|
|
|
|
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/8/2007 8:02:44 PM | at jayden
but in Jewish faith, a messiah is the deliverer. So if you're Jewish, you cannot believe that a messiah is just a prophet, and THEREFORE if you believe Jesus was the messiah, you are not Jewish.
^......so then by this logic,....the highly learned Lubovitch Jews,{who had believed and put all their resources in the notion that their grand rebbe, (M. schneerson) was to be the Messiah} are NOT (or were not) Jews because they believed that the Messiah was somebody other than who you (within the majority of Jews)would find acceptable! | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/8/2007 8:41:07 PM |
^......so then by this logic,....the highly learned Lubovitch Jews,{who had believed and put all their resources in the notion that their grand rebbe, (M. schneerson) was to be the Messiah} are NOT (or were not) Jews because they believed that the Messiah was somebody other than who you (within the majority of Jews)would find acceptable!
My logic is that if a person believes that Jesus CHRIST was the messiah, that person is Christian. That is all I have said. Anything else you think I meant is purely speculation on your behalf. | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/8/2007 9:44:27 PM |
Please show some verses from your original doctrine to support this. NOT some rabbinic (manmade) cr*p. I want to see if it can be traced to Moses own mouth.
I don’t believe Moses would say anything to that notion. Hence, unless you can show some verse from your ultimate doctrine – this (if true at all) must be a manmade innovation or traditional cr*p. This, most likely had NOTHING to do with the real teachings of Moses.
Prove me wrong!
Then I can begin to say - Jewish people are following a religion that makes no sense to me. Why would a real God set such standards or restrictions to be a Jew?
I am waiting for those verses… Otherwise it is just you and few other who think a traditional cr*p is really the original teachings of Moses.
Just a word about this notion that I often see creeping up in these debates about Judaism. I have never proclaimed any expertise on the matter but even my limited study of it can point out a big fat non-starter when I see it...the old libel about "made-up rabbinic crap" and "rabbinic traditions" as opposed to "real scriptural truth."
The Oral Law. Not acknowledged by a lot of Christian apologists, or some practicioners of Messianic Judaism, very germane to the subject matter...often described as "made up rabbinic crap" yet very often illustrated in the Hebrew Scriptures. Once again I am inclined to point out the necessity of expertise in the area when researching...ask a Rabbi if you want to answer a question about Judaism, not a Christian...preferably before a website...failing that I guess a website written by a Rabbi or rabbinical student will do. Once again I suggest Rabbi Singer's lecture on the Oral Law but for those who can't take time out of their busy lives for an interesting hour...
http://www.beingjewish.com/mesorah/howtoask.html
http://www.beingjewish.com/mesorah/oral-imperative.html
http://www.beingjewish.com/mesorah/whynotwritten.html
http://www.beingjewish.com/mesorah/notchaotic.html
http://www.beingjewish.com/
Overall the above is an excellent website and if you want to check the individual's CV it is there...it's not fringey stuff he's talking about.
As far as the rest of it goes...ultimate doctrine and other such nonsense...with all due respect that is such a silly question, even for this forum, trying to frame a response other than "go soak your head" is proving a real challenge. It's a RELIGION. You can accept the traditions as they are given to you by their originators, like it or lump it... but to cherry pick some as official and say the rest are somehow less "divinely inspired" A) because you didn't bother to learn about them, or B) couldn't be bothered to learn about them or C) found out they were part of an oral tradition as opposed to a written one and you weren't invited to the club...
well that is just pretty obtuse. But don't worry, you're in a big line up of cherry pickers before you who like piecemeal religion. I'm sure the Jewish people will go on doing what they do anyway without the validation of Christian apologists or anyone else telling them what is or isn't a valid part of their faith...
 | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/8/2007 10:52:50 PM | shadow said
At Jadyn07 and thisizmyproile
Get your facts straight. You guys claim to be Jews but contradict with each other on very simple things (such as - “who is still a Jew”).
As an outsider – listening to your contradictory cr*p is not making anything clearer.
Uh...hun....Just cause we are both Jewish doesn't mean our views must parallel each other(s)!!!!!....... --- There are many differing views within every group in society.....whether religiously based or not.....
