There ain't no Jesus here.

[Tumah]

Even centuries after his passing, Paul is still rousing the anger of his countrymen!

That's not something special about Paul. We do it with all the deserters. Unlike the name Saul, nobody names there kids Sabbatai Tzvi today.
I'm not really sure why you'd find that a point of exclamation.

Why should Paul want people to believe his gospel if it's all a lie? Why would he put himself through agony and suffering for the sake of a false prophecy?
He spent months deliberating over the encounter he had with Jesus on the road to Damascus. He had to piece together all the scriptures once again, viewing afresh what he had learned through religious studies.

Ask the same thing about every other religion in the world. Because they want power and followers.

 

[Tumah]

Tumah, I'm not trying to tell you how to interpret the Talmud. But unlike the Bible - the written Word of God - the Talmud is a book of men. I happen to agree with a particular interpretation, but not with the calculation of time that some men have placed on it.
God knows his own appointed times, and if these are exactly two thousand years for each dispensation, it makes sense that man's calculations should not be exact. We are not to know the exact time of the Messiah's arrival. We see signs of those times approaching and we prepare ourselves. Only the spirit of God can reveal particulars, as the Lord did with Simeon.
You're right about the reason for the delay in your Messiah's coming. It's sin. And as long as you go on believing that you can be holy without God's salvation, your sin persists.

There's some self-validation for you.
All the things that you agree with in the Talmud are correct. Everything else, is not.

Well, the NT is also a book of men. So I'm going to cut out everything in there that I don't agree with.
.... Ok. From John 1, I got four words, "There was a man." That is true. There was a man. Even though that particulars of who the man is, I don't believe John got correctly, but the part about there existing a man, I agree, there is truth there.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Let me just say that you're taking a very different interpretation of this versus my own, especially since, if one keeps reading, he's clearly dealing with the end of times.

He IS dealing with the end times, but the generation of Jesus Christ extends from the first fruits of the harvest to the completion of the harvest. I was not accurate in saying 'at the end of this dispensation' because it's actually 'within this generation' that he returns.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Tumah, I'm not trying to tell you how to interpret the Talmud. But unlike the Bible - the written Word of God - the Talmud is a book of men. I happen to agree with a particular interpretation, but not with the calculation of time that some men have placed on it.
God knows his own appointed times, and if these are exactly two thousand years for each dispensation, it makes sense that man's calculations should not be exact. We are not to know the exact time of the Messiah's arrival. We see signs of those times approaching and we prepare ourselves. Only the spirit of God can reveal particulars, as the Lord did with Simeon.
You're right about the reason for the delay in your Messiah's coming. It's sin. And as long as you go on believing that you can be holy without God's salvation, your sin persists.

I agree, we are not to know when Messiah comes. I read a story, which may or may not have happened, but it's got a good point. It's been said for a long time that the time of Messiah's coming is in the Book of Daniel. And there was a man who figured it out. God told him not to reveal it, for it is to be sealed until the end of time, but he started plans to publish the time Messiah would come. And God took his life. God wasn't playing games, God doesn't want the time known.

No Christian is to interpret the Talmud, nor anybody else. Not even Jews try to interpret the Talmud. They have a few people who specialize in Talmud and they leave it to them. Like only a doctor should try to practice medicine. I can read medical books all I want, but that doesn't make me a doctor. The Talmud is said to be a book sealed with seven seals. (Which is creepy that the Revelation talks about a scroll with seven seals.)

You can't figure out the times for the Messsiah from the Talmud or the Book of Daniel, and even if you did, God would stop you from posting the answers on the internet, even if it would cost your life. For the time of the Messiah is a well guarded secret and God doesn't want it known.

 

[Redemptionsong]

There's some self-validation for you.
All the things that you agree with in the Talmud are correct. Everything else, is not.

When it comes to the Talmud, and my choice of which interpretation to follow, I will always hold the interpretation up to the light of scripture (both Testaments) before following what I understand to be true.
I am very aware that pride is a sin, and stands in the way of truth.

 

[rosends]

Not even Jews try to interpret the Talmud. They have a few people who specialize in Talmud and they leave it to them.

Really? When you say "a few people" do you mean "every student in yeshiva high school" or "every person who did daf yomi"?

Are you saying that most people who study it don't interpret it, just translate it? In fact, everyone who studies it interprets it, asks questions on it and tries to come up with new understandings of it.

