The Collective Messiah

[Ben_Masada]

You don’t understand. It is an article of faith for Ben that Paul corrupted Christianity and that Jesus was “in the line of” the Pharisees. The evidence he provides is that a translator chose the word “rabbi” in translating from Greek to English. Any documentary evidence to the contrary is just proof of Paul’s cleverness in rewriting the Gospels. The Pope is hiding the true Gospels in the Vatican vaults.

**You are completely wrong Switzler, Paul did not corrupt Christianity which is exactly as he planned it to be. One does not formulate a body of doctrines to corrupt them. He tried to corrup Judaism by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it.

Yes, Jesus was in the line of the Pharisees. he was of the same company and very friendly with the Pharisees. Read about Nicodemus. Besides, the Sect of the Nazarenes had Pharisees in their Council in Jerusalem as followers of Jesus. (Acts 15:5) Pharisees would invite Jesus to dine with them. (Luke 7:36)

And regarding being a Rabbi, he was a Rabbi, therefore, a married man.

Paul did not rewrite the gospels. But the gospel writers were Gentiles former disciples of Paul’s.

And last but not least, I did not say that the real gospels are hiding in the vaults of the Vatican. I said the writings of the Nazarenes which were rejected gospels by the Fathers of the Church when they selected the books which would partake of the NT Canon.

I think you are frustrated with your failure to impress me about your ideas that Rome was beneficial to the Jews. Sorry lady, but Jews have a mind of their own without any strings attached anywhere. To think is our trademark.**

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

You are completely wrong Switzler, Paul did not corrupt Christianity which is exactly as he planned it to be. One does not formulate a body of doctrines to corrupt them. He tried to corrup Judaism by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it.

You are relying on a false distinction between Judaism and Christianity. You are fitting facts to theology.

Jesus was a Jew. The apostles were Jews. Paul was a Jew. All the early Christians were Jews.

This began as an intra-Jewish debate which only became a schism when the Rabbinical Jews ejected Chrisitans.

Further, what you fail to recognize is that both Christianity and Rabbinical Judiam innovated. Rabbinical Judiasm had to reinvent Judiasm in order to justify the ejection of Christians and the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the destruction of Israel that resulted from their misguided war with Rome.

You need to get your history right first and then proceed to theology, not the reverse.

Yes, Jesus was in the line of the Pharisees. he was of the same company and very friendly with the Pharisees. Read about Nicodemus. Besides, the Sect of the Nazarenes had Pharisees in their Council in Jerusalem as followers of Jesus. (Acts 15:5) Pharisees would invite Jesus to dine with them. (Luke 7:36)

These facts do not establish Jesus as being “in the line of” the Pharisees. Some Pharisees were convinced by Jesus and became Chrisitan. Others were not and debated him.

And regarding being a Rabbi, he was a Rabbi, therefore, a married man.

You have yet to offer evidence that Jesus was a Rabbi (except in the trivial sense of being a religious teacher). And the claim that all religius teachers are married is similarly false the fact that rabbis are encouraged to marry is proof that not all rabbis are married.

Paul did not rewrite the gospels. But the gospel writers were Gentiles former disciples of Paul’s.

What Paul wrote in his epistels is consistent in every way with the Gospels. While it is unknown who wrote the Gospels they do not deviate from Pauls letters.

And last but not least, I did not say that the real gospels are hiding in the vaults of the Vatican. I said the writings of the Nazarenes which were rejected gospels by the Fathers of the Church when they selected the books which would partake of the NT Canon.

Anyone who doubts my summary can read back through this thread.

I think you are frustrated with your failure to impress me about your ideas that Rome was beneficial to the Jews. Sorry lady, but Jews have a mind of their own without any strings attached anywhere. To think is our trademark.

I long ago realized that you would not be inconvenienced by anything as droll as facts.

But let me remind you that it was you who through a fit when I presented facts that you regarded as anti-semitic. Anyone wondering who is frustrated here need only glance back at the unanswered evidence I provided for my position.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Jesus was a Jew. The apostles were Jews. Paul was a Jew. All the early Christians were Jews.

Yes, because Paul was unable to build a chuch from scratch. So, he would rob the Nazarenes of their converts and turn them back to Gentiles.