And who says things should become clearer as we all "spew" our views...... I myself am enjoying this opprtunity to learn from others as well as challenge my own views/beliefs and knowledge...... | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/8/2007 11:15:41 PM | @ jad
My logic is that if a person believes that Jesus CHRIST was the messiah, that person is Christian. That is all I have said. Anything else you think I meant is purely speculation on your behalf.
.......your logic actually says that if a 'Jew' believes that some figure (whether it be JC or the late grand Rebbe schneerson) to be the Messiah...they are automatically catapulted outta Judiasm into some other religion as catagorized by those observers who do not share that same belief! | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 7:46:00 AM |
Uh...hun....Just cause we are both Jewish doesn't mean our views must parallel each other(s)!!!!!....... --- There are many differing views within every group in society.....whether religiously based or not.....
And who says things should become clearer as we all "spew" our views...... I myself am enjoying this opprtunity to learn from others as well as challenge my own views/beliefs and knowledge......
Yeah. What she said!
 | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 7:47:10 AM |
.......your logic actually says that if a 'Jew' believes that some figure (whether it be JC or the late grand Rebbe schneerson) to be the Messiah...they are automatically catapulted outta Judiasm into some other religion as catagorized by those observers who do not share that same belief!
Please don't tell me what I do and do not believe. I never said anything of the sort. | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 8:01:13 AM | At themadfiddler:
First of all - instead of giving a lecture about – how “Oral laws” (a.k.a. traditional practices) exist in the religion of Judaism and that not everyone can verify the validity of them – you could have just pointed out that – the maternal bloodline connection (we were talking about) is just such. It would have been simpler to do just that.
I will try to explain – why “Oral laws” that have been passed from generation to generation does NOT hold up well with me – but may be later.
Secondly – you always try to correct misconception regarding “Judaism” when presented by a non-Jew – so how about shedding some light on the matter Jadyn07 (a self proclaimed Jew) claimed? She claimed in her post #98 - that all Jews believe in Jesus as a prophet. Is that true??? She doesn’t claim to be a Messianic Jew but spoke for the entire Jew in her post. So, is that true??? Because that was really a new song I heard.
Okay, let’s get back to “Oral laws”!!
Of course I agree that many information could be passed down from generation to generation – BUT IMO if it cannot be traced to its origin and does not make sense or seems like discriminatory or reversed discriminatory – then IMO it should be weeded out and discarded. We all agree that religious teachings could and surely have gotten corrupted by our predecessors. So, why hold on to such stuff that does not hold any water???
If it makes sense then keep it – but if it doesn’t make sense then it should be discarded in the front yard to be picked up by garbage collectors and the truck should be followed to the wasteland to make sure it is thrown under a pile of garbage – and never to be heard of again!!!!
Yeah! That is what I think of so-called “Oral laws” (a.k.a. traditional misconceptions started by some nincompoops) that makes “ZERO sense”.
By themadfiddler:
“As far as the rest of it goes...ultimate doctrine and other such nonsense... … … …. It's a RELIGION. You can accept the traditions as they are given to you by their originators, like it or lump it... but to cherry pick some as official and say the rest are somehow less "divinely inspired" A) because you didn't bother to learn about them, or B) couldn't be bothered to learn about them or C) found out they were part of an oral tradition as opposed to a written one and you weren't invited to the club...”
How about a (D) ???
D) Because it seemed like a cr*p law or practice and makes zero sense and should not even be a part of any faith system??
Traditional practices and religion is NOT the same thing. In order to learn the true teachings of any religion – one MUST discard all traditional practices that contradicts with the said religion’s principal teachings and makes the religion look wrongfully biased towards any direction. I am not interested to know what certain rabbinic nincompoops came up with – I am trying to see the real teachings left behind by (primarily) Moses and (prior to him) maybe other divinely inspired individuals. This is why I only acknowledge stuff from their ultimate doctrine.
By themadfiddler:
“well that is just pretty obtuse. But don't worry, you're in a big line up of cherry pickers before you who like piecemeal religion.
What you call “cherry pickers” and “piecemeal” – I call - systematically discarding “nonsense” and keeping only that was intended to be kept.
Things that makes zero sense or contradicts with principal teachings - should be discarded IMO.
So, the outlook consisting --- “glass half empty” = cherry pickers
And the outlook consisting ----“glass half full” = discarding nonsense.
