Ask a Jew Part Too; Commentary

Cupid dave - although I may vehemently disagree with your (what I consider bizarre) theology and explanations, you are one of the few folk here with whom I disagree that I still find interesting and worthwhile to read your thoughts...

However you want to second guess Judaism, the fact remains that for over 3,000 years, Judaism has been understood through both the Oral and Written Law.
Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel came long before the 4th Century. Most Christians of any persuasion try and link Gamaliel with either Jesus and/or Paul.
No matter how you want to cut it, Judaism has far deeper antecedents than your current denial of the Torah She'bal Peh given to Moshe Rabbeinu on Har Sinai along with the Written Torah.
Obviously, you are free to call whatever you'd like anything you please. It's a free country.
But, the solid, hard fact remains that their is NO Torah observant Judaism without the Oral Torah. Many, like you, have come before you for the last few thousand years, and insisted that only the Written Torah is the Torah.
None of them exist as Jews today. None.

 

I like you, too.

Understand me, the reason that the Christian world will be rocked with Jews coming into the fold, is that these studious men still with us today, the Rabbi and all the tradition and culture of Judaism will open up a whole new dimension for Christians hardly aware of little more that what they have read in their NT.

I do not disparage these rabbi, nor do I mock the Christians who insist their theology is correct.
Their churches all have dates when they first presented their book reports on these writings, and they have pretty much stuck to their guns straight through.

The Rabbi go back much further, and what they thought out and agreed makes sense then and now is this Oral Law to which you refer.
That they are so sure it has been called Law, in the same way scientist will do for some theories of which they are so certain are correct they see no possibility of violations.

Nevertheless, as in our present discussion here, these rabbi you refer us to merely state the eminent opinions which you find satisfactory as an alternative to what I post.
Though you may elect to measure the weight of what is true and not true by the authority and credentials these rabbi have bestowed upon each other instead of the merit of the scriptures is fine.

They have always used that as the tool to so persuade you back into their fold,

 

Granted, your Jewish Rabbi are the Heavy Weight Champions of the Bible.

They are the oldest religious body connected directly with these scriptures, new and old.
I am a David against the great Goliath.

But the war will be waged not with credentials and by the measure of respect people have for Rabbi this time.
The Battle between the constant and unending proselytizing by the Christians and the Rabbi, armed with rebuttals and counter arguments, will be lost on young Jews who will want to know how the beloved and revered and hero of Judaism could ever be a no body like John according to the Christians who chase them down.

And they will query these esteemed and wise Rabbi to help them explain the dozens of correspondences between Elijah, in 1&2Kings and Jesus in the gospels.

What will you tell them?
What will they come back with to explain how Jesus duplicated the first appearance of Elijah???
Because, it is coming, the middle ground of this claim of Elijah as the Christ, here, between the Christians and the Jews.
.

 

It's not a matter of attractiveness of one interpretation over another, it's a matter that Christianity is written in stone and your interpretation is much like creating your own religion, or shall I say re-creating Christianity.

The problem is not me and it is not a million other Christians that would otherwise embrace your interpretation if they believed it but when you have Jesus calling John the Baptist Elijah,Luke's Gospel saying just as much, You would have to convince someone that your interpretation is just as valid. You say it all hangs on Jesus saying 'if you will accept it' but what if they didn't accept it ?

 

Yep.
And I have been waiting for your theology and explanation in regard to the literally dozens of correspondences between what Elijah did in 800Bc, according to 1Kings, and the gospel story written by Jews of 32AD who report what Jesus did.

I have set forth the theology that you never address, beyond complaining you don't like it.

I used Deuteronomy 18 to show that a miracle working prophet, one like Moses himself, was to appear, which seems clerly what happened in 800BC.
Then, I point to Mal 4:6 which prophesied the return of this same Elijah.

I have read and entertained the Jewish arguments against Jesus as the messiah ben David, but neither you or any Rabbi has laid out the theology which denies this view or even competes with it.

The Tradition of the Seven Miracles which the Rabbi have passed down through the ages seems very much to support Jesus as the Elijah, yet all I get from you is the stiff-necked rejection out-of-hand.

Why would dozens of verse in 1kings compare almost one-to-one with the reports written about what Jesus did, unless he was modeling the Elijah for us to see this evidence???

 

Yes, the Jews in the future will not become Christians at all.
They will become more appropriately "Elijahians," I would guess.

This is the face saving grace G-d has granted to his chosen people, as the come to Christ by a path which Christianity did not provide.

