Why the NT is Historically and Theologically not acceptable for Torath Mosheh Jews

[Harel13]

We are talking about Rabbi Singer right?

No, @BilliardsBall. I know Rabbi Singer lives in Yerushalayim.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

No, @BilliardsBall.

I am guessing that he does. Remember he is supposed to SMS us if his guy shows up on the Mount of Olives.

 

[Harel13]

I am guessing that he does. Remember he is supposed to SMS us if his guy shows up on the Mount of Olives.

Another Jesusian death anniversary has passed and he hasn't shown up yet. I'm still waiting with bated breath.

 

[BilliardsBall]

No, @BilliardsBall. I know Rabbi Singer lives in Yerushalayim.

This was in 1990. He wasn't exiled from NYC quite yet.

Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son.

PS. I've been to Jerusalem. Could have met him there, too, right?

 

[BilliardsBall]

If one loves G-d and wants to do His Will. Not everything is about being 'saved' - a Christian concept that doesn't really exist in Judaism.

Wow, I never knew that, being Jewish [rolls eyes].

 

[BilliardsBall]

Isaiah does not describe a "light burden".

Regarding: "Salvation by Trust", if you want to be convincing, please provide some verses from Tanach. So far, I haven't found anything which supports this idea.

"Those who trust in the Lord are as Mount Tziyon, which cannot be moved but ABIDES FOREVER."

 

[Rival]

Wow, I never knew that, being Jewish [rolls eyes].

Any comment I have for this breaks RF rules. Congrats.

Literally no-one here thinks you're a Jew except you. You're a Christian. I don't care about your ethnicity, family background or whatever. You believe in Jesus and the NT. There are Noachides out there who are doing more Jewish things than you.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Huh? Who was talking about Jesus and Paul? You made a critique about rabbis and I simply stated that this same claim would therefore also apply to Jesus.

And there was no question about going to heaven. You made a claim about never having met a rabbi who does something and I stated that I do that thing so you can no longer make that claim.

Your remarks seem to ignore what is actually being discussed. I'm not sure why you would focus on one small set of sacrifices and ignore all the:
1. sacrifices that have nothing to do with blood
2. rituals in the temple that have nothing to do with sacrifices
3. rituals outside the temple and temple times

Maybe it is because that isn't the topic that was being spoken about.

There are many Temple rituals, yes. Which are needed for the remission of sin?

Leviticus 17:11
For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I have therefore given it to you [to be placed] upon the altar, to atone for your souls. For it is the blood that atones for the soul.

יאכִּי־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַבָּשָׂר֘ בַּדָּ֣ם הִוא֒ וַֽאֲנִ֞י נְתַתִּ֤יו לָכֶם֙ עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ
לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֑ם כִּֽי־הַדָּ֥ם ה֖וּא בַּנֶּ֥פֶשׁ יְכַפֵּֽר:

Source: Chabad.org

 

[Harel13]

rolls eyes

This is now the second time you're rolling eyes on this thread. And here I thought we Orthodox Jews were the elitists.

By the way, what mitzvot do you keep?

 

[Harel13]

Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son.

I should put this on my resume.

 

[Harel13]

By the way, @BilliardsBall, since you're excited to teach the ways of your messiah, perhaps you could look over this post and give your thoughts? Those that believe unleavened bread symbolizes Jesus

 

[rosends]

There are many Temple rituals, yes. Which are needed for the remission of sin?

Leviticus 17:11
For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I have therefore given it to you [to be placed] upon the altar, to atone for your souls. For it is the blood that atones for the soul.

יאכִּי־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַבָּשָׂר֘ בַּדָּ֣ם הִוא֒ וַֽאֲנִ֞י נְתַתִּ֤יו לָכֶם֙ עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ
לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֑ם כִּֽי־הַדָּ֥ם ה֖וּא בַּנֶּ֥פֶשׁ יְכַפֵּֽר:

Source: Chabad.org

There are rituals involved in dealing with sin, and for loads of other reasons as well, on a daily basis.

 

[rosends]

These are two different religions with different characteristics regardless of a personal agenda to claim they are the same.

No, they are not, regardless of your personal agenda to claim that they are different.

We are speaking of profound foundational principles by which religion was established,and maintained and matured over thousands of years such as revelation and prophets and scripture and temple worship which are very different than creating traditions of men and passing those traditions off as authentic revealed religion from God.

Why do you think that those are foundational in the establishing of the religion? Foundational events do not constitute a religion. Foundational beliefs and practices and rules do. And claiming that practices are created by men just shows your agenda – starting with a claim instead of any evidence.

This idea of creating doctrines and traditions by rabbis and others and trying to maintain those man-made traditions at all costs is a different religion that having prophets declare doctrines and provided on-going guidance from God over time.

But having prophets declare doctrine (which they mostly didn’t do, by the way) was not a necessary or foundational element of the Jewish religion, and the doctrinal aspects of the religion anticipated the need to establish doctrine in the absence of prophets so their lack was accounted for, foundationally.

For example, ancient process in production of scriptures where prophetic announcements were written down and scripture created inside the ongoing process of honoring God and keeping his commandments is different than the process you describe where the process became “...about maintaining a tradition and keeping within it.”

No, the process of maintaining the integrity of the text by reconciling it was part of the ongoing tradition of the process of honoring God’s word

This was part of the Messiahs point

Whose? Citing texts outside of Judaism to establish some understanding of Judaism is a fools’ errand. Trying to invoke a Jewish concept when that concept is used in such a flawed manner as to be laughable isn't really productive.

Maintaining traditions of rabbis does not seem to be the proper process in religion where one central principle seems to be maintaining a relationship with God.
The results of such a process is to LOSE this relationship as the Jews tell us.

