The Talmud and Jesus

[Valke2]

Please explain how this is “spin.”

Your post downplays the importance of Jewish tradition and over emphasizes the role of suffering servant in Judaism.

The Tanakh makes no mention about a “second coming.” Yes, Jewish tradition is that the Messiah will come once and complete all the tasks in one shot. To say that this is “only” tradition is misleading because such tradition is an integral and vital part of judaism.

 

[Valke2]

I’m not sure if you were trying to tie in Jesus to messiah ben Joseph. I believe you are better educated in the scriptures and Jewish history than me, so I’m at a disadvantage in supporting my beliefs. But it seems to be more than a stretch to do so, as one of the principle characteristics of the Messiah ben Joseph, in preparing the way for “The Messiah” is to wage war against the forces of evil. Jesus was no warrior. ANd no political or military leader. Jesus certainly didn’t wage war against the enemies of Israel.

Yes, its true that the Messiah ben Joseph will be killed. But killed in war, not on a cross.

Moreover, I am reading that the Messiah ben David is to follow “shortly” after the death of Messiah ben Joseph. ANd that the ressurection of the ben joseph will be accomplished by ben David (website citing to Pirkei Heichalot Rabaty, ch. 39).

As to the necessity of there even being a need for a messiah ben joseph, that seems to depend on us. His task is to prepare Israel for the coming of the big “M”. If Israel repents, we are to be immediatley redeemed , in which case there will be no need, it is said, for a messiah ben Joseph. Moshiach ben David will come directly and redeem us and we can avoid the trials and tribulations.

R. Saadiah Gaon (one of the few to elaborate on the role of Moshiach ben Yossef) notes that this sequence is not definite but contingent. Moshiach ben Yossef will not have to appear before Moshiach ben David, nor will the activities attributed to him or his death have to occur. All depends on the spiritual condition of the Jewish people at the time the redemption is to take place
moshiach.com/discover/tutorials/moshiach_ben_yossef.php#_ftn13

And Finally: “no certain knowledge can be derived from the interpertations of the prophecies about Moshiach ben Yossef, nor from the statements about him by some of the Geonim;” there is no point, therefore, in elaborating on the subject."
Or Hashem, Ma’amar III, klal 8: end of ch. 1 (R. Chasdai Crescas)

 

[RabbiAdamBernay]

Your post downplays the importance of Jewish tradition and over emphasizes the role of suffering servant in Judaism.

The Tanakh makes no mention about a “second coming.” Yes, Jewish tradition is that the Messiah will come once and complete all the tasks in one shot. To say that this is “only” tradition is misleading because such tradition is an integral and vital part of judaism.

The Tanakh suggests two comings, or two Messiahs. Two separate Messiahs at two separate time is Jewish tradition, as recorded by the Vilna Gaon. This Messiah will come once and complete all the tasks in one shot was created tradition to refute Yeshua. There is nothing in Tanakh that says it wouldn’t be at two separate times, and if you really check it, the descriptions are of very different times.

As for “overemphasizing” the suffering servant… again, Judaism has underemphasized it since Yeshua.

 

[didididi]

Valke, may I ask how you interpret Daniel 9:24-27 ?

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I’m not sure if you were trying to tie in Jesus to messiah ben Joseph. I believe you are better educated in the scriptures and Jewish history than me, so I’m at a disadvantage in supporting my beliefs. But it seems to be more than a stretch to do so, as one of the principle characteristics of the Messiah ben Joseph, in preparing the way for “The Messiah” is to wage war against the forces of evil.

Jesus was a spiritual warrior, fighting against the forces of evil on a spiritual front at his first coming. At his second coming, he will battle against the forces of evil on a physical level.

Valke2:

Jesus was no warrior. And no political or military leader. Jesus certainly didn’t wage war against the enemies of Israel.

I think it depends on one’s perspective.