And, yes, they will debate still with the Christians on these things, insisting that John could NEVER match up as their glorious and beloved Elijah,... not in a million years.

Yet this is also the Jesus, as the son-of-man suffers as the messiah ben Joseph who::

1) "won the heathen by the spirit of wisdom and righteousness which rests upon him"

2) "taught the nations the Noachian laws of humanity and make all men disciples of the Lord"

3) "repeated on a larger scale the wonders of the time of Moses"

4) "As the last redeemer, he did what Moses, the first redeemer, had done"

5) Like Moses, he disappear for 40 days after his appearance

6) "He replaced the Song of Moses by another song," (the New Testament)

7) "Like Moses, he will die, an yet, will not taste death"





NOTE:
The Jewish Encyclopedia:


http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5849-eschatology

to be discussed in connection with the account of the Messiah from the tribe of Joseph or Ephraim (


The Messiah will furthermore win the heathen by the spirit of wisdom and righteousness which rests upon him (Sibyllines, iii. 780; Test. Patr., Levi, 18; Judah, 24; Targ. Yer. to Gen. xlix. 12 and Isa. xli. 1).

He will teach the nations the Noachian laws of humanity and make all men disciples of the Lord (Midr. Teh. xxi.).

The wonders of the time of Moses will be repeated on a larger scale in the time of the Messiah (Mek., Beshallaḥ, Shirah, 8, after Micah vii. 15; comp. Hosea ii. 17; Targ.; Tan., Bo, ed. Buber, 6).


What Moses, the first redeemer, did is typical of what the Messiah as the last redeemer will do (Eccl. R. i. 9). The redemption will be in the same month of Nisan, (at the Passover seders), and in the same night (Mek., Bo, 14); the same pillar of cloud will lead Israel (Philo, "De Execrationibus," 8; Targ. Yer. to Isa. xxxv. 10):
the same plagues will be sent upon Israel's foes (Tan., Wa'era, ed. Buber, 15; Bo, 6, 19; Midr. Wayosha'; Jellinek, "B. H." i. 45);
the redeemer will ride on an "donkey" (Zech. ix. 9; comp. Ex. iv. 20);

manna, (transubstantiation?) will again be sent down from heaven (Ps. lxxii. 16; comp. Ps. lxxviii. 24; Syriac Apoc. Baruch, xxix. ;
and water rise from beneath by miraculous power (Joel iv. [A. V. iii.] 18; comp. Ps. lxxviii. 15 et seq.; Eccl. R. i. 9).


Like Moses, the Messiah will disappear for 40 days after his appearance (Pesiḥ. R. 15; Pesiḥ. v. 49b, after Hosea v. 15).

The same number of people will be redeemed (Sanh. 111a)
and the Song of Moses be replaced by another song , (the New Testament)(Mek., Beshallaḥ, Shirah, 1; Rev. xv. 3).

But, like Moses, the Messiah will die (II Esd. l.c.); the opinion that the Messiah will not taste death (Midr. Teh. lxxii. 17)

 

I appreciate your knowledge and your very respectful debate cupid dave, you have something constructive to say rather then arguing uselessly and without mocking our faith. I find that to be a refreshing quality on this board, thank you.

 

As Moishe said previously, he finds it rude to attack the religious beliefs of others, with the exception, I assumed, when those oeople have agreed to debate and comment upon their own beliefs and measure them against the beliefs of others.

My motivation is a general ecumenicalism for all the Bibke based monotheistic believers, to include the Muslims as well as the Jews.
In pointing out these argument for Christ as the Elijah and Jesus as the suffering messiah ben Joseph to the Jews, I see the whole Fold of sheep heading in that direction.

Once the Jews agree that, though God is one, his son is Elijah, the Muslims will need revisit their own daily pray, aimed against Trinity, when the cry out 5 times, "Allah is one."

Then, all in all, sexual prudence and love for the children now abused will be the common goal of us all.

 

Hmmm,..

No.
I want to accept Judaism and add my commentary to that of the college of Rabbi who sadly, had the only advantage over what I say in that they were born and lived before I did.

They managed to establish an image of such great students of the scriptures that no one could possibly be conceived as having anything to add to the knowledge and perspective they have sent forward into the Jewish community.
They have congratulated one another on this for centuries before I ask them about things which they did not comment upon.

