Find me a home (now focusing on biblical Israel & the talmud)

[Rhyfelwyr]

The Jews living in medieval Muslim lands kept their religion due to this interpretation, so I wouldn't say it's just mine.

The reasons for peoples' spirituality are their own.

Well I didn't mean it was limited to you individually, but it is one of several interpretations.

This is the Backroom, I couldn't have the discussion ending in a consensus!

[drone]

This is the Backroom, I couldn't have the discussion ending in a consensus!

Thread needs moar Navaros.

[Big_John]

Move to Oklahoma, the cost of living is cheap, we are not in a recession and the center of the state is a nice mix of liberal conservatives and conservative liberals. I will help pay your way and you can come over as a "guest worker," and my wife could set you up with one of her hawt bioengineer korean cousins.

i speak as an oklahoman. if you ever consider moving to that state, frag, just hang yourself an be done with it.

[Ironside]

Well I didn't mean it was limited to you individually, but it is one of several interpretations.

This is the Backroom, I couldn't have the discussion ending in a consensus!

Can be worth notincing that in the early fourteenth century, Islam was still considered heretical and not an own religion, at least in some places. Dante is certainly doing it. The Sixth Circle of hell is with minarets and Muhammed is punished for causing a schism (in Christianity).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Can be worth notincing that in the early fourteenth century, Islam was still considered heretical and not an own religion, at least in some places. Dante is certainly doing it. The Sixth Circle of hell is with minarets and Muhammed is punished for causing a schism (in Christianity).

Bluntly, in Christian theology Mohammed is a heretic, in Jewish theology Jesus is the same. In Christian theology Jews are unrepentant.

None of the three are therefore unreconcilable to each other.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Bluntly, in Christian theology Mohammed is a heretic, in Jewish theology Jesus is the same. In Christian theology Jews are unrepentant.

None of the three are therefore unreconcilable to each other.

Many Christians believe that the Jews are still saved, since they are God's chosen people and are covered by Christ's blood. They rejected Christ as the prophecies said, but he will still be their messiah.

Also, I can't speak for them, but do most Jews not consider Christians beliefs to be somewhat genuine, in that they are still worshipping Yahweh, but obviously without the customs of ethnic Israel?

Can't say the same for Islam though.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Many Christians believe that the Jews are still saved, since they are God's chosen people and are covered by Christ's blood. They rejected Christ as the prophecies said, but he will still be their messiah.

Also, I can't speak for them, but do most Jews not consider Christians beliefs to be somewhat genuine, in that they are still worshipping Yahweh, but obviously without the customs of ethnic Israel?

Can't say the same for Islam though.

I've only heard this from you, it doesn't seem to ake any sense, that the Jews should be marked out as special and judged seperately by God after the coming of Christ.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I've only heard this from you, it doesn't seem to ake any sense, that the Jews should be marked out as special and judged seperately by God after the coming of Christ.

The scripture does indicate that the people of Israel will be saved in the end:

"And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me." (Jeremiah 33:8)

"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:" (Romans 11:26)

Since these verses speak of the end times, it is likely that the resumation of sacrifices at the temple could be symbollic of the salvation of Israel, since their sins are once again being covered (possibly in fact by the blood of Christ), just as they were thousands of years ago.

The Jews are God's chosen people after all. I think that it is not surprising that they rejected Christ, God does say they are a stiffnecked people, and the Jewish customs were important in maintaining the identity of the Jewish people when they were dispersed and persecuted like the prophets said. Thanks to that, they are now back in the promised land, just like the prophets said, and God can put His plan for their salvation into action.

I do not think Jews will be judged differently from Gentiles, but due to the earthly inheritance of the Jews, God's organised things so that they worship Him a little differently, that is all.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I fail t see how any of this makes the Jews in any way a special case.

1. Some Jews converted, therefore "Israel" will be saved.

2. Acts makes it quite clear, from Peter's dream, Cornelius' conversion and the subsequent council in Jerusalem that God does not play favourites. Whatever special inheritence the Son's of Israel were promised, they seem to have had it.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I fail t see how any of this makes the Jews in any way a special case.

The whole OT is about how they are special to God, and there is nothing to suggest that this is no longer the case.

