Unknown2005-02-16 23:08:31
QUOTE(daganev @ Feb 17 2005, 07:00 AM)
As for the polythiesm aspect, I'm not an expert in polythiesm. However the polythiestic religions I do know about often have a head god who later has children who become other gods. The notion that I can throw all my gold into the fire, have it come out and be a golden calf all on its own, and to say that that is a represnetive of god is inherintly wrong.
Besides, if Jesus is god your breaking the second commandment.
Besides, if Jesus is god your breaking the second commandment.
52281
A head god, yes, but the other gods, whether they are sons and daughters or whatever, are considered singular (insofar as a god is singular) in true polytheism.
One could argue, for example, that Ancient Egypt was not actually a polytheistic culture; it had many different cults but modern study (from what I understand) indicates that all the gods hark back as a 'personification' of one original god (the sun, basically).
The Nordic Pantheon would be a good example of a polytheistic collection of gods worshipped in a polytheistic way, as far as I know.
I'm not too sure what you meant with your point about the gold and the fire, care to explain?
Daganev2005-02-16 23:25:46
In Jewish Thought, Ancient Egypt was the Opitomy of Polythiesm, that and Zoroastriansm is what I consider Judaism to be the "opposite" of.
So again, I might using the wrong word. But then, tons of books are using the wrong word, (which is all too often the case now adays)
I was making a refrence to the Golden Calf. Again, like always, there area few dissagreements of whether the epsiode of the Golden Calf was "Idolotry" or "adultrey" However, what is clear is that the process that created the golden calf was a miracle. There was no Goldsmith who shaped the idol into a calf. And it was Aaron the priest that oversaw it all.
Many would argue that since the golden calf was made via a miracle, it had G-d's seal of approval on it.
The point I was trying to make with it was probabbly seperate than from the paragraph it was in. I do that all to often.
Anyway, the point is that there is a difference with my relationship with something, and that something itself. G-d has over 26 different names in the bible. This is not to say that there are 26+ different gods, or that god has 26+ parts, nor does it mean that those 26+ are the only ones to be used. What it means is that my relationship, my prespective to G-d changes. Sometimes I want to view G-d as my Father, sometimes as my King, sometimes as my Shield and sometimes as my Saviour. What was important about the lesson of the golden calf is that one must recognize that even though your relationship changes, G-d does not change, nor can G-d be divided into any sort of parts or change, or anything else. However, like other truths in the world that our minds can not comprehend and grasp 24/7 we use language to descirbe different aspects to make communication easier.
If a person were to describe to me the Trinity like how I would describe my mother that would be fine. I.e. My mom is my mother, she is also the daughter of her Mother, but she is also the Leader of the Free world. But to say that there is a seperate physical entity that is the daughter who happens to be the SAME as another spiritual entity that is the leader of the free world, is not fine in my or most Jewish perspectives.
So again, I might using the wrong word. But then, tons of books are using the wrong word, (which is all too often the case now adays)
I was making a refrence to the Golden Calf. Again, like always, there area few dissagreements of whether the epsiode of the Golden Calf was "Idolotry" or "adultrey" However, what is clear is that the process that created the golden calf was a miracle. There was no Goldsmith who shaped the idol into a calf. And it was Aaron the priest that oversaw it all.
Many would argue that since the golden calf was made via a miracle, it had G-d's seal of approval on it.
The point I was trying to make with it was probabbly seperate than from the paragraph it was in. I do that all to often.
Anyway, the point is that there is a difference with my relationship with something, and that something itself. G-d has over 26 different names in the bible. This is not to say that there are 26+ different gods, or that god has 26+ parts, nor does it mean that those 26+ are the only ones to be used. What it means is that my relationship, my prespective to G-d changes. Sometimes I want to view G-d as my Father, sometimes as my King, sometimes as my Shield and sometimes as my Saviour. What was important about the lesson of the golden calf is that one must recognize that even though your relationship changes, G-d does not change, nor can G-d be divided into any sort of parts or change, or anything else. However, like other truths in the world that our minds can not comprehend and grasp 24/7 we use language to descirbe different aspects to make communication easier.
If a person were to describe to me the Trinity like how I would describe my mother that would be fine. I.e. My mom is my mother, she is also the daughter of her Mother, but she is also the Leader of the Free world. But to say that there is a seperate physical entity that is the daughter who happens to be the SAME as another spiritual entity that is the leader of the free world, is not fine in my or most Jewish perspectives.