There are two ways to look at them – pick your choice!!!
By themadfiddler:
“I'm sure the Jewish people will go on doing what they do anyway without the validation of Christian apologists or anyone else telling them what is or isn't a valid part of their faith.’
What if - it is not a “part” at all??? Just look that two Jewish individuals here in this thread not agreeing on a simple thing (i.e. a Jewish guy who indorses and practices Buddhism is still a Jewish for life or not!!!!) So, how you expect others to come up with proper understanding of their own religion? And whom should we listen to? Do rabbis agree with each other? I have seen your favorite rabbi’s (Singer) blogs – he didn’t make much sense to me. He discards things as not a possibility to be true - just because it is not mentioned in his books. It seemed to me that – he believes - absence of proof is really a proof that it can’t be true at all!!!
By Jadyn07:
“Your problem is that you're arguing with two different people about what you think is the same thing and you're starting to confuse who said what. You're arguing with me and asking me for "evidence”
Check your own first post addressed towards me and accusing me of attacking your religion when all I was asking the other poster was - verses to back up her statement. Since you joined in at that point – I asked you to provide the verses.
By Jadyn07:
“In Jewish tradition, a messiah means, and I quote:
the expected king and deliverer of the Jews”
What does a “deliverer” mean? And how is it different from what a prophet does? This one line definition is supposed to clarify and make a distinction between those two words??? 
Okay! A deliverer is not a God but so is a prophet. So what is the difference?
A messiah is a deliverer but not a prophet?  | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 10:30:46 AM |
What does a “deliverer” mean? And how is it different from what a prophet does? This one line definition is supposed to clarify and make a distinction between those two words???
Okay! A deliverer is not a God but so is a prophet. So what is the difference?
A messiah is a deliverer but not a prophet?
To be honest, I can't get through your whole post. It's long and I'm at work.
If you don't KNOW the difference between a messiah and a prophet, I suggest looking it up. Obviously you aren't taking my word on the subject of my own religion. I pasted you definitions of both, and that still isn't working for you. You seem interested. Go to the library. Research. If you really want to know, that's the way to go about indulging your curiosity. If you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, I'm going to have to step out of this conversation. | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 11:39:38 AM | Until you actually start looking up the material presented, shadowdancing, which is vast, and well supported, there is no point in representing the entire case for the Oral Law here in these forums. It has been done elsewhere by more qualified individuals than myself and I frankly don't see the need to convince you to make a point when a simple citation will do.
Traditional practices and religion is NOT the same thing. In order to learn the true teachings of any religion – one MUST discard all traditional practices that contradicts with the said religion’s principal teachings and makes the religion look wrongfully biased towards any direction. I am not interested to know what certain rabbinic nincompoops came up with – I am trying to see the real teachings left behind by (primarily) Moses and (prior to him) maybe other divinely inspired individuals. This is why I only acknowledge stuff from their ultimate doctrine.
This is still silly. You have no way of knowing whether the Written tradition is the only complete tradition or Oral material is part of the real tradition or not. Nada. Bupkiss. Just because one is written and one is not. You have written instructions but all they are, for all you know is the shorthand. You might not have any idea WHAT it actually means without the rest of the recipe. Your ethnocentric hubris is astounding. We are left with your cast aspersion, and the common one from the history of Christendom that the Oral Law is made up Rabbinic nonsense...however, as is established quite irrevocably within the citations I noted before, solid references to the Oral Law are noted within Written Scripture...which is a shorthand for the complete tradition of Judaism. The fact that you and of course others have not acknowledged this is not particularly special...but doesn't win you any brownie points in a debate...and still leaves you with nothing but a cast aspersion.
I'm not surprised you couldn't follow Rabbi Singer...but HIS books? What his books? He used the extant Bibles for proofs...common translations and then the Hebrew language. How much more common do you need than that? What could you not make sense about from that? If that's over your head then it's back to Theology 101 for you my friend. | |
|
| OK SHADOWDANCING ---Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/9/2007 11:57:18 AM | The Messiah: http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/beliefs/messiah.htm
Jews do not believe that the messiah will be divine. A fundamental difference between Judaism and Christianity is the Jewish conviction that God is so essentially different from and beyond humanity that he could never become a human.
