I see the merit lays within acceptance of the Messenger. That acceptance does not need other men's approval, or the labels that thay like to adhere to.
Regards Tony
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Religious Borrowing and then Theft
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
I see the merit lays within acceptance of the Messenger. That acceptance does not need other men's approval, or the labels that thay like to adhere to.
Regards Tony
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
When I go doing research about what other people believe and think of themselves, I go first, and always, to the people I'm doing the research on. For instance, I would never ask a Lutheran to explain Catholicism to me, and I would never ask a Catholic to explain the Jehovah's Witnesses to me.
So, when attempting to figure out who the JEWS acknowledge as Jewish, I went to Jewish sources. Traditionally, there are only two ways to be (or become) Jewish. One is to be born to it...one's mother, grandmother and great grandmother must be Jewish. The other way is to formally convert.
That's it.
I'm going to figure that if that's what the JEWS think, then....that's the end of the discussion. It's what they think that counts, not what you and I think.
Oh....and given that I'm LDS and WE have a tradition of 'being adopted' into the 'family,' so to speak, you might consider that I am being a bit contrary here. However, I'm not. Being part of the 'chosen people' does not make us Jewish. It just lets us walk beside them a little way.
I don't believe I AM Jesus' child. His sister, but I am a child of God, His Father. I'm not a classical Trinitarian. Oh, I believe that He is the Savior, the second member of the Godhead, and fully God, but He's not the Father in any way. He is Himself.
Dunno if that gets me out of the 'hypocrisy' thing.
Well, I disagree with you. Jesus first came to the Jews, and only after they rejected Him did He go to the gentiles. First His Father's chosen people, then the rest of us, and the rest of us are not them. When the gospel came to the rest of us, it did NOT make us "Jewish."
And I believe that they are STILL His chosen people. Stubborn, faithful, difficult...glorious. My own people should have such a history to be proud of. (well, come to think, they do...perhaps not quite as, er, separate,' but still...)
Being Jewish is BOTH the people and culture....AND the belief system. To deny that is to wipe out thousands of years of history. Those Christians who want to call themselves Jewish are missing the point, especially when they do not share ancestry OR beliefs.
(snort) I already said I was LDS (that's "Mormon" to most of you). What you are claiming is pretty much the same as telling us that we should stop calling ourselves 'Mormons" or "Latter-day saints" and claim that we are REALLY Catholics. Trust me on this one; the Catholics wouldn't appreciate it, and it would be untrue.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Likewise Jews who wear European clothes, speak English, saying 'g-d', are pretending to be European?
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
That totally doesn't make sense.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
(shrug) Does to me. Ah, well.....
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Different religion, that rejects Jesus
Different claimed theology
...
...
Then why did Jesus go to the jews? Your ideas contradict each other
That's nice.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
Different religion, that rejects Jesus['quote]
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints rejects Jesus.
ooooookay.
Perhaps you should learn the difference between a rejection of a perception of a thing...and rejection of the thing itself. Just because we might not agree with you about all your beliefs regarding Jesus doesn't mean that we reject HIM.
Different claimed theology
...
...
Then why did Jesus go to the jews? Your ideas contradict each other[/quote}
No they don't.
See what I did there?
I think so. We both have different ideas and different approaches. At least one of us is wrong, though it is possible that we both are.
I'm going to go on the idea that I'm not wrong.
Well, some Christians see it as totally different. For instance, Luther, the father of reformation, advocated for the physical elimination of the unconverted jews.
And even if his teachings are terrible, he was right to see that Christianity and Judaism are totally different. They are. The jews do not believe for a second that Jesus was the Messiah, or that you have to accept Him as Lord and savior, which is, I believe, the fundamental tenet of Christianity,.
I would say the theological distance of Christianity from Judaism is greater than the theological distance between Judaism and Islam.
Ciao
- viole
sooda
Veteran Member
Jesus didn't go to the Gentiles at all.. Paul went to the Gentiles.
sooda
Veteran Member
iam1me
Active Member
Some individuals have been anti-semitic, but even then they don't go so far as to deny that Jesus was a Jew, that the disciples were Jews, that God is the God of Abraham, etc.
Even if there are some who do go that far, they are simply wrong and ignorant (including those who are anti-semitic).
We dispute the identity of the Messiah, yes. But the very prophecy of the Messiah comes from Judaism. Jesus was a Jew, his disciples were Jews, Paul was a Jew, and all the early Christians were Jews. They believed and debated from the same scriptures. Their rejection of Jesus as the Messiah does not negate the fact that Christianity is founded upon Judaism.
The identity of the Messiah? Mmh, just a little unimportant disagreement here...
In fact, they do not believe for a second that Jesus was the Messiah and, especially, that He was the son of God. Or things like the trinity. You would have been stoned if you said that at that time. That is nothing short of blasphemy to orthodox jews. Probably equivalent to me saying that Jesus was a woman.
So, according to your theology they will go to hell like all Muslims, atheists, etc.
Correct?
Ciao
- viole
Last edited:
iam1me
Active Member
Their rejection of Jesus as the Messiah means they aren’t Christian, not that Christianity isn’t founded on Judaism.
Horribly incorrect. We are judged by our deeds, not by how close you are to holding the right doctrines.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Religiously what Jesus considered 'israel', by inference does include what is considered 'non jews', however yes, there does seem to be a distinction, between israel and some groups. This has to do with religious beliefs, and the fact that what is called judaism, now, isn't the religion that Jesus was talking about. When this difference occured, [Judaism, and Jesus religion, is said or speculated to have occured before Jesus in Israel.
The council of Jamnia canonized the jewish bible in a manner that does not work with Jesus religion, [going by religious ideas strictly speaking.
Then when formalized judaism rejected Jesus, you have the 'standard religion', codified differently. Codified different religion.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Romans 2:24
The word 'gentiles', often from the word 'ethnisin', means 'nations'. Hence it's general, though in english the word is used to mean 'non jew', even though,
Romans 2:24
[Blasphemy among 'gentiles', through jews.
Now, the context is speaking of jews doing incorrect things, however the blasphemy occuring among the 'nations, is through jews. The jews were in different nations, as noted elsewhere, so there is no reason to presume that 'gentiles', there, Romans 2:24, isn't referring to jews. It just means, blasphemed by jews, all over the place, [[nations
sooda
Veteran Member
You've lost me.. Care to clarify?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Followers of Jesus religion , and Jesus [[noted by Josephus, weren't just 'jews', even though Jesus said He was going to Israel.