These facts do not establish Jesus as being “in the line of” the Pharisees. Some Pharisees were convinced by Jesus and became Chrisitan. Others were not and debated him.

Christians started with Paul in Antioch. Read Acts 11:26. Therefore, 30 years after Jesus had been gone. How can you say that Jesus convinced Pharisees to become Christians? You need to get your historical facts in order.

You have yet to offer evidence that Jesus was a Rabbi (except in the trivial sense of being a religious teacher). And the claim that all religius teachers are married is similarly false the fact that rabbis are encouraged to marry is proof that not all rabbis are married.

In that case, you should get rid of your NT, because not only Pharisees but also Jesus’ disciples would call him Rabbi. It was a shame among us in the First Century for Jews to reach age 30 and still single. A shame bordering on being an abnormal person. If it was so to any Jew, imagine a Rabbi or Teacher. He could not officiate as such. If you want to open an exception with Jesus, make him a Greek first.

What Paul wrote in his epistels is consistent in every way with the Gospels. While it is unknown who wrote the Gospels they do not deviate from Pauls letters.

I should say so. And so much so that it seems to me that Paul wrote the whole of the NT.

But let me remind you that it was you who through a fit when I presented facts that you regarded as anti-semitic. Anyone wondering who is frustrated here need only glance back at the unanswered evidence I provided for my position.

But of course! After crucifying thousands of Jews in Israel, you come and tell me that this policy was beneficial to the Jews. What did you expect of me? To conclude that I was reading the posts of an anti-Semite.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Bubba Switzler;5410866:

Jesus was a Jew. The apostles were Jews. Paul was a Jew. All the early Christians were Jews.

Yes, because Paul was unable to build a chuch from scratch. So, he would rob the Nazarenes of their converts and turn them back to Gentiles.

So you claim without a shred of evidence, without even the pretense of seeking it. That you don’t like Paul and may disagree with his theology is beside the point. The point is that Paul was more Jewish than you.

And, as we discussed previously, the schism between Judaism and Christianity was not the choice of Christians or Paul but the Rabbinical Jews and the consequence of failed rebellions against Rome.

Bubba Switzler;5410866:

These facts do not establish Jesus as being “in the line of” the Pharisees. Some Pharisees were convinced by Jesus and became Chrisitan. Others were not and debated him.

Christians started with Paul in Antioch. Read Acts 11:26. Therefore, 30 years after Jesus had been gone. How can you say that Jesus convinced Pharisees to become Christians? You need to get your historical facts in order.

We’ve been through that already. All that happened in Antioch is that the term “Christian” was coined to describe the folowers of Christos, the Messiah.

Bubba Switzler;5410866:

You have yet to offer evidence that Jesus was a Rabbi (except in the trivial sense of being a religious teacher). And the claim that all religius teachers are married is similarly false the fact that rabbis are encouraged to marry is proof that not all rabbis are married.

In that case, you should get rid of your NT, because not only Pharisees but also Jesus’ disciples would call him Rabbi. It was a shame among us in the First Century for Jews to reach age 30 and still single. A shame bordering on being an abnormal person. If it was so to any Jew, imagine a Rabbi or Teacher. He could not officiate as such. If you want to open an exception with Jesus, make him a Greek first.

As I pointed out before, the NT was not written in Hebrew! All that the NT establishes is that Jesus was a religious teacher, which is all that “rabbi” meant at that time. He was not an official of any kind.

Bubba Switzler;5410866:

What Paul wrote in his epistels is consistent in every way with the Gospels. While it is unknown who wrote the Gospels they do not deviate from Pauls letters.

I should say so. And so much so that it seems to me that Paul wrote the whole of the NT.

Which would mean that the Gospels are the project of a Jewish mind.

Bubba Switzler;5410866:

But let me remind you that it was you who through a fit when I presented facts that you regarded as anti-semitic. Anyone wondering who is frustrated here need only glance back at the unanswered evidence I provided for my position.

But of course! After crucifying thousands of Jews in Israel, you come and tell me that this policy was beneficial to the Jews. What did you expect of me? To conclude that I was reading the posts of an anti-Semite.

What’s really sad about the demise of Judaism is this point exactly.

Rabbinical Judaism is founded on the premise that the Jews are righteous victims of a cruel world. But that is not what the Torah or the Tenach teaches. My children have more of a sense of responsibility than you have displayed in your reading of history.