For instance, I ask you now, if Mary was a cousin to a Levite, named Elizabeth, who by the Law, (Torah), was only able to marry her priestly husband Zechariah if she was truly a Levite, would it require that Mary's father was also a Levite, too, hence Mary was NOT from the line of David???

Why have the Rabbi never asked Christians this question?
And, ought they not so have done, in that whether they conclude Jesus was a false prophet worthy of death, and did execute him, ought they not still be able to maintain their charges against him?

 

Oy. cupid dave....
Because the Rabbis have no interest in either promoting or questioning whatever is written in the new testament? Because they considered the whole thing total BS? Because they wanted to write Jesus off as a crazy heretic in the hopes that the whole stupid thing would simply go away - like the Roman and Greek and Persian and Babylonian and Idol Worshiping religions that preceded them?
"They," either Jews or Rabbis or both - did not execute Jesus. The fact that they were accused of doing so and, apparently in many eyes - like yours - are still accused of doing so, was another BS reason to distance themselves from what they considered a heretic; idolatrous; meshugga religion like Christianity.
The reasons that your questions are not asked is because, 1,900 years ago, when such questions were asked, the Jews were told that they killed god and should be punished for doing so...
This became a totally pointless conversation for Jews to have regarding anything to do with Christianity so - they distanced themselves as far as possible from anything having to do with what they considered a crazy cult that claimed to be based on Judaism but wanted to either kill or convert the Jews to their heresy.
This was not a new phenomenon. Crazy cults abounded in Judaism since Moshe Rabbeinu received the Torah on Har Sinai.
Jews were constantly attaching themselves to all of the various Idol Worshiping cults of the times, often taking over the kingdoms of Israel Judea and killing those Jews who did not follow their cult.
Jews attached themselves to the Persians; to the Babylonians; and, more spectacularly to the Greeks to the point that Judaism was again almost wiped out.
They then began the Jewish Wars (so named by Josephus) over who had the right way to worship their particular flavor of god. They killed each other, allying with the Greeks or the Romans or the Persians or the pagan Arabs until Rome eventually wiped out the Kingdom of Israel and destroyed the Second Temple.
Jews continued their various sectarian disputes with the Sadducee's and the Kairite's and all the other meshugga sects that wanted to claim their Flavor of god was the Right Flavor of god.
Then came the Christians.
Rome wiped out Israel and then the Roman Empire became Christian.

You might see a correlation here between the most powerful political entity in the world that already destroyed Israel and the Second Temple and then adopted Christianity as its State Religion and the fact that the Rabbis and all Torah observant Jews refused to even consider Christianity as anything other than another insane sect bent on dividing Jews and destroying Judaism.

I'm not quite sure why you do not understand this.

 

Well, because it isn't true...

At first, the Rabbi organized their congregations to confront the Christians with only ridicule and censorship, then they attacked them and thinking that thy did g-d a favor, killed them.

During the first century perhaps even until 313AD when Constantine passed the Edit of Toleration, the Jews fomented and incited attacks on exposed Christians, even supplied evidence against hem for the charges used by the Romans to scape goat them for political excuses.

It was only when "what had come around, started to go around" amongst the Jews in the Empire that such screams of unfair treatment arose.
As the Christians grew steadily in numbers and then responded against the Jewish actions that had long attempted to eliminate them, proselytizing and efforts to convert the Jews was more the case than throwing them to the lions.

Today, the Jews maintain numerous authorized sites which have been set up on the Internet as a means of preparing Jews to answer back to Christians in regard to the conversations between them.

What I accuse you of here is backing off, as I "ask a Jew anything," which you now qualify as "except these important questions" that make Judaism guilty of propagating less than a compete review of the history of 32AD as found in the Gospels.
Your defense is now that you ignore the Christian complaint against Judaism because you won't read the NT and respond to it as has been done down thru the whole 2000 year prior.

I ask you how come dozens of verse literally repeat for Jesus what was said of Elijah in 1 Kings, and hiw Jesus could not be from the House of David, but MUST have, like Elijah, been a Levite.
I ask you how come Jesus drank the wine as example of the 5th cup at seder, which was expected of the Elijah?
I ask you if the record of John the Baptist could ever have been used in an attempt to convince Jews he was a prophet or the Elijah as Christians insist.

You back off, and say, "Taboo," that book I will not evaluate now, as if the Jews haven't read it.