He most certainly was a warrior. He was also the Lord of Sabbaoth, the armies of the Lord. In fact, he employed methdologies on a spiritual level which employed many tactics similar to “Sun Tzu’s Military Strategy”, a Chinese military treatise written during the 6th century BC by Sun Tzu. Composed of 13 chapters, each of which is devoted to one aspect of warfare, it has long been praised as the definitive work on military strategies and tactics of its time.

In particular, I am refering to Sun Tzu’s principles of war, all of which the Lord allowed people to bring upon themselves when they rebelled against his Spirit.

In other words, the Lord himself did not use deceptive tactics. Rather, the spirits (and, conversely, those who followed these deceptive spirits) often threw themselves into confusion and effectively defeated themselves. In other words, the enemies of the Lord often destroy themselves in their rebellion against God.

Take Sun Tzu’s principle’s on deception for example…
The Art of War 1:18-20:

All warfare is based on deception.

Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.

Taking these principles and looking toward the crucifixion of Christ, we see that the Lord has mounted his strongest attack so far against the adversary right from the cross.

continued…

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

…continued

In other words, when God came in human form, the adversary thought that he could at last defeat God once and for all by having him killed in the flesh.

Although there was no deception on God’s part, the adversary, since he did not believe, deceived himself into thinking that he could actually defeat God in this ‘moment of weakness’.

However, God assuming a state of humility in no way actually stops God from being God.
Hebrews 2:14-18:

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants.

For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.

Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Therefore, even though the adversary took this moment to lash out at the Lord, it actually backfired against the adversary.

In short, in a moment of military genius, the Lord totally destroyed the adversary’s schemes by allowing the adversary to slay the Lord’s flesh therefore releasing his Spirit to directly engage the battle with the adversary right on his own home territory-- the realm of the dead themselves.

As 1 Corinthians 2:7-8 notes, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of Christ’s age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

I can imagine the look on the adversary’s face when God himself came down to the realm of the dead and quite literally shook the foundations of creation, totally levelling the devil’s realm in a period of approximately three days, turning the devil’s kingdom on its head, thereby releasing all the souls who would ever be saved throughout all of human history-- past, present, and future.

It’s quite easy to defeat God. Every time we sin, we participate in his defeat. In fact, each time someone sins, they are effectively participating in the Lord’s crucifixion.

Therefore, when Adam sinned long ago, his sins were stretching across time and space, effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

Likewise, when Peter sinned at the moment of Christ’s crucifixion, his sins were effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

And when someone as yet unknown to us sins in the future, his sins are stretching across time and space, effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

The problem with this is that when we defeat the Lord, we actually only end up defeating ourselves-- and God is not actually defeated after all.

This is why Christ said this…
Matthew 10:39:

Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

In this sense, the crucfixion stands as the nexus point of all human history whereby God took on all our sins-- past, present and future. It’s the very means by which God triumphed over the devil and left him totally powerless and disarmed.

To us, since we are trapped in time and space, it may not appear as if the Lord were totally victorius yet. But that’s because we haven’t seen the end of human history yet. From God’s infinite perspective, however, it is finished– because he already knows the outcome…
Hebrews 10:11-14:

Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.

Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

 

[Valke2]

Valke, may I ask how you interpret Daniel 9:24-27 ?

Hi didi (may I call you “didi”?)

I believe Daniel is describing the the 490 years from the destruction of the first temple to the destruction of the second temple. 9:25 talks about a prince. Judaism believes this is Cyrus. Cyrus was a good egg who allowed the Jews to rebuild the temple. The messiah or anointed one mentioned iis Agrippa. He was the last Jewish king at the end of the second temple era. As you may know, mashiach means “annointed one” and can be a term applied to royalty. All Jewish kings were annointed.

That’s the thumbnail answer. I know this is a heavy hitter in the in the messianic playbook and I’d be happy to discuss it in more detail on another thread.

shalom.

