This could unite the two major religions :)

  • Thread starter Thread starter truthquester
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Young_Ludovicus said:
So you basically let Rabbinic Judaism tell you what a Jew is.

This seems like a real anachronistic view.

Weren’t the early christians themselves Jewish and wasn’t Jesus called the king of the Jews?

I don’t know why you would let the Rabbinic Jews decide what is and what isn’t a Jew.
Judaism was a lot more diverse than it is today. So I don’t know why a lot of people keep the trimmed down definition of modern day Rabbinic Judaism. Doesn’t make any sense to me when you look at the history of it all. Then again Rabbinic Judaism does seem to see a lot of other Jewish denomination as not really Jewish.

Whatever the Rabbinic Jews went through doesn’t change anything to what can be considered a Jew if you look at the origins.
Click to expand...
I see a distinction between someone with Jewish heritage or family background, and someone who is officially recognized as a Jew by the Jewish religious authorities.
 
Tomdstone said:
I see a distinction between someone with Jewish heritage or family background, and someone who is officially recognized as a Jew by the Jewish religious authorities.
Click to expand...
What about Beta Israel, Subbotniks, Kaifeng Jews etc.?
Not really Jewish then?

I can’t believe why people let mainstream Orthodox Rabbinic Judaism decide what is and isn’t a Jew.
 
Young_Ludovicus said:
What about Beta Israel, Subbotniks, Kaifeng Jews etc.?
Not really Jewish then?

I can’t believe why people let mainstream Orthodox Rabbinic Judaism decide what is and isn’t a Jew.
Click to expand...
Why should you let the Vatican decide who is Catholic. Suppose you say you are Roman Catholic, but you were never baptised and you don’t want to be baptised. Then what?
 
meltzerboy said:
Apparently G-d preferred a variety of religions since there are over 4000 of them worldwide.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough, one of my first thoughts when I saw the thread title was whether someone would challenge it vis a vis the implication that Christianity is one religion – I know a lot of posters here don’t see it as one single religion but more as an umbrella term for many religions.
 
AbideWithMe said:
Historically, Catholicism did not allow Jewish converts to Christianity to retain any Jewish practice, considering it a mortal sin. (That can be seen in the Twelfth Ecumenical Council/Fourth Lateran Council, The Council of Florence, and earlier in Aquinas’ ST.) As far as I know, it’s been a fairly recent development within any form of Christianity to allow, and even encourage, Jewish Christians to bring their patrimony with them if they are converts.
Click to expand...
Many Eastern Catholic and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches retain much of the type of Judaism their Church’s eminated from. No one ever prevented that. It’s certain non-Christian beliefs and practices that were not allowed. Western Latin Christianity was much more intolerant of variances, however, this may be due to centralization as even much of Latin non-Roman practices have been suppressed, either directly or indirectly.
 
SyroMalankara said:
Many Eastern Catholic and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches retain much of the type of Judaism their Church’s eminated from. No one ever prevented that. It’s certain non-Christian beliefs and practices that were not allowed. Western Latin Christianity was much more intolerant of variances, however, this may be due to centralization as even much of Latin non-Roman practices have been suppressed, either directly or indirectly.
Click to expand...
I know the Ethiopian Orthodox Church in particular adopted some practices from Judaism early on, and has continued them.

I’m thinking, though, not about non-Jewish groups who adopted the forms of some Jewish practices, but about Jews who became Christians and tried to continue some Jewish practice (after the early Jewish Christian communties died out). I do know the Twelfth Ecumenical Council came down heavy-handedly on that specifically. (I have to go in a minute, but I’ll track down the relevant canon tonight. It’s canon 70 but I’m not sure of the session.) Being that it was an Ecumenical Council, where would that leave other Eastern Catholic churches in that regard?
 