 

Dear cupid dave,
I may not agree with your theories and find your opinions peculiar but... you are now crossing that thin line between fact and fiction.
You are very fond of quoting chapter and verse regarding your pet theories.
So - either give me a solid source for your above slander or, cease this particular line of attack.
You have gone from unhappy theorizing to hateful demonization.
Don't do that.

Facts. Data. Support for your accusations? Put up or shut up.

Really?
So if you slander and accuse people as you are accusing the Jews of doing above - then it's okay to murder you and your family?
Explain that logic to me...

Actually no, cupid dave - after the Roman Empire became the Christian Roman Empire, getting thrown to the lions was no longer a wonderful blood sport for the Christian Romans.
Burning Jews alive in their synagogues was, however....

Indeed there are. And that means, what?

No.
You misunderstand me.
I have no interest in responding to what Christians theorize that Jews should theorize about what the new testament says...
Why should I?
I also don't argue with Muslims who want to know the Jewish theological response to obscure theories about the Hidden Imam based on Islamic texts.
Nor do I respond to Taoists who want to know what Jewish Law says about the "flowing mountain" or the "essence of nothing."
Nor am I much concerned with any religion that seeks a Jewish theological response to their own theological disputes.
Because - there isn't any.
I have already told you early on that your theories have no basis in Judaism.
Your response is to tell me that what Orthodox Jews practice today is not really Judaism, otherwise I would have a response.
That is rather circular thinking, my friend.

I don't have a clue. Not my cup of tea.

The 5th cup has been discussed. I have nothing to add. I don't know what Jesus drank. I don't recall any mention of a "5th cup" in the new testament.

Don't know. Never thought about it. Still not thinking about it. Why should I?

Never said "taboo."
I have already given my opinion that I think that Jesus was a mystic and that I do not judge him as harshly as did the Jews living 1500 years ago and up until the present.
Most Orthodox Jews I know have not read the new testament.
However, many other Orthodox Jews have read the new testament for the purpose of countering missionaries whose purpose is to convert Jews to Christianity.
However, even those Jews that do know the new testament would probably not be interested in having a theological argument with Christians over what the new testament was supposed to mean other than its common usage in mainstream Christianity.

You want my Opinion on Christianity?
YOU CAN'T HANDLE MY OPINION!!

I will indulge you a teeny bit.
In my humble opinion, Judas was the closest to G-d of all of the characters of the new testament.
Why?
Because, if the whole Passion Play was orchestrated by G-d, then Judas' "betrayal" was a pivotal part of this Play.
And therefore Judas' Holy Soul has been "damned for all time" by billions of humanity for playing the absolutely necessary part that G-d Chose for him to play.
Jesus suffering on the cross is nothing besides Judas bearing the slings and arrows of hatred for as long as Christianity survives.
Therefore, if the new testament is real, it is Judas who is sitting on the "Right Hand" of G-d and Jesus is still trying to make up his mind whether or not to "drink the cup" that had been chosen for him...
Oy.
One Jew's theological take on Christianity...
Oy.

 

I've entertained that thought many times over the years. Judas was the only one who actually gave up something.

And I'm not a Jew.

 

That is a great start.

Yes.
I want he opinion of Jews about scripture of the NT story which in the end will oppose the Christian take, though 2000 years old and totally endorsed by Christians right now.

You insight into Judas needs further point out that a part of the ritual of the redemption of the First Born, the Fast of which was the held on the evening of the night BEFORE Passover.
I had used this information, i.e. the Seder held the day before the Passover Feast, to further correct/inform Christians about the 3 days in the cave/tomb which Prospect and I had debated further back in this thread.

Was Judas was supposed to be doing was bring silver coins to a priest to redeem Jesus as a First Born son.
Instead, he received silver by betraying him, but then, to fulfill the rite of the Redemption of the First Born, Judas DID bring the required silver coins to a priest.

Perhaps in the future, I will be able to enlist your support here, in regard to the day of the Last Seder?


Matthew 27:3
Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
The shekel of Tyre
Silver Tyrian shekels were the medium of payment for the Temple tax in Jerusalem, and have been suggested as a possible coin used as the "30 pieces of silver" in the New Testament.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekels

 

(1) Mark 13:9
But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

(2) John 16:2
They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

 

That isn't a constructive view. For that matter, there is no personal responsibility for anyone.. Saying that Judas did what God sent him to do is no different than saying that God sent everyone to do just exactly what they did in their lives.

God sent the drug dealer to deal drugs.
God sent Hitler to kill millions of Jews, etc.. You get the point ?