 

[Georgess]

In the Rosary meditations of Pope John Paul 11- I believe , he asks , how the joyful mysteries can truly be called joyful - for all the suffreing and sorrow that is also very much part of it …

This thread , in its own way , also brings forth more depth to The Passion which too is intrinsic of the Incarnation , with its sorrrows and joys …

and many of the biblical verses take on a little more color - ’ He came to what was His own, but His own people did not accept Him ’

And the words of John The Baptist - ’ you brood of vipers ’

The crier going out about - for 40 days - about our Lord being sentenced to death …and it is in that background that He and the disciples as well Bl. Mother making the journey to Jerusalem …

The sufferings our Bl. Mother willfully accepted - having been filled with grace from the moment of conception, and having been brought up by good and holy parents ( is there not some tradition that she was brought up in the temple and thus possibly knew the scriptures and the the prophesies - of the suffering servant ) she probably had good understanding of her own role , like the role of the good and courageous jewish mothers and queens , who foreshadowed her …

If there is any truth to the part about St. Magdalene being a hairdresser , well , she could be an intercessor , for many of our young ( and old ) - to be rid of the obsessive attention to hair .

The Talmudic attempt, to make another manger scene , of dumb animals and smells …yet it too serves to bring forth good - of the realisation of the Love of our Lord , and the dignity which with He deals with those who hold such hostility !

Peace - to those on whom His favor rests !

 

[didididi]

Hi didi (may I call you “didi”?)

I believe Daniel is describing the the 490 years from the destruction of the first temple to the destruction of the second temple. 9:25 talks about a prince. Judaism believes this is Cyrus. Cyrus was a good egg who allowed the Jews to rebuild the temple. The messiah or anointed one mentioned iis Agrippa. He was the last Jewish king at the end of the second temple era. As you may know, mashiach means “annointed one” and can be a term applied to royalty. All Jewish kings were annointed.

That’s the thumbnail answer. I know this is a heavy hitter in the in the messianic playbook and I’d be happy to discuss it in more detail on another thread.

shalom.

Hehe, I didn’t know what name to register as so I just put anything.

Thank you very much for your response. Obviously you can imagine how Christians would interpret said verses.

God Bless.

 

[Valke2]

Jesus was a spiritual warrior, fighting against the forces of evil on a spiritual front at his first coming. At his second coming, he will battle against the forces of evil on a physical level.

I think it depends on one’s perspective.

He most certainly was a warrior. He was also the Lord of Sabbaoth, the armies of the Lord. In fact, he employed methdologies on a spiritual level which employed many tactics similar to “Sun Tzu’s Military Strategy”, a Chinese military treatise written during the 6th century BC by Sun Tzu. Composed of 13 chapters, each of which is devoted to one aspect of warfare, it has long been praised as the definitive work on military strategies and tactics of its time.

In particular, I am refering to Sun Tzu’s principles of war, all of which the Lord allowed people to bring upon themselves when they rebelled against his Spirit.

In other words, the Lord himself did not use deceptive tactics. Rather, the spirits (and, conversely, those who followed these deceptive spirits) often threw themselves into confusion and effectively defeated themselves. In other words, the enemies of the Lord often destroy themselves in their rebellion against God.

Take Sun Tzu’s principle’s on deception for example…

Taking these principles and looking toward the crucifixion of Christ, we see that the Lord has mounted his strongest attack so far against the adversary right from the cross.

continued…

He was no warrior. It doesn’t depend on your view. Unless you want to just make stuff up. A “warrior from the cross” is a nice image, but it is pure imagination and would never under any circumstance actually be viewed as a “warrior.” Only in the most metaphorical, poetic sense and ignoring the realities of the story, can you conclude that Jesus was a warrior.

 

[Karianne]

From 1578 to 1580, explicit references to Jesus were edited out of Talmuds, in order to avoid Christian persecution. In earlier manuscritps, there are clear references to “Yeshu ha’NOtrzi” (Jesus of Nazereth). This material has been put back into the Talmud, but many Jews don’t know this, as it appears only in some editions, and only in the back as a kind of endnote (and in small type).