The Jews of 1C-2C AD brought destruction upon themselves by their own choices. They rejected the friendship of Rome and chose, instead, to become the enemies of Rome. They created antisemitism. They are the reason you live in a secular Israel occupying Arab “Palestine.”

Which makes it all the more amusing that you would claim that Rabbinical Judaism is its own Messiah.

 

[John7]

**You are completely wrong Switzler, Paul did not corrupt Christianity which is exactly as he planned it to be. One does not formulate a body of doctrines to corrupt them. He tried to corrup Judaism by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it.

Yes, Jesus was in the line of the Pharisees. he was of the same company and very friendly with the Pharisees. Read about Nicodemus. Besides, the Sect of the Nazarenes had Pharisees in their Council in Jerusalem as followers of Jesus. (Acts 15:5) Pharisees would invite Jesus to dine with them. (Luke 7:36)

And regarding being a Rabbi, he was a Rabbi, therefore, a married man.

Paul did not rewrite the gospels. But the gospel writers were Gentiles former disciples of Paul’s.
**

more lies from Ben…

my prayer is that all Jews including Ben might become completed Jews in Christ Jesus

it can happen just think of all the Messianic Jews

as for the idle tale of the ‘collective messiah’, simply
1 John 2:22 **Who is a liar **but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

 

[BPW75]

While it is unknown who wrote the Gospels they do not deviate from Pauls letters.

Can you elaborate on this point? It is unknown who wrote the Gospels?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Can you elaborate on this point? It is unknown who wrote the Gospels?

The authorship of the various Gospels is a matter of speculation and tradition. It is, however, quite unlikely that Paul wrote them.

 

[Ben_Masada]

more lies from Ben…

No, from the NT.

my prayer is that all Jews including Ben might become completed Jews in Christ Jesus.

Then, you guys say that I am the one trying to proselytize.

it can happen just think of all the Messianic Jews

"Messianic Jews" are no Jews. They are the moribunds of Hosea 4:6 who have perished for lack of knowledge.

as for the idle tale of the ‘collective messiah’, simply
1 John 2:22 ]Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son.

Do you mean to say that Isaiah the Prophet was a liar and antichrist? It was from him that I got the idea of the collective Messiah.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

“Messianic Jews” are no Jews. They are the moribunds of Hosea 4:6 who have perished for lack of knowledge.

They are not Rabbinical Jews, anyway.

But this raises an interesting question: Are there any real Jews? For if Messianic Jews are not real Jews then neither are Rabbinical Jews.

If mere lack of knowledge disqualifies one from being a Jew then Judaism is dead.

 

[Ben_Masada]

They are not Rabbinical Jews, anyway.

But this raises an interesting question: Are there any real Jews? For if Messianic Jews are not real Jews then neither are Rabbinical Jews.

If mere lack of knowledge disqualifies one from being a Jew then Judaism is dead.

**You are mistaken about what it takes to be Jewish. “Messianic Jews” are not Jewish because they have confessed their religious loyalty to another religious faith. There is more than one way to lose one’s Jewishness. To be Jewish is not to belong to a different race.

I can’t help but detacting some traces of jealousy in your attitude, as you charge us with being Rabbinical Jews. We are not Rabbinical Jews. We are Biblical Jews. At least, I can speak for myself. And allow me to add, that with regards to you jealous remark that Judaism is dead for lack of knowledge, I hope you acknowledge your mistake by being unable to meet me in the Scriptures. What I have derived from our debates is that you have a very distorted knowledge of what it takes to being Jewish, and a sad case in Scriptural knowledge. All your struggle is to get a self-Jewish confession that we were to blame for our war with the Romans. Get serious lady!**

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

You are mistaken about what it takes to be Jewish. “Messianic Jews” are not Jewish because they have confessed their religious loyalty to another religious faith. There is more than one way to lose one’s Jewishness. To be Jewish is not to belong to a different race.

I always find it interesting that Messianic Jews are expelled from Judaism (like Christians before them) but atheists and bhuddists are welcome. I think that tells us a lot about Rabbinical Judaism’s priorities. Rabbinical Judaism is anti-Christian to its core.

This is in contrast to the Judaism of 1CAD in which you had very different religious opinions expressed with no notion that any one of them was expelled for their disagreement. Sadducees didn’t expel Pharisees or vice versa.