 

[metis]

He IS dealing with the end times, but the generation of Jesus Christ extends from the first fruits of the harvest to the completion of the harvest. I was not accurate in saying 'at the end of this dispensation' because it's actually 'within this generation' that he returns.

Paul told those in "the Way" not to marry, so if he didn't believe Jesus was coming back soon, why would he recommend something that would have ended the church over probably a very short period of time? Sorry, but scripture and logic simply points in a different direction than what you're suggesting. Early church writings had it that they thought the end times could happen at any time, which has still been a reoccurring theme for almost 2000 years now.

So, it seems that the only real question is whether Jesus said something that turned out to be entirely wrong or did he say something that maybe they misinterpreted? To that question, my answer is this: I don't know.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Really? When you say "a few people" do you mean "every student in yeshiva high school" or "every person who did daf yomi"?

Are you saying that most people who study it don't interpret it, just translate it? In fact, everyone who studies it interprets it, asks questions on it and tries to come up with new understandings of it.

I see you are Jewish. I figure most Jews are busy earning a living and raising families. As you know, the Talmud is a massive work and takes years just to really get started studying it. When I said I delved into the Talmud, I meant superficially, like looking at anthologies of selected passages.

If I have a question about law, I read the Rambam. I don't really know a whole lot of Talmudic scholars. I guess what I was saying is that if a Jew is careful to not carelessly draw conclusions and new interpretations based on Talmud, how much more so should a Christian realize that it is a deep subject and that a simple reading of it is not sufficient. If things were different, I might have gone to a yeshiva and learned Talmud, then when I learned it, why not form new interpretations?

I particularly don't like it when antisemites take passages out of context in order to cause hatred. Like when the Talmud argues about what age a girl can possibly lose her virginity and concludes it is 3 yrs old, anti-semites use that to try to convince people that Jews condone pediphilia. When actually all it means is that a girl cannot be set aside for a pre-arranged marriage before 3 yrs old. The anti semites fail to tell people that no girl is permitted to marry until after she has hit puberty. You being Jewish, are also probably irritated by these misquotes and misinterpretations that are created either by ignorance of or hatred for our faith.

You being Jewish, if you want to study Talmud, I see no problem with that. Specifically I was referring to a Christian interpreting one passage thinking he can figure out when Moshiach gets here. Do I make sense now?

 

[Redemptionsong]

I would like to know why Paul behaved so differently than Jesus. Did Jesus condemn the Jewish people? Did Jesus even dared judge them? So I don't understand why Paul did.
From the Epistle to the Romans

The following story is told in Matthew 15:21-28. A woman, from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, follows Jesus and the disciples begging Jesus to heal her daughter. Jesus does nothing initially, and the disciples ask Jesus to send her away because she's being annoying.
Jesus then says to her, 'It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from the master's table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.'
In John 1:11-13. 'He [Jesus] came unto his own [the Jews], and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.'

So Jesus came to his own but they rejected him as Messiah. The rejection is not complete in the Gospels because these books only deal with the life of Jesus up to the crucifixion and resurrection. In Acts, you have the continuing history of Paul trying to convince the Jewish Council, made up of both Pharisees and Sadducees, that Jesus is the promised Messiah. He fails to convince them. Afterwards it says, (Acts 23:11)'And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.'
In Acts 26 Paul talks about how he persecuted Christians before his conversion. He also mentions his calling. Jesus says to him at the time of the conversion, it is 'the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.'
This should make it cleaer that there was a rejection of Jesus Christ by many Jews. A remnant, however, has always remained faithful.
It's quite wrong to think that Jesus had a message that was incompatible with that of Paul. Don't forget, it was Jesus that called Paul as his apostle to the Gentiles. Paul was doing exactly what Jesus Christ was telling him to do. Even to the point of marytrdom in Rome.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Paul told those in "the Way" not to marry, so if he didn't believe Jesus was coming back soon, why would he recommend something that would have ended the church over probably a very short period of time? Sorry, but scripture and logic simply points in a different direction than what you're suggesting. Early church writings had it that they thought the end times could happen at any time, which has still been a reoccurring theme for almost 2000 years now.

So, it seems that the only real question is whether Jesus said something that turned out to be entirely wrong or did he say something that maybe they misinterpreted? To that question, my answer is this: I don't know.

Metis, Paul never told other people not to marry. He simply said that celibacy suited him. In fact,it says that you should not prevent people from marrying.(1 Corinthians 7:9 and 1 Timothy 4:3)

Paul must have understood clearly that the generation of Jesus Christ was to last until the 'times of the Gentiles' were fulfilled (Luke 21:24). This is because every person who receives the baptism of Jesus Christ becomes part of his body - making them his 'generation'.

