• 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!

Torah in Christianity

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
How can belief in the King of the Jews be a new religion?
For several reasons:
1. Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies of the messiah, therefore proclaiming him as messiah cannot be part of Judaism.
2. The Tanakh states four times that God is not a man -- obviously it was a critically important message to be so repeated. Any religion that says a certain man is God, is therefore antithetical to Judaism.
3. The heart and soul of the Torah and the rest of the Tanakh is obedience to God. Changing that message to belief in the messiah is therefore a change of religion.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Brian: you can't just show up on someone's doorstep and announce to them that you are adopted into their family. The adoption requires the consent of the family doing the adopting.

It is the Father who is doing the adopting.
What makes you think you are part of the family? Do you have God's Spirit also?
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Jesus Christ is the Word of God, according to John 1:1 It is wrong, therefore, to claim that the message of Jesus Christ is somehow distinct from the person. The new covenant is not a new law but the old law fulfilled in a man, Christ Jesus.
Actually it is difficult for me to keep straight exactly which thing in John 1 is Jesus. What John chapter 1 directly says is that Jesus is either the life or the light, not the Word. As someone who has made the same mistake I empathize and don't think you should feel embarrassed; but you are mistaken badly. I used to hear people saying this all the time and so didn't check it myself at first. It never says Jesus is the Word, and this matters every time Jesus mentions 'Light' in John such as in chapter 3. Light is at the time of John's writing thought to be a tiny copy of the thing being seen which then makes an impression upon the eye, somewhat like a seal makes an impression into wax. They do not have a concept of light as we are taught that it is merely energy packets. So the implication is that Jesus is a copy of the word or an exact representation but is not the Word itself. I don't care what the implications are for discussions about Trinity. That's what John literally says, and let the chips fall where they may.

IMO, it is also not accurate to think of Christ as bringing a new religion. The claim of Christians is that Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of OT prophecy.
I've no quarrel with you, nor with Jews, nor with any group that wish to follow Jesus or imitate the Jews or be children of Abraham. There is one lord, one faith, one baptism. We are competing in righteousness leading to peace and the victory of peace and love and happiness and the destruction of all sadness and death, and that is fine and dandy. I don't care who is the best, as long as we all get better and the world gets better. I also don't care if it takes a zillion years. Its a big mountain, and we have such tiny spoons with which to move it.

When Paul began to preach the risen Lord, he went to both Jews and Gentiles. The book of Acts shows that, for a long time, the mission was to persuade both Jews and Gentiles that the Messiah had come. Paul's focus on the Gentiles was because of the popular uptake of the Gospel. Finally, in Acts 28:22-29 Paul speaks a word of prophecy over the Jewish nation, repeating the words of Isaiah, making it clear that the Gospel was foolishness to those whose hearts had 'waxed gross' and were not ready to receive Christ.
Prophecies can fail, and prophecy shall cease; however principles never change. If the Jews are more righteous than the Christians then God will favor them, and we will all be blessed only through them. It won't matter what our scriptures say. Our job is to make them jealous not to harass them into compliance with our views.

I will add, that l agree that Peter is not the rock upon which the Church would be built. The rock is, throughout scripture, a reference to the Lord.
Best wishes for you to be right, but I don't think that is correct.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
For several reasons:
1. Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies of the messiah, therefore proclaiming him as messiah cannot be part of Judaism.
2. The Tanakh states four times that God is not a man -- obviously it was a critically important message to be so repeated. Any religion that says a certain man is God, is therefore antithetical to Judaism.
3. The heart and soul of the Torah and the rest of the Tanakh is obedience to God. Changing that message to belief in the messiah is therefore a change of religion.
1. Jesus fulfilled all the 'suffering servant' prophecies and promises to return to fulfil the rest. Which of the 'suffering servant' prophecies has he not fulfilled?
2. You're quite right. God is not a man. The question is whether the Messiah, the mediator between God and man, is fully God and fully man. There is only one mediator, and he's unique.
3. The heart of the Torah is holiness. This has not been achieved by any man accept Jesus Christ. Or, are you of the opinion that not all men are sinners?
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Actually it is difficult for me to keep straight exactly which thing in John 1 is Jesus. What John chapter 1 directly says is that Jesus is either the life or the light, not the Word. As someone who has made the same mistake I empathize and don't think you should feel embarrassed; but you are mistaken badly. I used to hear people saying this all the time and so didn't check it myself at first. It never says Jesus is the Word, and this matters every time Jesus mentions 'Light' in John such as in chapter 3. Light is at the time of John's writing thought to be a tiny copy of the thing being seen which then makes an impression upon the eye, somewhat like a seal makes an impression into wax. They do not have a concept of light as we are taught that it is merely energy packets. So the implication is that Jesus is a copy of the word or an exact representation but is not the Word itself. I don't care what the implications are for discussions about Trinity. That's what John literally says, and let the chips fall where they may.