Unknown2005-02-16 23:38:29
Alright I understand now. I was just confused because the Golden Calf didn't fit in with what you were saying, from my pov.
Anyway, I have been meaning to ask you something since you're obviously well versed on these topics:
My studies (aka what I have read) indicate that the very first followers of Jesus were Jews, correct? Messianic Jews, I have heard them called. Obviously these Messianic Jews shaped what is now known as Christianity and are no longer called Jews at all in the modern day.
How do you see these very first Jews who believed Jesus to be the Messiah and do you compare them to the modern Jewish groups who have come to believe in Jesus' divinity and chosen nature?
Anyway, I have been meaning to ask you something since you're obviously well versed on these topics:
My studies (aka what I have read) indicate that the very first followers of Jesus were Jews, correct? Messianic Jews, I have heard them called. Obviously these Messianic Jews shaped what is now known as Christianity and are no longer called Jews at all in the modern day.
How do you see these very first Jews who believed Jesus to be the Messiah and do you compare them to the modern Jewish groups who have come to believe in Jesus' divinity and chosen nature?
Daganev2005-02-16 23:47:56
The very first followers of Jesus were infact Jewish. However they were not by any stretch Christian.
False prophets and false messiahs have existed for centuries. The latest one, named Shabatai Tzvi was around the 1300 I think. (He lost all his followers when he converted to Islam rather than be killed)
What happened was, atleast from what I know, The Eearly Jesus followers agreed with and followed all the Laws of Judaism, they did not yet have a New Testament. They saw Jesus as thier Rebbe, and as the Messiah. They made no claims that Jesus died "For thier sins" or that Jesus was G-d. Its common in Jewish circles for people to say Christianity is really Paul's religion, and we shouldn't blame Jesus for what Paul did.
Its been written about in the L.A. times so I don't feel bad mentioning it here. There is a sect of Chasidism called Chabad. Many thought that thier Rebbe was the Messiah. After he died, many still thought that he was the messiah. (going as far as to set up a fax machine at his gravesite so when he came back he could read the prayers) However, 12 years later, its agreed that anyone who feels that he is the Messiah is basically going against all Jewish thought.
The Jewish tradition is that every generation someone is born who has the possiblity of being the Messiah. He may live up to his potential he may not. There have been many people who over the ages where labeled "Potential Messiahs" and some keep track of who thier children are to see if they can find a line to David's family tree. (One of the requirements to be the Messiah is that you are from King David's family)
False prophets and false messiahs have existed for centuries. The latest one, named Shabatai Tzvi was around the 1300 I think. (He lost all his followers when he converted to Islam rather than be killed)
What happened was, atleast from what I know, The Eearly Jesus followers agreed with and followed all the Laws of Judaism, they did not yet have a New Testament. They saw Jesus as thier Rebbe, and as the Messiah. They made no claims that Jesus died "For thier sins" or that Jesus was G-d. Its common in Jewish circles for people to say Christianity is really Paul's religion, and we shouldn't blame Jesus for what Paul did.
Its been written about in the L.A. times so I don't feel bad mentioning it here. There is a sect of Chasidism called Chabad. Many thought that thier Rebbe was the Messiah. After he died, many still thought that he was the messiah. (going as far as to set up a fax machine at his gravesite so when he came back he could read the prayers) However, 12 years later, its agreed that anyone who feels that he is the Messiah is basically going against all Jewish thought.
The Jewish tradition is that every generation someone is born who has the possiblity of being the Messiah. He may live up to his potential he may not. There have been many people who over the ages where labeled "Potential Messiahs" and some keep track of who thier children are to see if they can find a line to David's family tree. (One of the requirements to be the Messiah is that you are from King David's family)
Unknown2005-02-17 00:02:03
QUOTE(daganev @ Feb 17 2005, 10:47 AM)
The very first followers of Jesus were infact Jewish. However they were not by any stretch Christian.
Not in a modern sense, no. When I think Christian though I simply mean 'follower of Christ'. (I'll just take this oppotunity to remind Christians that christ is infact a title and not Jesus' name, just like god is a title and not a name)
Where I historically draw a distinction between Jews and Christians is where non-Jews were allowed into the Jewish faith that followed Jesus at the time without having to go through the established rituals and observences of previous 'conversions' (I forget the correct word). It was from here foward that Christianity became, more or less, simply following Jesus. A follower no longer had to adhere to the established Jewish laws.