That all began with Rabbinical Judaism in reaction to the growing popularity of of Christianity.

I can’t help but detacting some traces of jealousy in your attitude, as you charge us with being Rabbinical Jews. We are not Rabbinical Jews. We are Biblical Jews. At least, I can speak for myself.

Rabbinical Judiasm is not Biblical Judaism. Most significantly, Rabbinical Jews do not keep the Torah with respect to Temple sacrifice. Biblical Judaism revolved around the Temple of Jerusalem (and the tabernacle before it). Rabbinical Judaism substituted the Torah for the Temple and Rabbis for Priests.

You have lost your Jewish faith, my friend.

And allow me to add, that with regards to you jealous remark that Judaism is dead for lack of knowledge, I hope you acknowledge your mistake by being unable to meet me in the Scriptures. What I have derived from our debates is that you have a very distorted knowledge of what it takes to being Jewish, and a sad case in Scriptural knowledge.

See above.

All your struggle is to get a self-Jewish confession that we were to blame for our war with the Romans.

This is a simple fact of history. That you deny this illuminates much about you.

 

[Ben_Masada]

I always find it interesting that Messianic Jews are expelled from Judaism (like Christians before them) but atheists and bhuddists are welcome. I think that tells us a lot about Rabbinical Judaism’s priorities. Rabbinical Judaism is anti-Christian to its core.

There is no Atheist Jews and Bhuddists cannot join Judaism. Where did you hear about this? If you want to know, ask, don’t affirm something you are not aware of .

This is in contrast to the Judaism of 1CAD in which you had very different religious opinions expressed with no notion that any one of them was expelled for their disagreement. Sadducees didn’t expel Pharisees or vice versa.

They were both different classes of Jews.

Rabbinical Judiasm is not Biblical Judaism. Most significantly, Rabbinical Jews do not keep the Torah with respect to Temple sacrifice. Biblical Judaism revolved around the Temple of Jerusalem (and the tabernacle before it). Rabbinical Judaism substituted the Torah for the Temple and Rabbis for Priests.

We don’t have a Temple YET. Wait until we rebuild it to say how Rabbinical Judaism deals with this or that.

This is a simple fact of history. That you deny this illuminates much about you.

And that you are unable to see that if Rome had not entered Israel, nothing would have happened is beyond my figuring you out.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

There is no Atheist Jews and Bhuddists cannot join Judaism. Where did you hear about this? If you want to know, ask, don’t affirm something you are not aware of.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_atheism

kofersite.com/

time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,839200,00.html

Among others. You can investigate yourself. Similarly, Jews who practice buddhism are not expelled from Judaism.

Bubba:

This is in contrast to the Judaism of 1CAD in which you had very different religious opinions expressed with no notion that any one of them was expelled for their disagreement. Sadducees didn’t expel Pharisees or vice versa.

They were both different classes of Jews.

My point exactly. Although they had fundamental theological disagreements (mainly over the Pharisees beief in the Oral Torah) they did not expel one another. But when a Jew comes to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, that’s intolerable to Rabbinical Judaism.

Bubba:

Rabbinical Judiasm is not Biblical Judaism. Most significantly, Rabbinical Jews do not keep the Torah with respect to Temple sacrifice. Biblical Judaism revolved around the Temple of Jerusalem (and the tabernacle before it). Rabbinical Judaism substituted the Torah for the Temple and Rabbis for Priests.

We don’t have a Temple YET. Wait until we rebuild it to say how Rabbinical Judaism deals with this or that.

You don’t have a temple. Period. All you have is a temple mount and you can’t even go there. You are as expelled today as you were after the Roman Wars.

Honestly, which is more likely: that Jews will rebuild the Temple and a billion muslims will just shrug their shoulders? Or that, the Arabs will throw expel the Jews from “Palestine.” I’ll put my money on the later.

But set that aside. Conduct a survey of Rabbinical Jews and ask, simply, “do you favor a resumption of animal sacrifices”? I guarantee you it will be only a very small minority of Rabbinical Jews who answer yes. You’ll find more Jewish members of PETA than Jews who favor resuming animal sacrifices.

Bubba:

This is a simple fact of history. That you deny this illuminates much about you.