 

[rosends]

I see you are Jewish. I figure most Jews are busy earning a living and raising families. As you know, the Talmud is a massive work and takes years just to really get started studying it. When I said I delved into the Talmud, I meant superficially, like looking at anthologies of selected passages.

If I have a question about law, I read the Rambam. I don't really know a whole lot of Talmudic scholars. I guess what I was saying is that if a Jew is careful to not carelessly draw conclusions and new interpretations based on Talmud, how much more so should a Christian realize that it is a deep subject and that a simple reading of it is not sufficient. If things were different, I might have gone to a yeshiva and learned Talmud, then when I learned it, why not form new interpretations?

I particularly don't like it when antisemites take passages out of context in order to cause hatred. Like when the Talmud argues about what age a girl can possibly lose her virginity and concludes it is 3 yrs old, anti-semites use that to try to convince people that Jews condone pediphilia. When actually all it means is that a girl cannot be set aside for a pre-arranged marriage before 3 yrs old. The anti semites fail to tell people that no girl is permitted to marry until after she has hit puberty. You being Jewish, are also probably irritated by these misquotes and misinterpretations that are created either by ignorance of or hatred for our faith.

You being Jewish, if you want to study Talmud, I see no problem with that. Specifically I was referring to a Christian interpreting one passage thinking he can figure out when Moshiach gets here. Do I make sense now?

You would be better off working with the Kitzur, or the S"A (and the ramo if you are Ashkenazic). Talmud study is part of a well rounded Jewish education and the understanding of how laws develop and how the logic works complements aby good, rigorous education.

 

[metis]

Metis, Paul never told other people not to marry. He simply said that celibacy suited him. In fact,it says that you should not prevent people from marrying.(1 Corinthians 7:9 ...

Here's verse 8: "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do."

 

[blue taylor]

Judaism is a revealed religion just as is Christianity. Before it's founder, it was unknown. Why do you think Jesus was any less than Abraham, Zarathustra, Buddha, Mani, Mohammed, Bab or Joseph Smith?

 

[Tumah]

What?

I said, "That's not something special about Paul. We do it with all the deserters. Unlike the name Saul, nobody names there kids Sabbatai Tzvi today.
I'm n"

Can you hear me now?

 

[Tumah]

It isn't clear what your saying. 'What' means explain what your trying to say
Contextually. to the discussion.

I am saying that after the false messiah Sabbatai Tzvi, you will be hard-pressed to find another Jewish child with that name. The poster that I was responding to, seemed excited that Jews are still against Paul. I am only pointing out that Jews remain opposed to all false messiahs and there cohorts, and Paul is not exceptional in this regard.

 

[Tumah]

''Jesus'' is very uncommon as a given name for Christians, except in certain language/culture groups. //that aside/, You went from Paul to Saul, to Jesus, but you seem to be inferring that Jews would not name their child Paul?

I didn't mention anything about Jesus and Paul's name was originally Saul. What I am not inferring but explicitly stating is that Jews remain opposed to all false messiahs and their cohorts. The opposition may find different expressions, but remains nonetheless.

 

[metis]

Judaism is a revealed religion just as is Christianity. Before it's founder, it was unknown. Why do you think Jesus was any less than Abraham, Zarathustra, Buddha, Mani, Mohammed, Bab or Joseph Smith?

I didn't make such a claim.

 

[metis]

He IS dealing with the end times, but the generation of Jesus Christ extends from the first fruits of the harvest to the completion of the harvest.

And where is this supposedly found, plus Jesus is talking about "this generation" in the context of his audience because he's telling them what to look for?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Here's verse 8: "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do."

Yes, so he's not saying that it is wrong to marry.

 

[metis]

Yes, so he's not saying that it is wrong to marry.

In his expressed opinion, he is, but with an exception. And why would he say what he appears to have said unless he believe Jesus was coming back soon?

I would suggest that the better interpretation of "this generation" is the most direct one, thus using the "Occam's razor" approach. There's simply no reason to conclude otherwise, especially since this is also what the early church believed. Therefore, the more likely theological approach was that either Jesus was wrong, or he was misinterpreted, or that the author(s) screwed up in the writing. Any other attempt involves using theological gymnastics in such a way so as to come out looking like a pretzel.