1. Some Jews converted, therefore "Israel" will be saved.

How would Israel be saved if only some Jews are saved? Notice how Paul says "all Israel will be saved".

2. Acts makes it quite clear, from Peter's dream, Cornelius' conversion and the subsequent council in Jerusalem that God does not play favourites. Whatever special inheritence the Son's of Israel were promised, they seem to have had it.

How? What about the prophecies in Revelation about how Israel will be gathered together from the four corners of the world and returned to their inheritance shortly prior to the Second Coming? It's happening isn't it? Also, the Council of Jerusalem still orders that some of the Jewish customs be kept, but that doesn't mean we keep them nowadays. Paul may have been influenced by Hellenic Judaism in his travels prior to the council, which emphasised the "circumcision of the heart" over the literal kind. Also, early Christians were often divided along Jew/Gentile lines, Jews kept their ethnic customs while Gentiles did not adopt them. Paul simply argues against the judaizing sects such as those seen in Galatians, which demanded that Gentiles had to be circumcised in order to be saved. He condemned them for trying to justify themselves by the law, but he never did the same to Christians who were ethnic Jews.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I see no reason to prefer Paul over Peter when the two disagree, as they do here:

I refer to Acts 10-11, but specifically to 10.34-5, "Then Peter began to speak to them: 'I truly understand that God shows no partiallity, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ - he is Lord of all."

This follows Peter's dream, where God revokes Mosac Law and sends Peter to the Gentiles, 10.9-16; then it is followed by the Holy Spirit coming upon those to whom Peter is speaking, to the great astonishment of the Jew with Peter. Peter then baptises them, 10.44-8.

It is this event that precipitates the debate in Jerusalem, because Peter flouts Mosaic Law by not only accociating with, but eating with, non-Jews.

So, I say again:

How is it that the Jews are set apart to be saved in a different way, by a different standard.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I see no reason to prefer Paul over Peter when the two disagree, as they do here:

I refer to Acts 10-11, but specifically to 10.34-5, "Then Peter began to speak to them: 'I truly understand that God shows no partiallity, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ - he is Lord of all."

But Jews do fear Yahweh. The verse says God will not show partiality to those who fear Him, but that doesn't mean we can't fear/worship Him in different ways. In Heaven God will make no distinction between Jew and Gentile, but the Pentateuch is very clear that the Jews have a special set of customs based on an everlasting covenant.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with this argument, since everyone from the Puritans to Pope John Paul II acknowledged that the Mosaic Covenant was not made redundant by Paul's stating that it should not be seen as necessary for salvation. The customs still have a wordly value, like the land of Israel.

This follows Peter's dream, where God revokes Mosac Law and sends Peter to the Gentiles, 10.9-16; then it is followed by the Holy Spirit coming upon those to whom Peter is speaking, to the great astonishment of the Jew with Peter. Peter then baptises them, 10.44-8.

It is this event that precipitates the debate in Jerusalem, because Peter flouts Mosaic Law by not only accociating with, but eating with, non-Jews.

So, I say again:

How is it that the Jews are set apart to be saved in a different way, by a different standard.

I think it is so that the Jews could keep their identity and be be taken back to Israel (while we can argue over their salvation, God never takes away their inheritance on earth). God is pretty clear that their inheritance in the Holy Land lasts forever:

"And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."

And He is also clear that they will be dispersed before they return to their inheritance:

"And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste."

No other people on earth has been dispersed, persecuted, and still returned to their homeland like Israel. All those fanciful commandments and laws God gave to them, to be "a statute unto your people", they have been kept so that the Jews could be gathered together before the end. Otherwise, they would have been assimilated like any other people.

Jews aren't saved in a different way, they are covered by the blood of Christ just like the rest of us. But for the sake of His plan for this world, they have their own traditions etc.

[Kralizec]

Hooahguy, I've heard/read conflicting things about jewish beliefs regarding the afterlife. Do (most) jews believe in heaven and/or hell?

[Hooahguy]

Hooahguy, I've heard/read conflicting things about jewish beliefs regarding the afterlife. Do (most) jews believe in heaven and/or hell?

yes, most do.

[Hooahguy]

Hooahguy's whole argument is that some human, claiming to have insight into God's wishes, tells people it's ok to burn/rape/pillage in his name, it's all good. Thus justifying holy war, pogroms, militant Islamic terror, the works.