And that you are unable to see that if Rome had not entered Israel, nothing would have happened is beyond my figuring you out.

That is true but irrelevant to the point. They did (at the invitation of the Jews) and thus the Jews of 1C-2C AD faced not the choice between whether or not the Romans would enter Israel but whether they would make the best of their situation or make a bad situation worse. They chose the later with the unsurprising consequences.

But set that aside and consider: who were supposed to be the moral teachers in that situation? Not the Romans. If an adult and a child get into a fight it is the adult who is held responsible.

As we all know, it was left to the Christians to civilize Rome and the world while Rabbinical Judaism invented a “leave me alone” version of Judaism.

 

[Ben_Masada]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_atheism

kofersite.com/

time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,839200,00.html

Among others. You can investigate yourself. Similarly, Jews who practice buddhism are not expelled from Judaism.

A Jew can practice whatever he wants as long as he does not confess loyalty to another faith.

My point exactly. Although they had fundamental theological disagreements (mainly over the Pharisees beief in the Oral Torah) they did not expel one another. But when a Jew comes to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, that’s intolerable to Rabbinical Judaism.

The Oral Torah is part of Judaism. The NT never was.

You don’t have a temple. Period. All you have is a temple mount and you can’t even go there. You are as expelled today as you were after the Roman Wars.

**I don’t know what you are talking about. I have been up there several times. I even walked through the Muslim Mosque. **

Honestly, which is more likely: that Jews will rebuild the Temple and a billion muslims will just shrug their shoulders? Or that, the Arabs will throw expel the Jews from “Palestine.” I’ll put my money on the later.

Only if the time is ripe for another exile. If not, Jews are here to stay. Don’t bet because you may lose your money.

But set that aside. Conduct a survey of Rabbinical Jews and ask, simply, “do you favor a resumption of animal sacrifices”? I guarantee you it will be only a very small minority of Rabbinical Jews who answer yes. You’ll find more Jewish members of PETA than Jews who favor resuming animal sacrifices.

Nevertheless, one of the classes in the Yeshiva of Cohanim in Jerusalem is to teach Levites how to prepare animal sacrifices. Surveys sometimes do not reflect reality.

That is true but irrelevant to the point. They did (at the invitation of the Jews) and thus the Jews of 1C-2C AD faced not the choice between whether or not the Romans would enter Israel but whether they would make the best of their situation or make a bad situation worse. They chose the later with the unsurprising consequences.

That, I admit, was a mistake of ours to apply for the Roman help against the Hellenistic world. In fact, we did not need it. We were doing fine with the Hasmonians. This is true even today when we rely too heavy on America.

As we all know, it was left to the Christians to civilize Rome and the world while Rabbinical Judaism invented a “leave me alone” version of Judaism.

**Now, you can see that I am not a Rabbinical Jew. Instead of adopting the Jewish policy of “leave me alone,” I even provoke Christians everywhere. At this point,
nine Gentiles have converted to Judaism as a result of my work. And these are the ones I have been present at their final ceremony of conversion. That I don’t know, God knows how many. Besides, two “Messianic Jews” who had left Judaism, have reported to me via email that they have returned to Judaism proper. Therefore, no “leave me alone” version with me. **

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

A Jew can practice whatever he wants as long as he does not confess loyalty to another faith.

Atheism is not another faith but Messianic Judaism is? I think even you must be able to see through that.

The Oral Torah is part of Judaism. The NT never was.

The Oral Torah was as alien to the Judaism to the Sadducees as the NT was to Rabbinical Judaism. Again you invent a distinction where there is none.

I don’t know what you are talking about. I have been up there several times. I even walked through the Muslim Mosque.

And you performed your Torah obligations to make animal sacrifices?

Only if the time is ripe for another exile. If not, Jews are here to stay. Don’t bet because you may lose your money.

I might, but I’d be far more likely to lose my money the other way.

Nevertheless, one of the classes in the Yeshiva of Cohanim in Jerusalem is to teach Levites how to prepare animal sacrifices. Surveys sometimes do not reflect reality.

My point is that if you measure Jewishness by adherence to the Torah then the vast preponderance of Jews are not real Jews because they do not keep the Torah with respect to animal sacrifices and they do not desire to do so.