QUOTE
What happened was, atleast from what I know, The Eearly Jesus followers agreed with and followed all the Laws of Judaism, they did not yet have a New Testament. They saw Jesus as thier Rebbe, and as the Messiah. They made no claims that Jesus died "For thier sins" or that Jesus was G-d. Its common in Jewish circles for people to say Christianity is really Paul's religion, and we shouldn't blame Jesus for what Paul did.
That's how I understand it too. Jesus was reffered to as 'teacher' in a lot of the early writing about him, and that attribution has continued until today.
If the writings of the Apostles are to be believed though, Jesus infact did state (or atleast imply) that his death was for the sins of his people (or humanity, depending on how you want to look at it).l
QUOTE
The Jewish tradition is that every generation someone is born who has the possiblity of being the Messiah. He may live up to his potential he may not. There have been many people who over the ages where labeled "Potential Messiahs" and some keep track of who thier children are to see if they can find a line to David's family tree. (One of the requirements to be the Messiah is that you are from King David's family)
52433
I find this very interesting; I've never heard of this particular tradition before.
Daganev2005-02-17 00:17:40
There is a difference between dieing for someone's sins, and having your death ease the punishment of someone's sins.
A common practice for a Rebbe is for a person to come to them and say "so and so is sick please heal them" After long discussions, the Rebbe will find a "reason" for this sickness. He will then pray to G-d that he become sick or suffer in a specific way that would relate to this person so that he may share the burden. The assumption is that when a great person is sick or failing, other people in the community suffer as well, because they do not like seeing that person sick. Thus part of the punishment that was do to the community is negated to a small degree.
Its not uncommon to say that because Great Person SoandSo died we as a community have been releaved from a worse punishment. However, any personal sin I did is still going to be punished in the full way that personal sin deserves. Its only the communal sins that are not hurt. (a communal sin would not be taking care of widows and orphans)
This is very different than the notion that since Jesus died for my sins, I no longer have to worry about having commited that sin.
There are so many traditions that I often learn of ones I've never heard before. And its rare that you hear of things unless it comes up or you spend lots of time reading the books. For example, I never heard about all the theories about consoling mourners untill a friend of the family lost Her husband and I spent the full weak with them.
A common practice for a Rebbe is for a person to come to them and say "so and so is sick please heal them" After long discussions, the Rebbe will find a "reason" for this sickness. He will then pray to G-d that he become sick or suffer in a specific way that would relate to this person so that he may share the burden. The assumption is that when a great person is sick or failing, other people in the community suffer as well, because they do not like seeing that person sick. Thus part of the punishment that was do to the community is negated to a small degree.
Its not uncommon to say that because Great Person SoandSo died we as a community have been releaved from a worse punishment. However, any personal sin I did is still going to be punished in the full way that personal sin deserves. Its only the communal sins that are not hurt. (a communal sin would not be taking care of widows and orphans)
This is very different than the notion that since Jesus died for my sins, I no longer have to worry about having commited that sin.
There are so many traditions that I often learn of ones I've never heard before. And its rare that you hear of things unless it comes up or you spend lots of time reading the books. For example, I never heard about all the theories about consoling mourners untill a friend of the family lost Her husband and I spent the full weak with them.
Unknown2005-02-17 00:25:19
Hmm ok. I can't really enter into a debate about sin (Sin?) for a few reasons. Mostly I just hate the concept of sin and punishment with a passion and I tend to become too irrationally angry when I attempt to discuss it.
Especially Original Sin. I've never heard a more silly idea in my life!
So, I'll just nod and smile on this one 
Especially Original Sin. I've never heard a more silly idea in my life!
So, I'll just nod and smile on this one
Daganev2005-02-17 00:34:41
Funny you should say that.
There is no word in Jewish Literature for sin.
I've been forced to use it because when I say transgression everyone looks at me funny.
Original sin is just another reason why Jews say "cause we don't" when asked why they don't believe in Jesus.
There is no word in Jewish Literature for sin.
I've been forced to use it because when I say transgression everyone looks at me funny.
Original sin is just another reason why Jews say "cause we don't" when asked why they don't believe in Jesus.
