mixed up. First off, the real difference between Judaism and Christianity is Jesus. Secondly, the Jew-Christians had in fact converted many Jews. Heck, even many Pharisees converted to Christianity (the Gospel of John proves this, as it was dictated by a Pharisee, who acted as the mouthpiece and dictator of the Apostle John). The reason Christianity turned to the Gentiles as well is because Jesus had commanded His Church to make disciples of all nations and to not call what God has created unclean (there is actually a double meaning to this vision: it both refers to the end of the diet rules - which could only exist in a certain time and place, not in an univerisal People of God - and to the Gospel being preached to even the Gentiles as well, of whom the Jews at the time compared to pigs - which, according to the diet rules, are unclean animals). So, really, it’s all about Jesus.

 

[Kaninchen]

First off, the real difference between Judaism and Christianity is Jesus.

Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus and Christianity isn’t Judaism plus Jesus. The two religions are conceptually different.

 

[Angelos]

You mean picking up a false religious identity is not same as Peter’s cursing and swearing and denying by saying: "I do not know this man [Jesus] about whom you are talking - Mark 14:71) ? Is this in Christian Bible or Moslem’s Koran?

I wonder when you will stop resorting to logical fallacies. Now you are falsely comparing yourself to Peter, who denied being who he was due to his weakness and fear. However, he later repented and was forgiven by Jesus.

We all know that what drives you to pick up a false religious identity is not your fear of Christians, but only your frailty and your being ashamed of your original religious identity. However, we still hope that you will come to your senses soon and ask for forgiveness.

Peace

 

[Angelos]

Infact, he not only emphasis on the Law but added additional hardship to the Law. And this what can be called the ‘FULLFILMENT of LAW’. Oh… yeah… and that is what he told you that:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. --Matthew 5:17

So, what Jesus is telling you here is very very clear, simple and straight forward and it supports my stance.

Why do you think Jesus did not only refer to the Law, but also to the prophets??? The books of the prophets were not a part of the Mosaic Law and did not have any precepts to be observed.

Check your quotations once more to see that Jesus claims to fulfill the Law through changes in those commandments. This is why He lays emphasis on the contrast between what was said to the ancestors of the Jews in the past and what He says to them today.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Folks I think our conversations with one person on here are perhaps in vain. He refuses to answer directions, He misquotes or twist scripture, and though I do not know from what other have said here he is misrepresenting himself. May God show kindness and mercy on him, that he may see the error in doing such things.

 

[sambos671]

Why do you think Jesus did not only refer to the Law, but also to the prophets??? The books of the prophets were not a part of the Mosaic Law and did not have any precepts to be observed.

Check your quotations once more to see that Jesus claims to fulfill the Law through changes in those commandments. This is why He lays emphasis on the contrast between what was said to the ancestors of the Jews in the past and what He says to them today.

The prophets did not change the law.

 

[aaronjo]

**There is throughout Paul’s writings an irrational or pathological element which could not but repel the disciples of the Rabbis.

Possibly his pessimistic mood was the result of his physical condition; for he suffered from an illness which affected both body and mind. He speaks of it as “a thorn in the flesh,” and as a heavy stroke by “a messenger of Satan” (II Cor. xii. 7), which often caused him to realize his utter helplessness, and made him an object of pity and horror (Gal. iv. 13).

It was, as Krenkel (“Beiträge zur Aufhellung der Geschichte und Briefe des Apostels Paulus,” 1890, pp. 47-125) has convincingly shown, epilepsy, called by the Greeks “the holy disease,” which frequently put him into a state of ecstasy, a frame of mind that may have greatly impressed some of his Gentile hearers, but could not but frighten away and estrange from him the Jew, whose God is above all the God of reason (comp. II Cor. v. 13; x. 10; xi. 1, 16; xii. 6).

The conception of a new faith, half pagan and half Jewish, such as Paul preached, and susceptibility to its influences, were altogether foreign to the nature of Jewish life and thought.
For Judaism, religion is the hallowing of this life by the fulfilment of its manifold duties : Paul shrank from life as the domain of Satan and all his hosts of evil; he longed for redemption by the deadening of all desires for life, and strove for another world which he sawin his ecstatic visions.

The following description of Paul is preserved in “Acta Pauli et Theclæ,” an apocryphal book which has been proved to be older and in some respects of greater historic value than the canonical Acts of the Apostles (see Conybeare, “Apollonius’ Apology and Acts, and Other Monuments of Early Christianity,” pp. 49-88, London, 1894):

“A man of moderate stature, with crisp [scanty] hair, crooked legs, blue eyes, large knit brows, and long nose, at times looking like a man, at times like an angel, Paul came forward and preached to the men of Iconium: ‘Blessed are they that keep themselves chaste [unmarried]; for they shall be called the temple of God. Blessed are they that mortify their bodies and souls; for unto them speaketh God. Blessed are they that despise the world; for they shall be pleasing to God. Blessed be the souls and bodies of virgins; for they shall receive the reward of their chastity.’”