That, I admit, was a mistake of ours to apply for the Roman help against the Hellenistic world. In fact, we did not need it. We were doing fine with the Hasmonians. This is true even today when we rely too heavy on America.

That is beside the point as Rome might well have moved in anyway. The point is that Rome was a conquering empire and it had certain policies that were well known. Your ancestors decided to test Rome, repeatedly, until Rome finally crushed Israel and created “Palestine”.

History is not quite repeating itself with Israeli dependence on the US but the combination of dependence on the US and enmity its neighbors makes for a precarious situation that any false move could ignite. And with Iran going nuclear and Syria and Egypt likely to follow, it could get ugly soon.

Which is why I’m confident in my bet above.

But returning to the point, Israel’s situation in 1C-2C AD was far better than today. If Israel had merely befriended Rome instead of making war on it history would have been entirely different.

Paul saw the opportunity that the Rabbinical Jews missed which is how Christianity came to conquer Rome.

The Rabbinical Jews didn’t just reject Jesus as Messiah, they rejected an opportunity to become Priests to the World.

Now, you can see that I am not a Rabbinical Jew.

You reject the Oral Torah and the authority of the Rabbis?

Instead of adopting the Jewish policy of “leave me alone,” I even provoke Christians everywhere. At this point, nine Gentiles have converted to Judaism as a result of my work. And these are the ones I have been present at their final ceremony of conversion. That I don’t know, God knows how many. Besides, two “Messianic Jews” who had left Judaism, have reported to me via email that they have returned to Judaism proper. Therefore, no “leave me alone” version with me.

Egad. You must be preying on the mentally infirm, then, because you have demonstrated no persuasive skills whatsoever here.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Atheism is not another faith but Messianic Judaism is? I think even you must be able to see through that.

You are so anxious to attack that you even miss the point in discussion. I said that as long as a Jew does not confess loyalty to another faith, he won’t be rejected. Of course, I know that Atheism is not another faith. That’s why unbelief is no reason to disconnect a Jew. Christianity is.

The Oral Torah was as alien to the Judaism to the Sadducees as the NT was to Rabbinical Judaism. Again you invent a distinction where there is none.

The Oral Torah was not alien to the Sadducees. They just would not recognize it as authoritative vis-a-vis the written Torah, but I suspect of a political question involved here.

And you performed your Torah obligations to make animal sacrifices?

Jews do not sacrifice or pray in temples of Gentiles.

My point is that if you measure Jewishness by adherence to the Torah then the vast preponderance of Jews are not real Jews because they do not keep the Torah with respect to animal sacrifices and they do not desire to do so.

A great number of the commandments are limited by the absence of the Temple.

That is beside the point as Rome might well have moved in anyway. The point is that Rome was a conquering empire and it had certain policies that were well known. Your ancestors decided to test Rome, repeatedly, until Rome finally crushed Israel and created “Palestine”.

Today Rome does not exist and Israel is far from being crushed.

History is not quite repeating itself with Israeli dependence on the US but the combination of dependence on the US and enmity its neighbors makes for a precarious situation that any false move could ignite. And with Iran going nuclear and Syria and Egypt likely to follow, it could get ugly soon.

And all because we have decided to respect the political policies of Uncle Sam. If we decide to act as we should, we can finish with Iran and Syria in a matter of days.

But returning to the point, Israel’s situation in 1C-2C AD was far better than today. If Israel had merely befriended Rome instead of making war on it history would have been entirely different.

At least we don’t see Jews being crucified almost everyday as was the “better situation” of the First Century.

Paul saw the opportunity that the Rabbinical Jews missed which is how Christianity came to conquer Rome.

Yes, but it will never conquer Israel.

The Rabbinical Jews didn’t just reject Jesus as Messiah, they rejected an opportunity to become Priests to the World.

That’s exactly what we are, the world wanting or not. To be the Priests of the world is not a thing we have but that we are. What one has can be taken aways; what one is he is no matter what.

You reject the Oral Torah and the authority of the Rabbis?

No, but I am not a tick to think with their heads.

Egad. You must be preying on the mentally infirm, then, because you have demonstrated no persuasive skills whatsoever here.

It doesn’t matter what you think of me. A tree is known by its fruits. And I have produced them.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

You are so anxious to attack that you even miss the point in discussion. I said that as long as a Jew does not confess loyalty to another faith, he won’t be rejected. Of course, I know that Atheism is not another faith. That’s why unbelief is no reason to disconnect a Jew. Christianity is.