Kree2005-02-17 05:08:00
Okay back up a little fer meh. Please can any of the believers of creationism tell me how you can accept an all knowing all powerful being who created everything we see, taste, touch, hear and most likely a multitude of other things we as humans will never experience, can you tell me why you deny evolution so fervently? Is your god not powerful enough to set up a system which could be left alone to grow and change? Is it really so inconceivable that we may not have always looked the same or acted the same, and over time changed? We've seen it proven that evolution is a reality. Look at species with sub groups isolated from one another. You'll notice differences. That is evolution. And it really seems to me it would take a god to set up a system such as the one in which we all live.
As to sin and original sin. Heh to me it's all rules made up by weak men who could not control themselves without very strict social conventions.
As to sin and original sin. Heh to me it's all rules made up by weak men who could not control themselves without very strict social conventions.
Daganev2005-02-17 05:13:52
How do I repeat myself properly?
What I call "evolution" has the basic premise that random mutations turned a single cell organism into a Dolphin.
What is being called "Creationism" has the basic premise that random mutations couldn't turn a single celled organism into a tapeworm.
I find the basic and most important difference between these views is that if things are not random, that means there is a reason, and if there is a reason there is something that you can learn from the changes for our own technologies.
When its random there is little to learn but history and how.
What I call "evolution" has the basic premise that random mutations turned a single cell organism into a Dolphin.
What is being called "Creationism" has the basic premise that random mutations couldn't turn a single celled organism into a tapeworm.
I find the basic and most important difference between these views is that if things are not random, that means there is a reason, and if there is a reason there is something that you can learn from the changes for our own technologies.
When its random there is little to learn but history and how.
Unknown2005-02-17 05:35:40
Hail Entropy!
Hail Eris!
Hail Eris!
Daganev2005-02-17 05:37:46
yeah, I always wondered how entropy and evolution both exist.
However, if you go to my theory of a perfect infinite being having all opposites... it makes sense!
However, if you go to my theory of a perfect infinite being having all opposites... it makes sense!
Unknown2005-02-17 05:43:30
QUOTE(daganev @ Feb 17 2005, 04:37 PM)
However, if you go to my theory of a perfect infinite being having all opposites... it makes sense!
52677
By having all opposites do you mean being? An infinite being would be all of it's opposites (kinda negates the word opposite, when they become one, doesn't it?).
Daganev2005-02-17 05:54:37
Allow me to make a long post so that I can explain myself using someone else's words.
Everything in is my additions.
"
First, an overview of the Kabbalistic World System:
In order to have a place where to make the World, G-d made a Lessening in His Infinite Light.
This Lessening is called the Tzimtzum.
After the Tzimzum was left over an Impression of the original Infinite Light which is called the R'shimu
This is the Tzimzum U'Rshimu
From the Reshimu which is also called the Point came The Kav VaChut (The line) of Light.
That is, the finite Ray of the Infinite Light Which brings the Worlds into Being.
And from the Line was created A"K - Adam Kadmon - Primal Man or Man of Creation which is the General Crown or Will for he Will
From A"k is revealed The Particular Crowns Attik and Arich - Delight and Will and the world of Atzilus - Emanation. This is the world of the Primal Sephiros
From there are created the Consecutive Worlds of
Bria - Creation
Yetzirah - Formation
Assiah - Action or Making
In these three worlds the Divine Light becomes grosser and grosser in order to finally enter the World of the Qlipah - the Astrological Universe i.e our Universe which is the Physical Universe.
Then, in our Universe, the influence comes down from the Upper Circle through the Constellations and Stars down to Earth.
In the Kabbalistic Astrology/Astronomy system, the Earth is usually considered the stationary center of the Universe, with the heavens and heavenly bodies revolving around it. In several places in the Kabbalistic books, it is stated that the Earth revolves around the sun but this is considered to be true only within the relativistic setting of the solar system. The actual Absolute Center of the Universe is the place of the Holy of Holies of the Temple in Jerusalem (may it be rebuilt speedily in our days).
The revolutions of the Heavens influence us down here. Some of these influences are very obvious - e.g. the revolution of the Sun around the Earth causes night and day. The revolution of the Moon causes the tides of the Waters. The revolution of the Earth around the Sun through the twelve signs of the Zodiac cause the Seasons. Recently we've had some hurricanes. These were caused by the revolutions of the heavens and obviously affected many peoples lives.
The various climates on Earth are a result of where one is located under the sky. So at the poles it is extremely cold and at the equator it is hot. These climates also affect the food chain. It is well known that certain places are especially good for growing grapes or apples etc.
The above are very obvious effects of the Sky upon life on Earth. However Kabbalistic Astrology teaches that the Heavenly influences affect us in much more subtle ways. Even a person's character is affected by when and where he is born.