I've no quarrel with you, nor with Jews, nor with any group that wish to follow Jesus or imitate the Jews or be children of Abraham. There is one lord, one faith, one baptism. We are competing in righteousness leading to peace and the victory of peace and love and happiness and the destruction of all sadness and death, and that is fine and dandy. I don't care who is the best, as long as we all get better and the world gets better. I also don't care if it takes a zillion years. Its a big mountain, and we have such tiny spoons with which to move it.


Prophecies can fail, and prophecy shall cease; however principles never change. If the Jews are more righteous than the Christians then God will favor them, and we will all be blessed only through them. It won't matter what our scriptures say. Our job is to make them jealous not to harass them into compliance with our views.


Best wishes for you to be right, but I don't think that is correct.
Why have you chosen to ignore Revelation 19:13, when it confirms John 1:1? lt says that Jesus Christ is the Word of God, and it is through the Word that creation takes place [Colossians 1:14-19].

There are other NT passages that confirm the belief in Jesus Christ as the Word of God.

John clarifies his own Gospel when he says, 'For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one'. [1 John 5:7]

This makes clear that the Father can be distinguished from the Son, and from the Holy Spirit. The distinction is not in essence but in location, as Ephesians 4:6 tells us: 'One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through [amongst] all, and in you all'.

What you say about righteousness demonstrates a misunderstanding of the Gospel. The righteousness achieved by Jesus Christ in fulfilling the law can only be ours through faith in Him. Jesus did not tell people to follow a set of principles, he said, 'Follow me!'

By placing faith in Jesus Christ one receives the blessing of the Holy Spirit, the grace of God, which is also the righteousness of Christ. lt's the Holy Spirit that marks a person as being 'born again'.

You may, justifiably, ask why it is that people 'born again' of the Holy Spirit do not always bear witness to the righteousness within. The reason is that we are still living in the flesh, and the battle to walk by the Spirit, and not after the flesh, must be won. We are given the strength to do so, but we must also exhibit the will to do so.

Salvation is a process that begins with faith in Jesus as Saviour, but is not complete until the day of our resurrection (or rapture of the saints).

This is my understanding, and one l am happy to argue from scripture.
 

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
None of these verse say non-Jews will be part of God's people. God's people are the Jews. These verses say non-Jews will worship the Jewish God. Noahides already do, but it doesn't make them God's people. That is a role applied only to Israel.

Sorry if you are not one of God's people, but I am. Show me one verse that says Gentiles will never be the people of God. Or show me one verse that says no one but Israel will ever be the people of God.

If something will come to pass, that in itself tells you there will be a change. If his house will be called a house of prayer for all people, that means anyone will be able to be one of his people.

To be technical, even Abraham wouldn't have been called a Jew, but he was one of God's people.
 
Last edited:

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry if you are not one of God's people, but I am. Show me one verse that says Gentiles will never be the people of God. Or show me one verse that says no one but Israel will ever be the people of God.

If something will come to pass, that in itself tells you there will be a change. If his house will be called a house of prayer for all people, that means anyone will be able to be one of his people.
What do you mean when you say 'God's people'? Are you under the assumption that non-Jews had no way of worshipping the Israelite God before Christianity?

I'm understanding you mean Chosen People, Priestly Nation. This is reserved for Israelites. If you are saying have non-Jews a covenant with and a means of worshipping the Israelite God then yes, they have.
 

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
Yes with the change in priesthood to someone not of Levi that part of the law is changed necessarily, but still the Torah is not changed because the Torah predicts this. (Ps 110:4)
Christians are grafter into Judaism and we all are then priests.
Nevertheless the law of love sums up the whole Law of Moses, so the Law in essence is not changed.