Atheism is “another faith” it is faith in the non-existence of God. It is hard to imagine a more anti-Jewish faith than atheism but it tells us about Rabbinical Judaism’s inherent anti-Christian bias that an atheist Jew is welcome but a Messianic Jew is not.

Furthermore, faith is not the essence of Judaism. The Jews are not merely heirs to Abraham but they are participants in a Covenant with God. A person with genuine Jewish faith would keep the Torah.

Jewish anti-Christianism is not an excuse for Christian anti-semitism but it certainly is worth noticing.

Bubba:

The Oral Torah was as alien to the Judaism to the Sadducees as the NT was to Rabbinical Judaism. Again you invent a distinction where there is none.

The Oral Torah was not alien to the Sadducees. They just would not recognize it as authoritative vis-a-vis the written Torah, but I suspect of a political question involved here.

The Sadducees rejected the Oral Torah just as Rabbinical Jews reject the NT. But the Sadducees did not eject the Pharisees from Judaism as Rabbinical Jews ejected the Christians and continue to shun Messianic Jews.

Bubba:

And you performed your Torah obligations to make animal sacrifices?

Jews do not sacrifice or pray in temples of Gentiles.

No, Biblical Jews sacrifice at the Temple of Jerusalem. Pretend Jews pray at the wailing wall.

Bubba:

My point is that if you measure Jewishness by adherence to the Torah then the vast preponderance of Jews are not real Jews because they do not keep the Torah with respect to animal sacrifices and they do not desire to do so.

A great number of the commandments are limited by the absence of the Temple.

Not merely “a great number” but the core of Judaism. And the Jewish disinterest in rebuilding the Temple and resuming animal sacrifices demonstrates the non-Biblical nature of Rabbinical Judaism.

Bubba:

That is beside the point as Rome might well have moved in anyway. The point is that Rome was a conquering empire and it had certain policies that were well known. Your ancestors decided to test Rome, repeatedly, until Rome finally crushed Israel and created “Palestine”.

Today Rome does not exist and Israel is far from being crushed.

I have visited Rome. I can assure you it still exists.

Bubba:

History is not quite repeating itself with Israeli dependence on the US but the combination of dependence on the US and enmity its neighbors makes for a precarious situation that any false move could ignite. And with Iran going nuclear and Syria and Egypt likely to follow, it could get ugly soon.

And all because we have decided to respect the political policies of Uncle Sam. If we decide to act as we should, we can finish with Iran and Syria in a matter of days.

Israel defers to America because it depends on it. But interestingly American Jews are increasingly turning their backs on Israel.

Now mind you, I am rooting for Israel, though for humanitarian and geopolitical and not theological reasons, but the time is coming when Jews will have to abandon Israel again.

Bubba:

But returning to the point, Israel’s situation in 1C-2C AD was far better than today. If Israel had merely befriended Rome instead of making war on it history would have been entirely different.

At least we don’t see Jews being crucified almost everyday as was the “better situation” of the First Century.

Setting aside your exagerations, the point remains. Christians, too, suffered persecution by the Romans but they prevailed. Christianity is today where Judaism could have been had it made the right choices in 1C-2C AD.

Bubba:

Paul saw the opportunity that the Rabbinical Jews missed which is how Christianity came to conquer Rome.

Yes, but it will never conquer Israel.

Back to the “leave us alone” theme, I see.

Bubba:

The Rabbinical Jews didn’t just reject Jesus as Messiah, they rejected an opportunity to become Priests to the World.

That’s exactly what we are, the world wanting or not. To be the Priests of the world is not a thing we have but that we are. What one has can be taken aways; what one is he is no matter what.

Nope. This is Judaisms core failure.

Bubba Switzler;5433675:

Egad. You must be preying on the mentally infirm, then, because you have demonstrated no persuasive skills whatsoever here.

It doesn’t matter what you think of me. A tree is known by its fruits. And I have produced them.