It was by such preaching that "he ensnared the souls of young men and maidens, enjoining them to remain single "(Conybeare, l.c. pp. 62, 63, 67; comp. ib. pp. 24-25; Gal. iii. 38; I Cor. vii. 34-36; Matt. xix. 12; Clement of Rome, Epistle ii. § 12).**

—From Jewish Encyclopedia------

 

[Angelos]

I do not think our Islamic Jew cannot come to the forum because of Ramadan! The real reason is that he has so many different nicks/identities to write posts on behalf of. It is not easy for a Muslim to be a moderate Jew and and a Baptist revert at the same time

 

[Angelos]

There is throughout Paul’s writings an irrational or pathological element which could not but repel the disciples of the Rabbis.

Possibly his pessimistic mood was the result of his physical condition; for he suffered from an illness which affected both body and mind. He speaks of it as “a thorn in the flesh,” and as a heavy stroke by “a messenger of Satan” (II Cor. xii. 7), which often caused him to realize his utter helplessness, and made him an object of pity and horror (Gal. iv. 13).

It was, as Krenkel (“Beiträge zur Aufhellung der Geschichte und Briefe des Apostels Paulus,” 1890, pp. 47-125) has convincingly shown, epilepsy, called by the Greeks “the holy disease,” which frequently put him into a state of ecstasy, a frame of mind that may have greatly impressed some of his Gentile hearers, but could not but frighten away and estrange from him the Jew, whose God is above all the God of reason (comp. II Cor. v. 13; x. 10; xi. 1, 16; xii. 6).

The conception of a new faith, half pagan and half Jewish, such as Paul preached, and susceptibility to its influences, were altogether foreign to the nature of Jewish life and thought.
For Judaism, religion is the hallowing of this life by the fulfilment of its manifold duties : Paul shrank from life as the domain of Satan and all his hosts of evil; he longed for redemption by the deadening of all desires for life, and strove for another world which he sawin his ecstatic visions.

The following description of Paul is preserved in “Acta Pauli et Theclæ,” an apocryphal book which has been proved to be older and in some respects of greater historic value than the canonical Acts of the Apostles (see Conybeare, “Apollonius’ Apology and Acts, and Other Monuments of Early Christianity,” pp. 49-88, London, 1894):

"A man of moderate stature, with crisp [scanty] hair, crooked legs, blue eyes, large knit brows, and long nose, at times looking like a man, at times like an angel, Paul came forward and preached to the men of Iconium: 'Blessed are they that keep themselves chaste [unmarried]; for they shall be called the temple of God. Blessed are they that mortify their bodies and souls; for unto them speaketh God. Blessed are they that despise the world; for they shall be pleasing to God. Blessed be the souls and bodies of virgins; for they shall receive the reward of their chastity.'"

It was by such preaching that "he ensnared the souls of young men and maidens, enjoining them to remain single "(Conybeare, l.c. pp. 62, 63, 67; comp. ib. pp. 24-25; Gal. iii. 38; I Cor. vii. 34-36; Matt. xix. 12; Clement of Rome, Epistle ii. § 12).

Why specifically Paul? Why don’t you copy and paste from the same source the traditional Jewish view concerning Jesus? Are you, as a moderate Jew(!), ready to accept some parts of the canonical Gospels? If you deny Jesus’ divinity, are you ready to accept Jesus as a prophet and/or the expected Messiah?

Something within me predicts that these questions will fall on deaf ears as usual. (Aaronjo, I hope you are not a disabled reader).

 

[Angelos]

There is throughout Paul’s writings an irrational or pathological element which could not but repel the disciples of the Rabbis.

Possibly his pessimistic mood was the result of his physical condition; for he suffered from an illness which affected both body and mind. He speaks of it as “a thorn in the flesh,” and as a heavy stroke by “a messenger of Satan” (II Cor. xii. 7), which often caused him to realize his utter helplessness, and made him an object of pity and horror (Gal. iv. 13).

It was, as Krenkel (“Beiträge zur Aufhellung der Geschichte und Briefe des Apostels Paulus,” 1890, pp. 47-125) has convincingly shown, epilepsy, called by the Greeks “the holy disease,” which frequently put him into a state of ecstasy, a frame of mind that may have greatly impressed some of his Gentile hearers, but could not but frighten away and estrange from him the Jew, whose God is above all the God of reason (comp. II Cor. v. 13; x. 10; xi. 1, 16; xii. 6).

The conception of a new faith, half pagan and half Jewish, such as Paul preached, and susceptibility to its influences, were altogether foreign to the nature of Jewish life and thought.
For Judaism, religion is the hallowing of this life by the fulfilment of its manifold duties : Paul shrank from life as the domain of Satan and all his hosts of evil; he longed for redemption by the deadening of all desires for life, and strove for another world which he sawin his ecstatic visions.