There are many other things also that were a part of the law that we are not under. Circumcision, sacrifices, stoning, etc.
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
What do you mean when you say 'God's people'? Are you under the assumption that non-Jews had no way of worshipping the Israelite God before Christianity?

I'm understanding you mean Chosen People, Priestly Nation. This is reserved for Israelites. If you are saying have non-Jews a covenant with and a means of worshipping the Israelite God then yes, they have.

You didn't provide any verses backing up what you had said. Since non-Jews already had a way to worship God before Christianity, what change happens to make his house a house of prayer for all people?

I also sent several posts to you previously that you didn't respond to. I will ask again because it is pertinent to the OP. Since God is perfect in all his ways. When he said he would make new heavens and a new earth, did that mean what he made the first time wasn't perfect? That being the case, why would him making a new covenant be any different?
 
Last edited:

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Why have you chosen to ignore Revelation 19:13, when it confirms John 1:1? lt says that Jesus Christ is the Word of God,
I shall look it up...I see...

No, I think this does not change what John 1 actually says.

If John 1 wanted to say Jesus was the Word it could have. It says that the Life was in the Word. This is similar to saying that Levi was in Abraham paying tithes to Melchizedek.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
You didn't provide any verses backing up what you had said. Since non-Jews already had a way to worship God before Christianity, what change happens to make his house a house of prayer for all people?
The Temple was always accessible to non-Jews.

I also sent several posts to you previously that you didn't respond to. I will ask again because it is pertinent to the OP. Since God is perfect in all his ways. When he said he would make new heavens and a new earth, did that mean what he made the first time wasn't perfect? That being the case, why would him making a new covenant be any different?
Because I wanted to leave this thread and not bother responding. I'm bored already.

But have at it, soldier.

Here is Jeremiah 31:35-37, saying God will never forsake Israel:

35 Thus says the Lord,
who gives the sun for light by day
and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar—
the Lord of hosts is his name:
“If this fixed order departs
from before me, declares the Lord,
then shall the offspring of Israel cease
from being a nation before me forever.”

then I will cast off all the offspring of Israel
for all that they have done,
declares the Lord.”

See what he's saying here? God will never forsake Israel, and this order will remain fixed. In other words, it's not going anywhere.

That in mind, here is what Isaiah 66:22 says,

“For as the new heavens and the new earth that I am making stand before Me says the Lord, “so shall your seed and your name endure.”

Notice the language here? The new heavens and earth are already standing before God. It's not a new creation that gets rid of the old one. God isn't going to kill everything and start again, so to speak. In the last verse we read:

"And they shall go out and see the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh."


This is the same place. This is a Messianic vision, or a vision of the end of the Babylonian Captivity. There's clearly reference to current events, the Temple, the Priesthood, and Israel remaining forever. God is bringing Israel back, remaking the Temple and so-on anew, reclaiming Israel from Babylon and making sure they endure forever.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
There are other NT passages that confirm the belief in Jesus Christ as the Word of God.

John clarifies his own Gospel when he says, 'For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one'. [1 John 5:7]

This makes clear that the Father can be distinguished from the Son, and from the Holy Spirit. The distinction is not in essence but in location, as Ephesians 4:6 tells us: 'One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through [amongst] all, and in you all'.
I have an understanding that the holy spirit alights upon Jesus after he is grown. That would be unnecessary were he already the Word. I also have no problem with the Trinity, and John 1 seems consistent with the Trinity as I understand it.

What you say about righteousness demonstrates a misunderstanding of the Gospel. The righteousness achieved by Jesus Christ in fulfilling the law can only be ours through faith in Him. Jesus did not tell people to follow a set of principles, he said, 'Follow me!'

By placing faith in Jesus Christ one receives the blessing of the Holy Spirit, the grace of God, which is also the righteousness of Christ. lt's the Holy Spirit that marks a person as being 'born again'.

You may, justifiably, ask why it is that people 'born again' of the Holy Spirit do not always bear witness to the righteousness within. The reason is that we are still living in the flesh, and the battle to walk by the Spirit, and not after the flesh, must be won. We are given the strength to do so, but we must also exhibit the will to do so.