And he also doesn't like to share.

actually only kill. to rape them would be impure. just sayin'

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

But Jews do fear Yahweh. The verse says God will not show partiality to those who fear Him, but that doesn't mean we can't fear/worship Him in different ways. In Heaven God will make no distinction between Jew and Gentile, but the Pentateuch is very clear that the Jews have a special set of customs based on an everlasting covenant.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with this argument, since everyone from the Puritans to Pope John Paul II acknowledged that the Mosaic Covenant was not made redundant by Paul's stating that it should not be seen as necessary for salvation. The customs still have a wordly value, like the land of Israel.

From Acts, from Mathew, the Sermon on the Mount, from Mark and John. Time and again Jesus rejects the Law as a law for a hard-hearted people, not pleaseing to God.

As to the Jews fearing God, well that's debatable in a Christian context, when God sent prophets they were rejected.

I think it is so that the Jews could keep their identity and be be taken back to Israel (while we can argue over their salvation, God never takes away their inheritance on earth). God is pretty clear that their inheritance in the Holy Land lasts forever:

"And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."

And He is also clear that they will be dispersed before they return to their inheritance:

"And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste."

No other people on earth has been dispersed, persecuted, and still returned to their homeland like Israel. All those fanciful commandments and laws God gave to them, to be "a statute unto your people", they have been kept so that the Jews could be gathered together before the end. Otherwise, they would have been assimilated like any other people.

Jews aren't saved in a different way, they are covered by the blood of Christ just like the rest of us. But for the sake of His plan for this world, they have their own traditions etc.

I'm pretty sure everything you quote here is from before Babylon, or at least refers to that. In which case it has arguably already happened in 500 BC.

I'm not saying Mosaic Law should be abandoned wholesale, but consider this:

If a Jew converts to Christianity are his marriage vows regulated by Mosaic Law or Christ's Law?

[Rhyfelwyr]

From Acts, from Mathew, the Sermon on the Mount, from Mark and John. Time and again Jesus rejects the Law as a law for a hard-hearted people, not pleaseing to God.

As to the Jews fearing God, well that's debatable in a Christian context, when God sent prophets they were rejected.

Of course, Jews are no more capable of keeping the laws than the rest of us. Also, Jesus does not reject the law as such, he simply says that it is now written on our hearts. The reason for the New Covenant is not that the laws are invalid, but simply that no man would save himself by adherence to the laws as the Old Covenants were designed for. God's covenant with the Israelities is everlasting, it cannot be overruled by the New Covenant. They could even be complementary, in that Christ's blood has covered the sins of the Jews since the sacrifices began (here I go with my dramatic "lamb slain before time stuff again"!).

I'm pretty sure everything you quote here is from before Babylon, or at least refers to that. In which case it has arguably already happened in 500 BC.

But sir, that is preterism! Preterists ignore significant parts of the prophecies, although I could sympathise with the historicist position, that some of the events have already happened.

I'm not saying Mosaic Law should be abandoned wholesale, but consider this:

If a Jew converts to Christianity are his marriage vows regulated by Mosaic Law or Christ's Law?

In Matthew, Jewish Christians stick to the Mosaic law, while the Greek Christians do not. The command for Jewish Christians hearkens back to Mosaic Law:

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." (Matthew 19:9)

Whereas when asked for his own opinion on divorce by the pharisees, Jesus simply says that what God makes should not be broken, and that the Jews were given their commandments on divorce because of the "heardness of their hearts".

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Of course, Jews are no more capable of keeping the laws than the rest of us. Also, Jesus does not reject the law as such, he simply says that it is now written on our hearts. The reason for the New Covenant is not that the laws are invalid, but simply that no man would save himself by adherence to the laws as the Old Covenants were designed for. God's covenant with the Israelities is everlasting, it cannot be overruled by the New Covenant. They could even be complementary, in that Christ's blood has covered the sins of the Jews since the sacrifices began (here I go with my dramatic "lamb slain before time stuff again"!).

You're still sliding around the issue.

Are the conditions for salvation different for Jews under Christ's law, yes or no?

Right now you seem to be saying yes, a position inconsistant with your normal evangelical religion, and with your rejection of Muslims.