AbideWithMe said:
Historically, Catholicism did not allow Jewish converts to Christianity to retain any Jewish practice, considering it a mortal sin. (That can be seen in the Twelfth Ecumenical Council/Fourth Lateran Council, The Council of Florence, and earlier in Aquinas’ ST.) As far as I know, it’s been a fairly recent development within any form of Christianity to allow, and even encourage, Jewish Christians to bring their patrimony with them if they are converts. In that, I’ll agree with Moses that Jews for Jesus represents a form of Protestantism that is unlike most of what Christianity has allowed for the past two millennia.
Click to expand...
Does this mean Jesus sinned when he followed Jewish law?
 
Memaw said:
Apparently it is Man that prefers a variety of religions not God. Jesus prayed that we would ALL be ONE in Him. How can God prefer something that does NOT even agree about His teachings?? I agree we need love and respect for each other but the TRUTH is the TRUTH and no matter how hard we try to make it OUR kind of “truth.” Jesus said. “I am the Way, the TRUTH, and the Life, come follow ME.” That is what will UNIT us in Faith. God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
Actually, Krishna prayed that we would all be one in Him, saved by Him and receive eternal life in Him. All this happened way before Jesus. Why therefore reject Krishna?

.
 
mek42 said:
Does this mean Jesus sinned when he followed Jewish law?
Click to expand...
No, the time “after the promulgation of the gospel” was considered the cutoff point by the Council of Florence, and IIRC, in Aquinas’ thinking in the Summa, too. The late American Cardinal, Avery Cardinal Dulles wrote an informative article in First Things magazine years ago which touched on this, but, I’m sorry, I have to get to bed now.:o
 
Young_Ludovicus said:
What about Beta Israel, Subbotniks, Kaifeng Jews etc.?
Not really Jewish then?

I can’t believe why people let mainstream Orthodox Rabbinic Judaism decide what is and isn’t a Jew.
Click to expand...
Actually, Orthodox Judaism is not all that restrictive when it comes to deciding who is or is not a Jew. A Jew is defined as either one who is born of a Jewish mother or one who undergoes conversion. (There are, however, different paths to conversion among the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform.) That’s it. And Reform Judaism adds to this that one may also be born of a Jewish father. One does NOT have to be “religious” to be considered a Jew; one does NOT even have to be a believer: that is, one can be regarded as a secular or cultural Jew, an agnostic or atheist Jew. There are the Karaite Jews, who do not accept the Talmud but only the Torah. There is also a group of Jews–the Nazarene Jews–who believe in Jesus as the Messiah but not in His divinity. They accept the Torah and believe that Jesus came, as it is believed in Judaism to be one of the roles of the Messiah, to intensify the studying and understanding of the Torah.
 
Servant19 said:
Actually, Krishna prayed that we would all be one in Him, saved by Him and receive eternal life in Him. All this happened way before Jesus. Why therefore reject Krishna?

.
Click to expand...
This would be a good question to ask Muslims.
 
Tomdstone said:
Why should you let the Vatican decide who is Catholic. Suppose you say you are Roman Catholic, but you were never baptised and you don’t want to be baptised. Then what?
Click to expand...
Wait bud.

That’s an entirely different manner.

That would be like the Vatican decides who is christian instead of catholic.

The Rabbinic Jews decide who is a Jew (by their definition), not who is a Rabbinic Jew.
 
meltzerboy said:
Actually, Orthodox Judaism is not all that restrictive when it comes to deciding who is or is not a Jew. A Jew is defined as either one who is born of a Jewish mother or one who undergoes conversion. (There are, however, different paths to conversion among the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform.) That’s it. And Reform Judaism adds to this that one may also be born of a Jewish father. One does NOT have to be “religious” to be considered a Jew; one does NOT even have to be a believer: that is, one can be regarded as a secular or cultural Jew, an agnostic or atheist Jew. There are the Karaite Jews, who do not accept the Talmud but only the Torah. There is also a group of Jews–the Nazarene Jews–who believe in Jesus as the Messiah but not in His divinity. They accept the Torah and believe that Jesus came, as it is believed in Judaism to be one of the roles of the Messiah, to intensify the studying and understanding of the Torah.
Click to expand...
Well when the Jewish groups are decided based on who is the father like in the Karaite Jews, the Kaifeng Jews and more. They are pretty hesistant. They are pretty hesistant about Jews who don’t follow Rabbinic Judaism. Wether they believe or not that’s true. But an atheist Subbotnik or an atheist Kaifeng Jew would not be regarded as a Jew for sure, while an atheist Rabbinic Jew would be. Why this distinction?