àWhich is why even a Jew who lives in Jerusalem today says in his prayers, "Because of our sins we were exiled from our Land." For even one who is physically in the Land of Israel, is still in galut.”

And if you read more on the Chabad site, you would learn that the goal is to reaffirm that connection which we do through interacting with the texts and studying the laws. That site also points out how maintaining the laws and rituals, as codified (not created by) by rabbis would repair that relationship with God. If you would like, I can find all sorts of stuff on the Chabad site that supports this idea. Since you take one snippet from their site, should I assume you agree with everything they say, or would you prefer to take one quote and excise it and focus on it?

If you so imbue the Chabad site with the power to determine your understanding, you can read this page https://www.chabad.org/library/arti...wish/Eternal-Love-Understanding-Tisha-BAv.htm

It creates a religion where individuals simply live according to written tradition of rabbis rather than living inside a living, thriving, ongoing revelatory and personal experience with God as was given to the Christians.

This borders on preaching and possibly proselytizing (and it ignores that no gospels have been written in many, many years, so therefore, Christianity must be a different religion - but since I don't care about Christianity, it can be different or the same, or whatever). Since I maintain that the gospels are fiction and the entire notion of Christianity is false, you really aren’t going to convince me of anything by touting how wonderful it supposedly is.

This is a different religion than modern Judaism these Jews describe as a religion : “when nearly all perceptible traces of the relationship we share with Him have vanished. We don't feel or see G‑d's love for us, and we don't really feel like His children.”.

You might want to research the phrase

You keep confusing the status of the individuals with the idea of the religion. If the people change their status but are still bound by the laws, rituals and beliefs of the religion, the religion has not changed. But, you might ask, have the laws and rituals changed as well? Yes, in a way consistent with the original rules. American laws have developed and evolved over time, always being measured against the intent of the source documents and precedent, but this doesn’t mean that the concept of American citizenship is different from what it was when men wore wigs and threw tea into the harbor.

When you claim that the two religions are the same simply because the Jews knew they were going to lose important characteristics of their original religion, doesn’t mean the two religions are the same.

Sure it does. Saying it doesn’t is meaningless. A program with an "if then" subroutine doesn't become a new program when that condition is met. It just jumps to the subroutine within the same overall program.

God can give authentic religion to a people and he can take it away :

Sure, He can. But he hasn’t. We still have it and he told us it was an eternal bond. Quoting from a non-canonical, non-Jewish text isn’t going to change that so you can feel good about your religious choices.

Knowing that these things were going to happen to Israel as they had been warned of does not mean that the modern religion the Jews have created without prophets, without revelation, without ability to produce scripture, without temple worship, without, (as the Jews say) “nearly all perceptible traces of the relationship” we share with God, without a feeling or ability to see Gods love and without the feeling that they are like his children is the same as a religion that has all of these characteristics the modern Jewish religion lacks.

Good thing we haven’t created anything, but simply continued the religion and traditions in order to reinstill that relationship by adhering to the ancient religion. Creating something only a couple of thousand years ago following some failed itinerant preacher and the fictions written about him after he fails and dies would be silly. But don’t be offended…I point out this same failing to people of other religions as well.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Any comment I have for this breaks RF rules. Congrats.

Literally no-one here thinks you're a Jew except you. You're a Christian. I don't care about your ethnicity, family background or whatever. You believe in Jesus and the NT. There are Noachides out there who are doing more Jewish things than you.

It is the great kindness of my brethren to Messianic brethren that makes me want to quit Messianism, where the rule is to love your neighbor as yourself, and to be patient and kind.

The insult to the Noahides was noted.

 

[BilliardsBall]

This is now the second time you're rolling eyes on this thread. And here I thought we Orthodox Jews were the elitists.

By the way, what mitzvot do you keep?

The mitzvot that must be kept--trust God for eternal life.

 

[Rival]

It is the great kindness of my brethren to Messianic brethren that makes me want to quit Messianism, where the rule is to love your neighbor as yourself, and to be patient and kind.

The insult to the Noahides was noted.

I didn't insult any Noachides. I said they're more Jewish than you. That's a compliment.

 

[BilliardsBall]

There are rituals involved in dealing with sin, and for loads of other reasons as well, on a daily basis.

So Lev 17:11 as quoted from Chabad.org is incorrect, we DON'T NEED BLOOD ATONEMENT, because . . . [insert Talmud "wisdom" here].

 

[rosends]

So Lev 17:11 as quoted from Chabad.org is incorrect, we DON'T NEED BLOOD ATONEMENT, because . . . [insert Talmud "wisdom" here].

the section you quoted is a section not about atonement but about giving sacrifices NOT for atonement (see verse 8, "And you should say to them: Any man of the House of Israel or of the strangers who will sojourn among them, who offers up a burnt offering or [any other] sacrifice,")
When one gives any sacrifice and eats a portion of it, one may not eat the blood because, in the context of animal-atonement sacrifices, the blood is considered an essential part. But we don't need a blood atonement for 3 reasons (and you can commence rolling your eyes because it will keep you from having to read the screen):

1. Not all sins are covered by sacrifices
2. Not all sin sacrifices had to have animals/blood
3. When there is no temple, there are no sin sacrifices

A couple of verses later, talking about sacrifices which are birds (which can also be used for sin sacrifice) the text requires that the blood be covered with dust and not eaten. Do you adhere to that also?

If you want to read up on Chabad.org's position, start here
https://www.chabad.org/library/arti...sh/Atonement-in-the-Absence-of-Sacrifices.htm

 

[Harel13]

The mitzvot that must be kept--trust God for eternal life.

So only one - faith in God?

 

[Harel13]

[insert Talmud "wisdom" here]

I inserted ignoring the rest of the Torah (AKA the Pentateuch). Is that okay?