But sir, that is preterism! Preterists ignore significant parts of the prophecies, although I could sympathise with the historicist position, that some of the events have already happened.

Prophecies are never listened to and never understood. Isaiah was believed to prophecy a temporal salvation after Babylon, but Jesus explicitely rejected that interpretation.

In Matthew, Jewish Christians stick to the Mosaic law, while the Greek Christians do not. The command for Jewish Christians hearkens back to Mosaic Law:

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." (Matthew 19:9)

Whereas when asked for his own opinion on divorce by the pharisees, Jesus simply says that what God makes should not be broken, and that the Jews were given their commandments on divorce because of the "heardness of their hearts".

Which is his own opinion?

Do they represent a developement of the Message?

You have not answered my question.

Which law binds a Jewish Christian?

[AlexanderSextus]

Just stay at home Fragony. Your country may have problems, but at least they are your problems.

I concur. You live in the netherlands. Scared of Terrorism? Go smoke a joint. Worried about Islamisation? Smoke a Joint.

You are safer from terrorism in a Dutch Coffee Shop than anywhere else in the world.

[Rhyfelwyr]

You're still sliding around the issue.

Are the conditions for salvation different for Jews under Christ's law, yes or no?

Right now you seem to be saying yes, a position inconsistant with your normal evangelical religion, and with your rejection of Muslims.

The conditions for salvation are not different. The way they worship in this world is.

Prophecies are never listened to and never understood. Isaiah was believed to prophecy a temporal salvation after Babylon, but Jesus explicitely rejected that interpretation.

Well the best we can do is try to understand them as best as we can. Right now, preterism has some major gaps which is why it is not taken very seriously.

Which is his own opinion?

Do they represent a developement of the Message?

You have not answered my question.

Which law binds a Jewish Christian?

If they have become a Christian (as we use the word), then Christ's law. The New Covenant is the fulfillment of the previous ones, an expansion of the law into something less tradition orientated and more complete.

However, the prophecies are clear that the Jews will not worship Christ as we do (generally speaking), but they still have their everlasting Covenant with God, and are promised their place up there with Abraham. If Jews are not saved under the Old Covenant, does this mean no character in the Old Testament is saved!? Surely not!

Of course, this does not mean that they could be saved by adherence to the laws thousands of years ago, any more than they could be today. Which is why I think that Christ's sacrifice must cover them, otherwise how do we explain the fact that so many Jews are/were saved?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The conditions for salvation are not different. The way they worship in this world is.

For everyone else, acceptence of Christ is required for salvation, according to you. If Jews are exempt then the rules are different for them.

Well the best we can do is try to understand them as best as we can. Right now, preterism has some major gaps which is why it is not taken very seriously.

That which God has decreed will come to pass. Prophecy is largely a sign of God's power, it has little or no practical application, until it is fulfilled.

If they have become a Christian (as we use the word), then Christ's law. The New Covenant is the fulfillment of the previous ones, an expansion of the law into something less tradition orientated and more complete.

However, the prophecies are clear that the Jews will not worship Christ as we do (generally speaking), but they still have their everlasting Covenant with God, and are promised their place up there with Abraham. If Jews are not saved under the Old Covenant, does this mean no character in the Old Testament is saved!? Surely not!

Of course, this does not mean that they could be saved by adherence to the laws thousands of years ago, any more than they could be today. Which is why I think that Christ's sacrifice must cover them, otherwise how do we explain the fact that so many Jews are/were saved?

Well, in John, Christ says that the only one who has entered Heaven is he who has come from Heaven.

A while back you argued strenuously that Christ was the only Way and the Gate, now you sacrifice that principle to try to fit all the scripture together?

Scripture is never going to fit together, it's a part of our world, and therefore imperfect and incomplete.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Sorry early rise tomorrow so I can't have an epic duel tonight but...

Well, in John, Christ says that the only one who has entered Heaven is he who has come from Heaven.

A while back you argued strenuously that Christ was the only Way and the Gate, now you sacrifice that principle to try to fit all the scripture together?

Scripture is never going to fit together, it's a part of our world, and therefore imperfect and incomplete.

I think when I said this someone else commented that they could still be honouring Christ, but in a different way. Though they don't say it, we do know that they are in fact worshipping the trinitarian God, surely that is significant?