The Rabbinic Jews often ask them to formally convert to Judaism to be regarded as a Jew. But they are already Jews. An Israeli Tv-Hostess had to formally convert to Judaism, because she was of ‘disputed Jewish origin’ (Non-Rabbinic Judaism) they would only want to ‘convert’ her if she resigned from her Tv-work. (this seems like bullying right)

Many Jews that are non-rabbinic even have to leave the country to marry a mainstream Rabbinic Jew. As they can’t have Jewish marriage in Israel, because they aren’t seen as Jewish.

The Nazerene Jews are extinct for ages, but if there are currently Nazarene Jews they surely are a modern re-invention right?

In short:
They don’t tend to accept Jews who are not from mainstream matrilineal Rabbinic Judaism. And they often ask for a formal conversion to Judaism.
 
Young_Ludovicus said:
Wait bud.

That’s an entirely different manner.

That would be like the Vatican decides who is christian instead of catholic.

The Rabbinic Jews decide who is a Jew (by their definition), not who is a Rabbinic Jew.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but suppose you claim you are a Catholic, but are not baptised and attend a Buddhist temple. Would you be Catholic on the basis of your claim, or do you have to satisfy some requirements set up by the Vatican in order to be a Catholic?
 
Tomdstone said:
Maybe, but suppose you claim you are a Catholic, but are not baptised and attend a Buddhist temple. Would you be Catholic on the basis of your claim, or do you have to satisfy some requirements set up by the Vatican in order to be a Catholic?
Click to expand...
No you would surely not be a catholic.

But I don’t understand why you go there.
As this doesn’t come close to what we are talking about.

To make your example the same:
It’s the same like claiming you are a christian, probably baptised in a way that isn’t considered legitimate by the Church, and attend worship services which by the Vatican aren’t seen as really ‘Christian’. But the Vatican isn’t a country in which the Vatican checks if they are christian to allow them to become a Vatican citizen based on a law for return.

Why do you make this shrewd comparison?
 
Young_Ludovicus said:
No you would surely not be a catholic.

But I don’t understand why you go there.
As this doesn’t come close to what we are talking about.

To make your example the same:
It’s the same like claiming you are a christian, probably baptised in a way that isn’t considered legitimate by the Church, and attend worship services which by the Vatican aren’t seen as really ‘Christian’. But the Vatican isn’t a country in which the Vatican checks if they are christian to allow them to become a Vatican citizen based on a law for return.

Why do you make this shrewd comparison?
Click to expand...
Because Jews have a right to say who they consider to be Jewish.
 
Tomdstone said:
Because Jews have a right to say who they consider to be Jewish.
Click to expand...
I agree that any faith community has a right to self-definition, which includes who they consider to be members. So… just to expand that point. Do Catholics get to define other Christian denominations? Presbyterians are Christians? And their baptism is valid? Yes, I believe that is fine. What about Mormons? I believe not so much. Yet Mormons self define as Christians, complete with Baptism.
 
Tomdstone said:
Because Jews have a right to say who they consider to be Jewish.
Click to expand...
Why are you equating ‘Jews’ with Catholics?
Why not ‘Jews’ with christians?

The ‘Jews’ who you talk about are Rabbinic Jews.
There are different kind of Jews you know,
So it’s Rabbinic Jews saying what is Jewish and what isn’t.

The Rabbinic Jews have the right to decide who is a Rabbinic Jew ofcourse. But they can’t judge for the entirety of Judaism.

That is pretty much like if the Catholic church decides who is christian and who isn’t.
And Muslims would be like: The Mormons aren’t christians because the catholic church said so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top