The picture of Jesus described in the Talmud is very different (if it were similar, it wouldn’t have been removed out of fear of angering christians). The description is attributed to Rabbi Eliezer, who was taught by Yochanan ben Zakkai. Zakkai was very old when he died in 80 CE and could have encountered Jesus while he was alive.

ALthough some rabbis have argued that Jesus in the Talmud was a different person than the Jesus followed by Christians, Rambam agrees he’s the same person. I think the main reason some rabbis in omodern times have said otherwise was in an attempt to avoid anti-semitism. But if that was the attempt, it failed, as there are plenty of antisemitic websites that state the sources that acknowledge Jesus in the Talmud.

Anyway the Talmud reveals Jesus as a former student of Torah who went seroiusly off the rails and became a spiritual danger to the Jews.

I’ll post more later when I have time.

Thank you very much, this is fascinating to learn.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

He was no warrior.

Yes. Actually, he is.

According to Christian theology, this passage here is refering to Christ as a theophany of God prior to his incarnation…
Joshua 5:13-15:

Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?”

“Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come.” Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord have for his servant?”

The commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.

Valke2:

It doesn’t depend on your view.

Sure it does. And your answer actually proves this to be true.

To me, he’s a spiritual warrior. To you, he’s not.

Sounds like it depends on one’s view to me.

Valke2:

Unless you want to just make stuff up.

But it’s not made up. It’s a revelation from God by the Holy Spirit.

Valke2:

A “warrior from the cross” is a nice image, but it is pure imagination and would never under any circumstance actually be viewed as a “warrior.”

Are you speaking from a Jewish perspective or a Christian perspective?

I can understand your statement if you’re talking about a Jewish perspective. But, from a Christian perspective, no.

Valke2:

Only in the most metaphorical, poetic sense and ignoring the realities of the story, can you conclude that Jesus was a warrior.

Then why does 1 Corinthians 14:8 say?

Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?

Take a look at the entire passage before you explain to me that I’m interpretting this in the most metaphorical, poetic sense and ignoring the realities of the story.

Another example can be found in Colossians 2:15 where the Christian Scriptures state…

And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

And, lastly, we see an image of Christ not much different from Joshua’s encounter with the commander of the army of the LORD. In fact, when one note’s that Joshua’s name is a precurser to Yeshua, Jesus’ name– and when one notes exactly how brutally Joshua ripped through the promised land, I think this kind of imagery about Christ’s second coming in the apocalypse makes more sense…

I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great.”

Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

This isn’t a pretty picture Valke. This depiction of Christ is essentially no different from the social upheavals preceeding the coming of the messiah commonly found in the Jewish literature known as the Birthpangs of the Messiah.

Christ wasn’t a pacifist hippie with long hair preaching, “Peace Dude.” The crucfixion was but another stage of combat against the spiritual powers that be.

He was (and is) a warrior from beginning to last.

And when he comes again, he will fulfill all your own Jewish messianic expectations for you. This is what’s been taught from the beginning.

Peace Dude.

 

[Georgess]

The grace through faith to recieve God’s Mercy and to be forgiving is greater than any military might .

There is King David on his deathbed - and his last words to King Solomon were - how to take revenge …

Even modern med. has shown how unforgiveness can be a very destructive poison - again , a poison that no army can eradicate - only the grace of God …being able to be in the Loving embrace of The Father , that has forgiven all…and has satisfied the innate sense of justice - by The Infinite Merits …

The battle against demonic forces …could any army have set free someone like the Gerasene demoniac …raised the dead …
heal the blind …

Reading the O.T , one can be struck by how frequent the wars and pillages - for a populace much smaller than now and how harsh the judgements …and we still see the same where The Light of The Lord has not reached or been extinguished …

And to have shown The Way - how to overcome …with the utmost respect , for human freedom and dignity , and how care for the weak and poor are of supreme value … and is there is any one among us who is not poor or weak in some area or other …

O , Today, if you hear His Voice , harden not your hearts !