Salvation is a process that begins with faith in Jesus as Saviour, but is not complete until the day of our resurrection (or rapture of the saints).

This is my understanding, and one l am happy to argue from scripture.
God owes no one the truth.

Faith-fulness and faith are both carried by a single Greek term 'Pistis'; and this leads to endless confusion in English bibles. The word 'Faith' has drifted in the English language and no longer means faithfulness as it used to. It has come to mean 'Belief', but this is not always what Greek writers mean when they write 'pistis'. It is like hurting people to make Christianity all about belief. Belief is nothing by itself. Doubt is part of being a human, but we can be consistent with our actions. We can be religious in our actions. We can work continuously, and if we have just a little bit of consistency, a little bit of faithfulness it is enough to accomplish many things. But if we are all micro-focused upon belief then we can be all talk and no do, and then sometimes nothing gets done or worse. I have seen this in practice, and its not good. I give very little import to belief. Show me spiritual fruit, instead.
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
The Temple was always accessible to non-Jews.


Because I wanted to leave this thread and not bother responding. I'm bored already.

But have at it, soldier.

Here is Jeremiah 31:35-37, saying God will never forsake Israel:

35 Thus says the Lord,
who gives the sun for light by day
and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar—
the Lord of hosts is his name:
“If this fixed order departs
from before me, declares the Lord,
then shall the offspring of Israel cease
from being a nation before me forever.”

then I will cast off all the offspring of Israel
for all that they have done,
declares the Lord.”

See what he's saying here? God will never forsake Israel, and this order will remain fixed. In other words, it's not going anywhere.

That in mind, here is what Isaiah 66:22 says,

“For as the new heavens and the new earth that I am making stand before Me says the Lord, “so shall your seed and your name endure.”

Notice the language here? The new heavens and earth are already standing before God. It's not a new creation that gets rid of the old one. God isn't going to kill everything and start again, so to speak. In the last verse we read:

"And they shall go out and see the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh."


This is the same place. This is a Messianic vision, or a vision of the end of the Babylonian Captivity. There's clearly reference to current events, the Temple, the Priesthood, and Israel remaining forever. God is bringing Israel back, remaking the Temple and so-on anew, reclaiming Israel from Babylon and making sure they endure forever.


I never said he would forsake Israel. I said he would turn to the Gentiles, and anyone from any nation can be his people.

You know it says the new heavens and the new earth that I make. (NOT made)

Another question: Are the Jews supposed to keep the law of Moses regarding stoning? See Deuteronomy 22:21-24 and Numbers 15:30-36 and Leviticus 20:13-27 and Leviticus 24:23

If not - why not?
 
Last edited:

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
I never said he would forsake Israel. I said he would turn to the Gentiles, and anyone from any nation can be his people.
That wasn't my point. God in these verses said as long as the heavens and earth are fixed, he will not forsake Israel, and we know God will never forsake Israel - therefore the heavens and earth remain fixed.

You know it says the new heavens and the new earth that I make. (NOT made)
Not going through this again.

Another question: Do You keep the law of Moses regarding stoning? See Deuteronomy 22:21-24 and Numbers 15:30-36 and Leviticus 20:13-27 and Leviticus 24:23

If not - why not?
Because I'm not a Jew.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
I have an understanding that the holy spirit alights upon Jesus after he is grown. That would be unnecessary were he already the Word. I also have no problem with the Trinity, and John 1 seems consistent with the Trinity as I understand it.


God owes no one the truth.

Faith-fulness and faith are both carried by a single Greek term 'Pistis'; and this leads to endless confusion in English bibles. The word 'Faith' has drifted in the English language and no longer means faithfulness as it used to. It has come to mean 'Belief', but this is not always what Greek writers mean when they write 'pistis'. It is like hurting people to make Christianity all about belief. Belief is nothing by itself. Doubt is part of being a human, but we can be consistent with our actions. We can be religious in our actions. We can work continuously, and if we have just a little bit of consistency, a little bit of faithfulness it is enough to accomplish many things. But if we are all micro-focused upon belief then we can be all talk and no do, and then sometimes nothing gets done or worse. I have seen this in practice, and its not good. I give very little import to belief. Show me spiritual fruit, instead.
Good fruit grows on good trees. What makes a tree 'good' is the Holy Spirit.