However, Kaballistic Astrology is not Fatalistic. The universe is a backdrop to our actions but within its framework we have a choice of good or bad. So, for instance, a person who is influenced by Mars - a blood sign - can become a murderer or a surgeon Please remember that these posts are not meant to explain Astrology but rather the relationship of Astrology to the Kabbalah
"
Within the Tzimzum on the world of Aysiah all opposites must exist in order for the infinite light to remain perfect. On the higher level of Atzilut the light would become more pure and indeed there would be no opposites.
Everything in is my additions.
"
First, an overview of the Kabbalistic World System:
In order to have a place where to make the World, G-d made a Lessening in His Infinite Light.
This Lessening is called the Tzimtzum.
After the Tzimzum was left over an Impression of the original Infinite Light which is called the R'shimu
This is the Tzimzum U'Rshimu
From the Reshimu which is also called the Point came The Kav VaChut (The line) of Light.
That is, the finite Ray of the Infinite Light Which brings the Worlds into Being.
And from the Line was created A"K - Adam Kadmon - Primal Man or Man of Creation which is the General Crown or Will for he Will
From A"k is revealed The Particular Crowns Attik and Arich - Delight and Will and the world of Atzilus - Emanation. This is the world of the Primal Sephiros
From there are created the Consecutive Worlds of
Bria - Creation
Yetzirah - Formation
Assiah - Action or Making
In these three worlds the Divine Light becomes grosser and grosser in order to finally enter the World of the Qlipah - the Astrological Universe i.e our Universe which is the Physical Universe.
Then, in our Universe, the influence comes down from the Upper Circle through the Constellations and Stars down to Earth.
In the Kabbalistic Astrology/Astronomy system, the Earth is usually considered the stationary center of the Universe, with the heavens and heavenly bodies revolving around it. In several places in the Kabbalistic books, it is stated that the Earth revolves around the sun but this is considered to be true only within the relativistic setting of the solar system. The actual Absolute Center of the Universe is the place of the Holy of Holies of the Temple in Jerusalem (may it be rebuilt speedily in our days).
The revolutions of the Heavens influence us down here. Some of these influences are very obvious - e.g. the revolution of the Sun around the Earth causes night and day. The revolution of the Moon causes the tides of the Waters. The revolution of the Earth around the Sun through the twelve signs of the Zodiac cause the Seasons. Recently we've had some hurricanes. These were caused by the revolutions of the heavens and obviously affected many peoples lives.
The various climates on Earth are a result of where one is located under the sky. So at the poles it is extremely cold and at the equator it is hot. These climates also affect the food chain. It is well known that certain places are especially good for growing grapes or apples etc.
The above are very obvious effects of the Sky upon life on Earth. However Kabbalistic Astrology teaches that the Heavenly influences affect us in much more subtle ways. Even a person's character is affected by when and where he is born.
However, Kaballistic Astrology is not Fatalistic. The universe is a backdrop to our actions but within its framework we have a choice of good or bad. So, for instance, a person who is influenced by Mars - a blood sign - can become a murderer or a surgeon Please remember that these posts are not meant to explain Astrology but rather the relationship of Astrology to the Kabbalah
"
Within the Tzimzum on the world of Aysiah all opposites must exist in order for the infinite light to remain perfect. On the higher level of Atzilut the light would become more pure and indeed there would be no opposites.
Rhysus2005-02-17 05:55:40
Governing dynamics of self assembling complex systems. Read "The Physics of Immortality" for a means by which chaos and evolution can peacefully coexist.
Daganev2005-02-17 06:00:30
An infinite source of energy to creat computers that run similuated infinite universes?
And where are you going to gather infinite energy in a finite closed universe?
And then I find this... Go Tipler!
And where are you going to gather infinite energy in a finite closed universe?
And then I find this... Go Tipler!
Unknown2005-02-17 06:18:09
Daganev traditions and Jewish principales mean squat. Jesus being God could create a system so that anyone who believes in him will be made righteous and without sin. God can do as he wishes your argument is moot because its from a Jewish perspective, naturally a biased one.
As for the link you posted about Isaiah, its so biased that the author has no real merit. His interpretation although a valid one doesn't mean it is the Truth of what Isaiah said. Therefore that argument is moot and I also won't use it as an argument until further notice.