Messianic Jews do not simply believe in a Messiah. They believe in the Trinity. That is incompatible with Judaism. They are not Jews, in the religious sense.
Is there a racial sense?
On the other hand, in Ezra 10:2-3, the Jews returning to Israel vowed to put aside their non-Jewish wives and the children born to those wives. They could not have put aside those children if those children were Jews.
It doesn't say "non-Jewish wives", it says "pagan wives". Besides, if you're going to use the Old Testament/Tanakh to prove some racial heritage, then, they're Mesopotamians (Iraqis/Kurds), where Abraham came from, just like it says.
Peace  | |
|
| |
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 5:11:13 AM |
Originally posted by “thisizmyprofile”:
“A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
-- Bertrand Russell
me likey!”
What are you saying??
Moses was that clever man and all those rabbinic nincompoop people who wrongfully read between the lines and came up with many nonsense interpretations are those stupid people?
Yeah! Then …me likey too!!! 
Good one!  | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 5:33:59 AM | At themadfiddler:
I was expecting a response from you regarding – whether or not Jesus is considered a “prophet” by all Jews – as claimed by Jadyn07 (a self proclaimed Jew) who obviously spoke for all Jews in her post#98. I thought you will shed some light on that. That is very close to the topic at hand because if all Jews do accept Jesus as a prophet then I really need to seek more information between the difference between a “messiah” and a “prophet”. In that case – the difference between a Messianic and a Jew will lie between those definitions.
Someone emailed me (a long informative email) regarding this and I plan on looking into it. However, if all Jews accept Jesus as a prophet – then IMO the difference between a messianic Jew and a Jew – will come down to - who believes in Jesus to be a deity and who just a prophet. In that way we will be narrowing down the difference.
 | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 7:02:19 AM | at jaden
Please don't tell me what I do and do not believe.
^.......your own train of thought expresses what you do or don't believe, not me!....if you label those who believe in JC (as messiah) as "non-jews" ....then the same must apply to those jews who have selected some other figure to be the Messiah....to state otherwise is at best, faulty logic or at worst, it is plain bigotry!.....assuming you are not bigoted, then what you are saying is that any jew who happens to believe that a certain Messiah(that you do not believe in) has arrived, is no longer a jew. | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 10:05:29 AM | It is not called bigotry, in religion, it's called heresy. As a Christian, I'd thought you'd be familiar with that word, sum1. And, what's heresy, to some, is a religion, to others.
Heresy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy
Like I said earlier...I'd probably agree with you, that simply believing that someone is the Messiah, would still qualify them as practicing Judaism. However, the Messianic Jews, the people in the topic, believe in the Christian Trinity, making them Christians.
Regarding Israel: http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=21820&sec=59&con=35
<div class='quote'>They claim Israeli citizenship under the Right of Return; the state says they forfeited their rights to immigrate as Jews when they accepted Jesus as the messiah.
Heresy, and loss of Jewishness (because its a religion), according to the government of Israel, as well.
Peace | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 12:19:04 PM |
I was expecting a response from you regarding – whether or not Jesus is considered a “prophet” by all Jews – as claimed by Jadyn07 (a self proclaimed Jew) who obviously spoke for all Jews in her post#98. I thought you will shed some light on that. That is very close to the topic at hand because if all Jews do accept Jesus as a prophet then I really need to seek more information between the difference between a “messiah” and a “prophet”. In that case – the difference between a Messianic and a Jew will lie between those definitions.
If you check out that wiki entry that i posted on msg 69, it is actually quite well researched. With all due respect to Jadyn and her beliefs, I personally have not ever heard of any mainline Jewish faith organization referring to Jesus as a prophet. Some groups, due to political correctness or a desire to maintain ecumenical peace may be softsoaping things but the official position of Orthodox Judaism has always been if there was such a person - and this was always held in doubt - he was no prophet...but not relevant to Judaism and not the Messiah.
A prophet is someone receiving divine wisdom from God. The big "M" Moshiach, relevant to this discussion, is the anointed mortal representative of God that heralds the Messianic Age when God makes himself known to Mankind and establishes a time of Peace and Harmony on Earth, rebuilds the Temple, yada yada. The Moshiach would also be a prophet. Does that make it any clearer? Hope I was of assistance...back to my chilling breakfast  | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/10/2007 5:09:48 PM |
By themadfiddler:
“but the official position of Orthodox Judaism has always been if there was such a person - and this was always held in doubt - he was no prophet...but not relevant to Judaism and not the Messiah.”