 

[Georgess]

P. S - besides, every victory of God’s people , from the foundation of the world , to this day - is His victory …the victory against death and disease, ignorance and superstition …

His Church is The Church Militant …in spiritual warfare…as well as its needed physical realms … of feeding the hungry , clothing the naked …praying for mercy on the whole world , as His priesthood …

and as St Padre Pio said , the world might make it without the sun but not without The Holy Sacrifice of The Mass …The Power of The Holy Mysteries , to ward off satanic attacks from hearts and minds …that bring on the realms of hatred and lust , violence and disease …and instead , bring in the oil of gladness - that we been made to be the children of The Kingdom !

 

[Valke2]

all of which doesn’t change the fact that Jesus wasn’t a warrior and that he did not lead Israel to victory over its enemies. There has to be at least a nexus with phyiscal reality and a correlation between language and how the universe works for their to be enough common ground to communicate. You can spend all day reinterpeting the meaning of the prophets, Genesis, etc. to ignore the fact that Jesus was no military leader or warrior. If that is what your theology teaches, then fine. Personally, I find it hypocritical to see the justifications used to prove the validity of one religion and then to hear those same people mocking Mormons or JWs, for example for their interpetations and beliefs. If you are going to see Jesus in the book of Joshua, then that is no different than seeing God’s word delivered by a Native American Angel in the Book of Mormon.

 

[ricmat]

all of which doesn’t change the fact that Jesus wasn’t a warrior and that he did not lead Israel to victory over its enemies. There has to be at least a nexus with phyiscal reality and a correlation between language and how the universe works for their to be enough common ground to communicate. You can spend all day reinterpeting the meaning of the prophets, Genesis, etc. to ignore the fact that Jesus was no military leader or warrior. If that is what your theology teaches, then fine. Personally, I find it hypocritical to see the justifications used to prove the validity of one religion and then to hear those same people mocking Mormons or JWs, for example for their interpetations and beliefs. If you are going to see Jesus in the book of Joshua, then that is no different than seeing God’s word delivered by a Native American Angel in the Book of Mormon.

I’m not sure what your objection is to Jesus being a “warrior” in the sense of battling evil in a spiritual sense. Jesus said that he came not to bring peace but the sword - in the sense of making people choose sides. Sides of what? It’s the war with evil and Satan.

We (Church) are his warriors, he leads us as the head of that Church, he remains us physically in the form of the Eucharist, and his mother, the Woman of Genesis 3:15 is his Field Marshal.

And Israel, in this scenario, is the New Israel (the Church).

It’s not the teaching of the CC that Jesus led the old Israel to victory over the Romans (or enemy du-jour). Of course that might even be considered since Catholicism became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the late 300’s

BTW - it’s really interesting to get a Jewish perspective on all this. Thanks for your involvement.

 

[ronald44481]

The Talmud Is The Traditions Of The Elders,
Which Christ Condemed, It Is The Complete
Revearsal Of God’s Word. It Was Used By
The Phaisses That Falsely Called Themselves
Jews. The Pharise Did Not Disapear They
Are Alive Today And Falsely Call Themselves
Jews Which Are Working The World System
Of Anti Christ
Ronald44481

 

[Valke2]

The Talmud Is The Traditions Of The Elders,
Which Christ Condemed, It Is The Complete
Revearsal Of God’s Word. It Was Used By
The Phaisses That Falsely Called Themselves
Jews. The Pharise Did Not Disapear They
Are Alive Today And Falsely Call Themselves
Jews Which Are Working The World System
Of Anti Christ
Ronald44481

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

all of which doesn’t change the fact that Jesus wasn’t a warrior and that he did not lead Israel to victory over its enemies.

Right. It means he will one day do this on a physical level in a way not much different than how he operated on a spiritual level.

The first time the batte was in the spirit-- a battle which we are still engaged in to this day.