Jesus is not 'anointed' as the heir to the throne until his baptism by John. He doesn't declare himself as God's 'anointed' until he preaches at the synagogue in Nazareth [Luke 4:16].

The Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary, and there was a miracle of conception. Is there any reason why the Word should not be made flesh and live under the law before living by the Spirit? This would allow Jesus to be a mediator between two covenants.

Faith in Jesus Christ is not at the expense of works. It's all a matter of getting the order right! Ultimately, it's the faith of Christ in us that does the good works, otherwise we would have reason to boast.

This is my understanding.
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
For several reasons:
1. Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies of the messiah, therefore proclaiming him as messiah cannot be part of Judaism.
2. The Tanakh states four times that God is not a man -- obviously it was a critically important message to be so repeated. Any religion that says a certain man is God, is therefore antithetical to Judaism.
3. The heart and soul of the Torah and the rest of the Tanakh is obedience to God. Changing that message to belief in the messiah is therefore a change of religion.

1. For Christians, the Messiah did fulfill the prophecies. The Jews state the prophecies to mean what they think they should mean, not necessarily what God meant.

2. For me, NOT being a Trinitarian. The Messiah was in actuality, YHWH dwelling in a fleshly body. God is a Spirit, but he took on a body. The body was called the Son, because YHWH fathered the body. But YHWH chose to dwell in that body. So YHWH was not a man, but chose to dwell in the body of a man and sacrifice that body for our sins.

3. Do the Jews keep the law of Moses regarding stoning? See Deuteronomy 22:21-24 and Numbers 15:30-36 and Leviticus 20:13-27 and Leviticus 24:23 If not - why not?
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
This isn't post Christian.
The consensus is. I'd prefer not to play argumentative games with some, both post and pre-Christian, sources saying that parts of the suffering servant passage refer to the Messiah while other portions do not, but I could if you want.

I'd much rather point out that it is clear there was at least some pre-Christian messianic interpretation of the suffering servant in the fact that 1st century AD Jewish authors writing about the man they believed to be the Jewish messiah placed Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy.

It's not adding or taking away. It literally cannot be done if there's no Temple.
Exactly, it can't be done, so there was an ad hoc addition to the law, that came after David, inspired of God, wrote that the law is perfect.

The law's perfection is a statement of reflection on itself not in relation to need as circumstances arises. Either your argument that the Psalmist's and Deuteronomy's statements mean that alterations can't be made period and at least three thousand years of Jewish faith have been false to God and the law or it similarly can't be used against Christianity in the manner you would like. It really reads more of a Samaritan argument.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Exactly, it can't be done, so there was an ad hoc addition to the law, that came after David, inspired of God, wrote that the law is perfect.

The law's perfection is a statement of reflection on itself not in relation to need as circumstances arises. Either your argument that the Psalmist's and Deuteronomy's statements mean that alterations can't be made period and at least three thousand years of Jewish faith have been false to God and the law or it similarly can't be used against Christianity in the manner you would like. It really reads more of a Samaritan argument.
The Torah is subject to circumstance and makes provisions for those circumstances. It mentions that if Israel does not obey, they will be sent into exile; this naturally lends itself to the idea that there will be Torah in exile. One has a perfect Torah in imperfect conditions. The Torah is perfect, this does not mean circumstances will be.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
You didn't provide any verses backing up what you had said. Since non-Jews already had a way to worship God before Christianity, what change happens to make his house a house of prayer for all people?
The line in Is 56 about the temple being a house of prayer for people of all nations refers to those people who convert to Judaism, no matter what nations they come from. It deals with those who attach themselves to God (check the verse right before it). It is a promise of inclusion to those who find God in temple days - the next verse says that the number gathered to God would be more than the dispersed people (the Jews) because it would include converts. This idea is parallel to, but different from the apparently similar promise in the days of the first temple that even the prayers of non-Jews which weren't offered properly at the temple would be received by God -- 1 Kings 8:43. Check the Radak there, אף על פי שלא יהיה ראוי לכך תשמע תפלתו and a sentence later in which there is an explanation as to WHY those prayers will be accepted.[/QUOTE]
 
Top