Thanks for clarifying that. I was almost certain that most Jewish people don’t accept Jesus even as a prophet, but Jadyn07 kind of confused me there for a while.
I do respect her beliefs and I think – it is GREAT that she believes in Jesus as a prophet. If anyone read any of my post then they would notice that – according to my own posts I agree that - she is still a Jewish and a better one than other Jews who don’t accept Jesus as a prophet. So, in that regard – my congratulation to her! I too think Jesus was just a prophet (and NOT a God).
However, her statement (post#98) was IMO incorrect that - all Jewish people accepts Jesus as a prophet. So, I needed a clarification.
Outside of Internet – I hate talking to people regarding religious matters because IMO there are very few religious people out there these days. And it is hard to find someone who is not threatened by the notion that someone sincerely wants to learn about his or her religion. Of course I can find many people who might talk freely but they always try to prove that - their religion is the best and try to convince me to indorse it. So, it is better to JUST stick around here while I am swimming through tons of manmade innovations, corruptions, fabrications and misconceptions to seek for the real truth.
Regarding the links you provided:
While trying to discover the truth about any religion – I know most people would examine through researched materials of any famous religious scholar from that religion. That is what everyone keeps suggesting me to do and I know that would be considered a wiser move – BUT I normally use a roundabout method. I know that is unconventional but I do it because - it is hard to be certain which so-called scholar got it right and which religious scholar is just biased and came to his conclusions just to defend his religion due to his devoted loyalty. The smarter and more educated you are – the more tactful you can be – to make a delusional concept look real and authentic. This is why I like to talk to everyday people and then look at their ultimate doctrine myself. Usually religious scholars are all rabbis or priests and thus their job and livelihood depends on their conclusions. They hardly come to conclusions that would make them change their faith system and as a result lose their jobs. So, they find ingenious ways to support their theories and try to make sure it somehow apparently collaborates with their religion. So, I would rather listen to ordinary people than those biased people and then check their ultimate doctrine myself.
Occasionally I do check some of those peoples’ websites – if I am convinced that they have unbiased viewpoint. But it is very hard to find those people. Checking the ultimate doctrine myself – is thus - the best option left IMO. Although since I don’t speak those languages – sometimes it helps to be directed towards a good translation.
Anyways – I will try to check more - to figure out if the links you had provided are unbiased. Thanx regardless!!! In the meantime – I will wonder around these threads to accidentally come across the truth and hope to recognize them when I do.
Anyways – my conclusion on this topic is – Messianic Jews are not Jews if they believe in Jesus to be a God BUT they can be 100% kosher/ genuine Jews if they only believe in him as a prophet (not God) and maintain other basic Jewish beliefs and mosaic laws. Other Jews IMO have no authority to deny them the name “Jews” if they (and I repeat) maintain one God concept and other mosaic laws.
Okay! Now let me catch the next flight to another thread.
| |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/11/2007 6:48:43 AM | at open
It is not called bigotry, in religion, it's called heresy. As a Christian, I'd thought you'd be familiar with that word, sum1.
........i'm talking about bigotry toward one (presumed) heresy...the hersey in question is that of christianity as seen through the eyes of Jews.
------------
However, the Messianic Jews, the people in the topic, believe in the Christian Trinity, making them Christians.
.......what pple don't understand is that multiple personhood is not inconsistent with Judiasm!......the term 'son(s) of god' is seen frequently in the OT (genesis & Daniel)...the 'spirit' also mentioned......and the word 'abba' denotes the Father.
the word 'trinity' was a convenient term which as i believe, was coined years after the crucifixion, done to simply package the 3 into one word.....it is just semantics and not religious concepts that was altered by this word!.......the fact that a Messianic jew would believe in a trinity concept is thus of no surprise!......and therefore, wouldn't disqualify them as being jews at all!.......the issue of contention would be whether or not they accept the virgin birth of the Messiah!....if they do then it puts them more in the camp of strict christianity!
hey claim Israeli citizenship under the Right of Return; the state says they forfeited their rights to immigrate as Jews when they accepted Jesus as the messiah.