In the final battle it will be in the flesh-- a battle which will end all battles.

Valke2:

There has to be at least a nexus with phyiscal reality and a correlation between language and how the universe works for their to be enough common ground to communicate.

Not if you’re God.

Valke2:

You can spend all day reinterpeting the meaning of the prophets, Genesis, etc. to ignore the fact that Jesus was no military leader or warrior.

But I’m not re-interpreting anything.

The only early Christian defender who did not hold a view that Christ second coming would be volatile was Oregen if I recall correctly. Of all the others, whose writings are accepted as legitimate, these early fathers were quite clear that Jesus would return and complete the battle, just as he did in the spirit.

No. This doesn’t mean that all the early fathers agreed with each other on exactly how this would happen. There were a wide variety of opinions on this-- as eschatological issues often do produce a wide variety of opinions on the unknown parts. But, in regards to Christ’s Second Coming, they were all agreed that Christ would come as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah.

Valke2:

If that is what your theology teaches, then fine.

Well, at least you’re not accusing me of heterodoxy from the Catholic faith. Seems to be a common theme lately.

Valke2:

Personally, I find it hypocritical to see the justifications used to prove the validity of one religion and then to hear those same people mocking Mormons or JWs, for example for their interpetations and beliefs.

That’s ok Valke2. I can think of a few threads you’ve personally started here, many of which, such as this gem of a thread or this jewel of a thread, are highly hypocritical upon further examination.

Remember your posts about Christmas trees?

Yeah, like…um…whatever…

If you’re going to make claims of hypocrisy against the Church, perhaps you’d do well to stop staring at the speck of dust floating around my eyes and realize that there is a blinding beam of light blazing brightly into your own eyes.

Valke2:

If you are going to see Jesus in the book of Joshua, then that is no different than seeing God’s word delivered by a Native American Angel in the Book of Mormon.

Are you actually saying that Catholic teachings are no different than Mormon teachings? That’s actually an insane claim to make.

Good luck with your Third Temple. You’re going to need it.

 

[Valke2]

Right. It means he will one day do this on a physical level in a way not much different than how he operated on a spiritual level.

The first time the batte was in the spirit-- a battle which we are still engaged in to this day.

In the final battle it will be in the flesh-- a battle which will end all battles.

Not if you’re God.

But I’m not re-interpreting anything.

The only early Christian defender who did not hold a view that Christ second coming would be volatile was Oregen if I recall correctly. Of all the others, whose writings are accepted as legitimate, these early fathers were quite clear that Jesus would return and complete the battle, just as he did in the spirit.

No. This doesn’t mean that all the early fathers agreed with each other on exactly how this would happen. There were a wide variety of opinions on this-- as eschatological issues often do produce a wide variety of opinions on the unknown parts. But, in regards to Christ’s Second Coming, they were all agreed that Christ would come as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah.

Well, at least you’re not accusing me of heterodoxy from the Catholic faith. Seems to be a common theme lately.

That’s ok Valke2. I can think of a few threads you’ve personally started here, many of which, such as this gem of a thread or this jewel of a thread, are highly hypocritical upon further examination.

Remember your posts about Christmas trees?

Yeah, like…um…whatever…

If you’re going to make claims of hypocrisy against the Church, perhaps you’d do well to stop staring at the speck of dust floating around my eyes and realize that there is a blinding beam of light blazing brightly into your own eyes.

Are you actually saying that Catholic teachings are no different than Mormon teachings? That’s actually an insane claim to make.

Good luck with your Third Temple. You’re going to need it.

I had actually asked the moderator to remove my last response to you as I thought it was harsh. I didn’t realize the Church taught that Jesus was a warrior. I trhought I was only addressing a personal belief. However, the use of the prophets and other scriptures to validate a belief that Jesus was a military leader takes a lot of imagination. And if one is going to defend such an interpetation, why would an interpetation based on the book of mormon be any less valid, for example?