The following description of Paul is preserved in “Acta Pauli et Theclæ,” an apocryphal book which has been proved to be older and in some respects of greater historic value than the canonical Acts of the Apostles (see Conybeare, “Apollonius’ Apology and Acts, and Other Monuments of Early Christianity,” pp. 49-88, London, 1894):

"A man of moderate stature, with crisp [scanty] hair, crooked legs, blue eyes, large knit brows, and long nose, at times looking like a man, at times like an angel, Paul came forward and preached to the men of Iconium: 'Blessed are they that keep themselves chaste [unmarried]; for they shall be called the temple of God. Blessed are they that mortify their bodies and souls; for unto them speaketh God. Blessed are they that despise the world; for they shall be pleasing to God. Blessed be the souls and bodies of virgins; for they shall receive the reward of their chastity.'"

It was by such preaching that "he ensnared the souls of young men and maidens, enjoining them to remain single "(Conybeare, l.c. pp. 62, 63, 67; comp. ib. pp. 24-25; Gal. iii. 38; I Cor. vii. 34-36; Matt. xix. 12; Clement of Rome, Epistle ii. § 12).

An additional question:

Are you familiar with the guy in the following video clip? Do you, as a Jew (!), agree with him?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLHIGKqMqLc

 

[aaronjo]

Why specifically Paul?

Because it is Saul/Paul who is actual founder of existing Christianity, not Jesus.

 

[Angelos]

Because it is Saul/Paul who is actual founder of existing Christianity, not Jesus.

How can you prove this?

Why did Paul not write a Gospel if he wanted to found a religion all by himself?

How can you claim that Paul was more powerful than the rest of Jesus’ apostles and disciples, than Jesus, and than G-d??? Why are you choosing to deify Paul by asserting that Paul’s religion/message vanquished Jesus and God’s religion?

 

[Angelos]

Because it is Saul/Paul who is actual founder of existing Christianity, not Jesus.

This was not the only question I posed. Please check my post and answer my other question too. Thanks

 

[aaronjo]

Calling Hitler Catholic is like saying Mohammad was a Christian.

Hitler killed many Catholics and Protestants. He Killed the Jews first and then many others who stood in his way.

Hitler was indeed a Catholic.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Because it is Saul/Paul who is actual founder of existing Christianity, not Jesus.

And the companions who put together the Quran, not Muhammad.

And the Rabbis who founded Judaism, not the OT.

 

[John_Goddard]

Hitler was indeed a Catholic.

About as much as Marilyn Manson is Episcopalian…

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Hitler was indeed a Catholic.

As much as Salman Rushdi was Muslim.

 

[aaronjo]

Jesus in the NT is different from the pathetic Islamic messenger erroneously named Issa in your Koran. LOL Unlike Issa, Jesus is not a puppet controlled by pagan Mohammad and his scribes, who wrote a false bible.

Could you please tell me which food forbidden in the Torah did Issa in the Koran make pure for Israel?

Though the following reply by ‘Verus Israel’ is from an another thread, I think it will help people like Angelos:

**

Thank you! Although I do not live in Israel, I appreciate the sentiment.

I will assume, in answering your questions, that by “Israel” you are referring to the modern state.

The modern state of Israel is officially secular, although it is involved, to a certain extent, with religious affairs. To my knowledge, no city officially follows Jewish law, although there are many religious (and allegedly religious) communities. I understand that while some settlements throughout the country may exclude individuals and families (both Jewish and non-Jewish alike) from residency in those places, no city has a policy to do so.

Unfortunately, not all food served in Israel conforms to the Jewish dietary regulations.

I believe that God made a promise to Yishma’el, but not a covenant. A “covenant” is a bilateral agreement that is proposed, accepted, and ratified; the Hebrew word for this is “berith.”

Originally, some of the Jewish tribes did

** view Muhammed favorably; opposition to him and his followers grew only due to political circumstance that unfortunately developed over the course of early Muslim history. In all truth, Muslims and Jews are family; sometimes family members become estranged from each other, but this is not a determined state of affairs. Over the course of history, many Jewish communities have had extremely positive relationships with many Muslim communities. . In fact, many Jewish and Muslim historians have noted how Judaism played a formative role in shaping Islam and Islam subsequently played a substantial role in shaping the continuing development of Judaism. Abraham Maimonides (son of the famous Moses Maimonides, known as Rambam) even declared that the Sufis (a group within the Muslim population) practiced some of the original and ancient religious practices of biblical Israel, which we had lost over the course of our exile.

I would share an apartment with whomever is nicest. Religious beliefs do not factor into it for me.

I hope I answered your questions!

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Though the following reply by ‘Verus Israel’ is from an another thread, I think it will help people like Angelos:

---

Odd that you focus on this quote. Sort of like you have a personal stack in it being true.

Btw, if you are going to base it on descent, as seems in the post, the Christians would, since Christ was a descendeant (actually THE descendant) of Isaac, would be closer than the Ishmaelite cousins.

 

[John_Goddard]

Or shouted out that Church of Satan founder Anton LaVey was Jewish. Same thing.