.......this ruling is something that was pushed into law by pressure exerted from the orthodox (and ultra-orthdox) Jews so as to prevent the free influx of what THEY define to be non-jews......but this is not a belief that is widely accepted! | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/11/2007 12:11:22 PM |
.......what pple don't understand is that multiple personhood is not inconsistent with Judiasm!......the term 'son(s) of god' is seen frequently in the OT (genesis & Daniel)...the 'spirit' also mentioned......and the word 'abba' denotes the Father.
The terms "sons of God", in the OT, refered to Angels. Are you infering that Jesus is an Angel? Or, possibly the reincarnation of the first singular, "son of God", Adam? What people don't understand is the "son of God" label, for Jesus, proves nothing about some Trinity. There are a number of "sons of God", that aren't God, in the bible.
the word 'trinity' was a convenient term which as i believe, was coined years after the crucifixion, done to simply package the 3 into one word.....it is just semantics and not religious concepts that was altered by this word!
Nope. The first use of the word Trinity, in the 2nd Century, by Tertullian, described God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit as unequals. The concept was a work in progress, over centuries.
but this is not a belief that is widely accepted!
Are you kidding me? It is widely accepted that Jews who convert to Christianity, are Christians, not Jews. The State of Israel always had a no right of return policy, regarding them. Now they come along and start calling themselves Messianic Jews, so they had a new ruling on the law. It's the same law, just different terminology.
What is a Christian? Does it matter what a Christian eats? No, it matters what they believe. Messianic Jews, believe in Christianity = they are Christians, who eat Kosher food.
Peace | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/13/2007 9:53:42 PM | at open
The terms "sons of God", in the OT, refered to Angels.
.......and which 'expert' has told you this?.........actually, anything refering to being 'sons' essentially means either someone (or a group of individuals) who are given a mandate or directives from "god".......that is, someone having authority by way of an 'anointing' of sorts.
if you read genesis 6; 1-2....you will see what i mean.....it would be ridiculous to think it was refering to Angels here!...if so, then how do you explain these "angels' coming down, taking wifes, and much less copulating with them???...............you would make a heck of a lot more sense if you had said that they were 'space-aliens' instead of angels!
------------------
There are a number of "sons of God", that aren't God, in the bible
......thats right, and then its up to the reader to determine what the purpose of their anointment was in the context that each case is presented!
--------------------
Now they come along and start calling themselves Messianic Jews, so they had a new ruling on the law. It's the same law, just different terminology.
......its those who are in power that actually define terms and status, usually based on political reasons!........for instance, if, from the begining, Israel had a law that said, anyone of maternal jewish descent is (and will always) be a Jew regardless of their view on who the messiah is then i'd bet that there would be no one disputing the validity of this law! | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/14/2007 5:56:54 PM | .......and which 'expert' has told you this?.........actually, anything refering to being 'sons' essentially means either someone (or a group of individuals) who are given a mandate or directives from "god".......that is, someone having authority by way of an 'anointing' of sorts.
if you read genesis 6; 1-2....you will see what i mean.....it would be ridiculous to think it was refering to Angels here!...if so, then how do you explain these "angels' coming down, taking wifes, and much less copulating with them???...............you would make a heck of a lot more sense if you had said that they were 'space-aliens' instead of angels!
"And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.'" - The Book of Enoch, translated from the Dead Sea Scrolls
"For in his days the angels of the Lord descended upon earth - those who are named The Watchers - that they should instruct the children of men, that they should do judgment and uprightness upon earth." - The Book of Jubilees: http://www.earth-history.com/Pseudepigrapha/Jub/jubilees-05.htm
"But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shown for virtue, they now showed by their actions a double degree of wickedness; whereby they made God to be their enemy, for many angels of God accompanied with women and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength; for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians called giants" - Flavius Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews: http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-1.htm
""And when the angels of God saw the daughters of men that they were beautiful, they took unto themselves wives of all them whom they chose." Those beings, whom other philosophers call demons, Moses usually calls angels." - Philo, On The Giants: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book9.html
That was the common, pre-5th century belief. I know you prefer the rulings of the Roman Catholic Church of that, post-Constantine era, but it wasn't the original view.
thats right, and then its up to the reader to determine what the purpose of their anointment was in the context that each case is presented!