Judas was the one who betrayed Jesus and Jesus said it would have been better that he had never been born. Jesus was going to die whether Judas betrayed him or not, Judas just made it more convenient for them.

But if you were to hold to your opinion, I will add that Judas didn't really have to feel the hate that you describe - "slings and arrows of hatred for as long as Christianity survives." - because he hanged himself. Most Christians don't hate Judas, he had the decency to hang himself and toss the silver, this show remorse, and possibly repentance.

 

Ah.
So, you are claiming that the theology of Christians who decided to persecute and murder Jews for the last 1500 years is justified by the theology of Christians...
Really?
Need we discuss further?

 

As a non-Christian, I view the entire new testament as an esoteric exercise in mysticism.
In that vein, I like my theory vis a vis Judas.
I happen to believe that Nothing happens without G-d orchestrating it.
Including those things that we, in our limited viewpoint, see as "bad."

 

I understand... At the end of the day, I also believe that freewill is an illusion but my point is that it isn't very constructive to take away personal responsibility -hence the reason that the illusion is so real.

 

No, I was just responding to your demand for a solid source,...

"So - either give me a solid source for your above slander or, cease this particular line of attack."

What better testimony can we have than the complaint of the victims themselves here?
Matthew was written in 54AD before these attacks began in earnest.
He wrote what at least ought be considered his complaint in this regard, whether you like his "politics" or "religion" is immaterial.

 

Well, I also believe in Free Will.
In my Judas scenario, Judas would have been a conscious, willing participant, hence his elevated status for all time.
I find no dichotomy between Free Will and nothing happening without G-d orchestrating it.

 

Unlike cupid dave, I have no illusions about you guys accepting anything in the NT, including young Jews which is why I still don't see his point about you accepting his Elijah interpretation. You guys can just as easily dismiss his interpretation as you do Jesus and John the Baptist. I do understand this but,do you guys see anything constructive about Jesus' teachings ? For example, all the scribal laws about working on the Sabbath,adultry,etc... I have read many... The Jews weren't allowed to help, lets say a medical condition on the Sabbath anymore than keep it from getting worse until after the Sabbath.. Thousands of scribal laws concerning everyday life.

 

Fine.

But that has not been the issue(s) here in this thread you started.

Of course you and Muslim are anti-Christ in regard to what the NT contends as Christ representing the son-of-God.
It is merely objective literary criticism that I bring to your attention, in regard to what the NT states.

Good reading comprehension clearly supports that objectively speaking, dozens of verse compare with what a close reading of 1Kings says.

Whether you then maintain that coincidence is important on religious grounds is immaterial to your acknowledging that, in fact, this observation is correct.
Jesus is reported to have duplicated the acts and experiences of Elijah.

What the children of the next generation of Jews make of this, as this comes to their attention, is another matter, one that I ask you to prepare them for by responding to this.

 

Of course he would have been a conscious,willing participant if God orchestrated him to be, though, this doesn't allow for him to leave that path of betrayal unless he could have somehow defied God's will. You cannot have it both ways.

 

To the best of my recollection, I told cupid dave that his Elijah interpretation has no basis in Torah.

I do. Orthodox Judaism does not.
I am a student of history and I love the historical applications of great men. And, IMHO, Jesus was a great man.
Torah observant Jews believe that Jesus was a heretic who twisted words of Torah into some kind of gobbledygook for his own ends. That makes him a bad man and all of his words suspect.

Pikuach nefesh is the Torah Law that says that saving a human life overrides other Commandments, including violating the Sabbath.
If there is the least possibility that a life may be endangered; and this is taken in the most lenient manner possible, then Jewish Law declares the Sabbath must be violated.
Let's say someone falls and knocks themselves on the head and is bleeding slightly. An ambulance is called. By the time it gets there, the person is okay and the bleeding has stopped. However, based on the experience of the non Jewish medics, they insist that the person needs to be checked out at the hospital. He has to go.
Same with any other seemingly benign but with the extremely remote possibility that the person could be in danger then - or even at a future date, as a result of whatever injury or illness occurs.
It is not just a "leniency" in Torah Law. Pikuach nefesh IS Jewish Law.

And, Jewish Law regarding everyday life is Jewish Law.
I suspect that you find Jewish Law puzzling or confusing. So do many Jews.
Which is why the Study of Jewish Law is considered the highest level of achievement in Judaism.
As I've noted before, without the Oral Law, the Written Law is confusing and doesn't make all that much sense.