Then, by your own measure, Judaism is an abject failure and Christianity a success.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

---

We all know that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah. So, no argument about it. But then whom did Isaiah have in mind when he wrote chapter 53? In fact, who was in his mind when he wrote the whole book? That’s in Isaiah 1:1: “A vision about Judah and Jerusalem.” That’s the theme of the book of Isaiah: Judah. Or the House of Jacob called by the name Israel from the stock of Judah. (Isa. 48:1)

Now, how about the Suffering Servant? Isaiah mentions him by name, which is Israel according to Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4

Now, we have extablished a syllogism. If the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah, and Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, the resultant premise will obviously be that Israel (the Jewish People) is the Messiah. Rashi thought so too, and a few other thinkers of weight.

Now, if the Messiah must also bring the epitet of son of God, there is no problem. We can have it from Exodus 4:22,23. Here’s what it says in there: “Israel is My son; so, let My son go, that he may serve Me,” says the Lord. That’s why Hosea said that
“When Israel was a child, God said, out of Egypt I called My son.” (Hosea 11:1)

Last but not least, Jesus no doubt was part of the Messiah but not on an individual basis. The Messiah is collective. What we need from time to time, especially in exile, is of a Messianic leader to lead or inspire the Messiah to return home. Moses
was one for bringing the Messiah back to Canaan. Cyrus was another for proclaiming the return of the Messiah to rebuild the Temple; and in our modern times, we had Herzl who was also one for inspiring the Messiah with love for Zion.

Now, I would appreciate to share your comments about the above.

Ben:

Gabriel of 12;

Your thought process conflicts with your summary; For one if you are going to take the origial historical interpretation which the Catholic Church holds too. And remain there, then these scriptures do not pertain to any living Jew or peoples pass the day of the prophet.

Now because both Hebrew and Catholic doctrines are interpretated from Typology and I dont include symbolism here, and the Oral Traditions of our Fathers the Word of God comes to life in every age.

To deny that Hebrews did not interpret scripture as do Catholics from a typological and Oral Tradtionional teachings of the Law and Prophets from our forefathers takes you in conflict with both Jewish and Judeo Cathoilc Christian interpretation of the Word of God.

One cannot teach a personal interpretation of God’s Word. One must have a Teacher from God, and both Jew and Catholic have Rabbi, and Magesterium since the first century to interpret scriptures.

So Isaiah does reference the True and final Messiah Jesus who is God incarnate. For Jesus revealed all the Prophets and Law that pertatained to him of which Jesus now fulfilled. Including the sacrifice of Bread and Wine according to the order of Melchizedeck.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Ben; What I have found puzzling about your posts; is that you include a 19th century Evangelical Christian interpretation mixed with a 2000 year old Catholicism. This is not happening.

It goes without saying that some of your posts would not make sense when arguing a Christian belief. Because outside of Catholicism you enter into a many diverse interpretation of Jesus and his teachings.

For clarification on this non catholic forum, it may be good to emphasize which Christianity your addressing, a 2000 year old Christianity which is Catholicism or Evangelicals, and or our seperated brethern, Protestantism. To some of these 19th century Christians, may have Jewish connotations such as SDA’s and JW’s who would find your interpretation of Jesus agreeable.

To remain on track, for clarification Catholicism has no problem revealing a first century Jewish Christian biblical interpretation of the scriptures. Taking a position from a 19th century Christian interpretation seperates oneself from the True Christianity from antiquity who were Hebrew Jewish Christians. It is from these that Liturgical, Revelations, and biblical interpretation from the Law of Moses and Prophets are summed up in Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord. This is not coming from a Christian of today, this revelation comes to us from the first Hebrew Jewish Chritians.

It would be accurate to argue with your Jewish colleagues who became Christians from the first century, which is the Catholic church, who would have an understanding of both Hebrew thought and teaching of scriptures fulfilled through Jesus Christ. Than to take a mixture of 19th century christian interpretations that many times does not address the questions you ask of Catholics. And become mundane requests and your late Christian biblical interpretations that conflict with Christianity from antiquity.

Anyhow just for your information, please do not clump your 19th century christianity biblical interpretation with Catholicsm the too dont mix.

Peace be with you

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

To remain on track, for clarification Catholicism has no problem revealing a first century Jewish Christian biblical interpretation of the scriptures.

But Ben doesn’t even want to acknowledge that there were Jewish Christians or that the NT is a product of Jewish minds or that Rabbinical Judaism was the cause of the Jewish-Christian schism (not to mention the destruction of Israel).