Okay...use logic...1. What would be so wickedly evil and outrageous, to deserve a flood, about human men (sons of God) taking human wives (daughters of man)? 2. Angels can take on human form. 3. People of Sodom and Gamorah wanted to have sex with angels. 4. Angels had gone to Earth to help man, and God had warned them that they might succumb to evil there. 5. Although there are other sons of God, in the OT...there is no use of the exact phrase "sons of God", that refer to anything but angels, elsewhere in the OT.
......its those who are in power that actually define terms and status, usually based on political reasons!........for instance, if, from the begining, Israel had a law that said, anyone of maternal jewish descent is (and will always) be a Jew regardless of their view on who the messiah is then i'd bet that there would be no one disputing the validity of this law!
Statement of Faith: http://www.jewsforjesus.org/about/statementoffaith
Explain to me how that isn't Christianity.
Peace | |
|
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/17/2007 10:26:34 PM | at open
That was the common, pre-5th century belief. I know you prefer the rulings of the Roman Catholic Church of that, post-Constantine era, but it wasn't the original view.
.......the original version does not always coincide with correctness!.......the sites that you put up don't hold anything convincing.........in essence, the term "sons of god" has been believed to represent angels by mere de-fault!......on quick observation, it seems like an easy fit but not quite......if you read genesis 19, in the destruction of S&D, the first line makes reference to 2 angels, and NOT '2 sons of God (or heaven)' as you'll have in Gen 6;2.....and why would this be?.......especially in the same book?........if son of God and angels are interposable then what does it say for the early christains (of Jewish origin) who 1st refered to JC as the son of God?...........and of Gen 6;2, what is truly meant here?... .....was it put together to supernaturally explain a social phenomenon that later transpired?.......what was so different in the definition between those labeled as 'sons of god' and those called angels sent by god (in Gen 19).......there are lots of opinions out there and that is all there is!!!......in my view, Gen 6 explains a significant social turn of event...the key in this passage is the very first statement that says 'when men began to increase in numbers on the earth'.......and it seems clear here that there was some sort of intermixing with a type of pple previously unrecognized, but whose grandeur made them feel that they were 'sons of god'...or sons of heaven....what convinced them of that is obviously not clear!....furthermore, the phrase or title: 'son of' was quite commonly used as a point of reference to a lineage as it is today in that part of the world!.......what ensues in Gen 6;5 is just an anthropomorphic dissertation to explain the cataclysm to come!
Explain to me how that isn't Christianity.
the statement is merely of Jews who happen to believe that the Messiah has come in the form of JC....the notion that he is equated on the same level as the father doesn't make them any less Jewish.......belief in the 3 persons is something that makes itself manifest on its own once you recognize and deem the Messiah to be of Divine origin. | |
|
| |
| Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ?
Posted: 1/18/2007 12:31:21 AM |
Yes they are, although when they accept Christ they are first and formost Christians.
Muslims accept Christ. Does that make us Christian? I don't think so.
Try again.
Messianic Jews are Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah. They are not 'Jews', they are not 'Christians'; they are 'Messianic Jews'.
A 'Jew' does not accept Jesus as the Messiah. That 'Jew' may still be 'Jewish' by race, but is not 'Jewish' by faith; since that faith holds that the Messiah has not yet come.
Most 'Christians' accept some version of the pagan notion of the triun God (mother/father/son or mind/spirit/flesh as the most popular); this is not a requirement of being a 'Messianic Jew', although it also not a requirement for being a 'Christian'.
A 'Christian' does not necessarily have to believe in the 'Jewish' prophecy that Elijah must return before the Messiah can appear, but a 'Messianic Jew' would believe that Elijah has returned, most likely in the guise of John the Baptist.
A 'Messianic Jew' would have no base reason for rejecting the Gnostic Gospels as valid teachings of Jesus over the New Testament; very few 'Christians' outside of the Middle East are even passingly familiar with the Gnostic Gospels.
My point is that without a universally recognized and acknowledged definition of just what a 'Christian' is, one cannot apply that label to 'Messianic Jews' any more than one can apply the label of 'Jewish' to them with regards to faith. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