Now you keep mentioning God is infinite without anything to back it up, many trained theologians will note, as that Atheist pointed out, to have God be infinite is to have a warped view of what God is, you claimed some Jewish people will go as far as to claim God is the known world. We as Christians conform our beliefs to fit Scripture while Jews from what ive gathered so far do the opposite.
Physics have explained to us that YHWH can be within our Universe and outside at the same time because there exist multiple time dimensions. With Just two time dimensions the possibilities are endless and as such YHWH could exist in 3 forms that coexist at the same time within different dimensions. The Holy Spirit or what is referred to YHWH in the OT is the form by which he travels through ALL dimensions and this doesn't mean God is infinite. That statement has problems associated with it that you haven't even considered yet, not to mention Modern Physics has already revealed to us that there exist many dimensions especially Time dimensions which are important.
Finally you are very mistaken on Jesus's disciples, who very much believed Jesus was in fact God. In fact I'm appalled that you would attribute Paul with any wrong doing just because you can't accept Christ as the Lord. The fact is Jesus already prophesied that Jewish people wouldn't believe Him, while many Gentiles(non-Jew's) would gladly accept Him. Jesus also states why certain people refuse to believe in Him, and will be caste into Sheol for not believing. Also majority of the disciples were killed in gruesome manner because frankly they believed they had seen Jesus resurrect and appear to them. Peter I believe was crucified upside down and St. Bartholomew was skinned alive to note a few.
Also as one more attempt to show how Jewish logic is flawed(I mean this to only inform you of the Truth and not to insult), take a look at what John Gill had to say:
Firstly Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the laws of the prophets.
Mat 5:17 Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled. Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
He came to fulfill Prophecy
the prophecy of place of birth micah 5:2 fulfillment Mat 2:1-6
lineage Jereiah 23:5 fulfillment acts 13:22-23
Prophet priest king Deut 18:17-19 psalm 110:4-4
fulfillment acts 3:20-23 hebrews 7:17 8:1
fore runner john the baptist Isiaah 40:3-4 fulfillment Luke 3:2-5
triumphal entry Zechariah 9:9 fulfillment mat 21:1-9
Death by Crucifixion Psalm 22:16-18 34:20 fulfillment john 19:18-37
Died for others guilt Isaiah 53:4-12 fulfillment 1Peter 2:21-25
Buried in rich mans tomb Isaiah 53:9 fulfillment mat 27:57-60
Resurrection Psalm 16:10 fulfillment acts 2:24-32
As for kosher
Act 10:14 - But Peter said, not so, Lord,.... God forbid I should do this, so contrary to the law of God, and to my own practice, throughout the whole course of my life:
for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean; in a ceremonial sense, which was in common use with Gentiles, but unclean by the law of Moses: this shows that Peter as yet closely adhered to the ceremonial law, nor did he know that it was abolished by Christ; and notwithstanding the commission given to him and the rest of the apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature, and the extraordinary gifts of speaking with divers tongues for that purpose, bestowed on them at the day of Pentecost; yet he and they remained greatly strangers to the calling of the Gentiles, and the admitting of them to a civil and religious conversation with them; the knowledge of every truth was not at once communicated to them, but gradually, as it pressed the Lord to enlighten their minds.
Act 10:15 - And the voice spake unto him again the second time,.... The following words,
what God hath cleansed; that is, hath pronounced clean and lawful to be used, as he now had all sorts of food, Mat 15:11 Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a man; but that which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.
that call not thou common; or pronounce it to be unholy or unclean, and unlawful to be used: and the same holds good of men, as well as things; for as hereby the Lord instructed Peter, that there was nothing of itself common, or unclean, and unfit for use; so that no man, not any Gentile, Barbarian, Scythian, or be he who he would, was common or unclean, and his company to be avoided as such. Distinctions both of men and meats were now to be laid aside; and the Jews themselves own, that what is now unclean, will be clean in the time to come, or the times of the Messiah; they say (f),
"every beast which is unclean in this world,
the holy blessed God מטהר ×ותה,
cleanses it, in the time to come, (the times of the Messiah,) as they were at first clean to the sons of Noah Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herb. wherefore, as the herb was clean to all, and as the beasts were clean to the sons of Noah; so also in the time to come he will loose what he has bound, or forbidden.''
And particularly they observe, that a swine is call הזיר from הזר, "to return", because the Lord will return it unto Israel. (g).
-john gill
As for the link you posted about Isaiah, its so biased that the author has no real merit. His interpretation although a valid one doesn't mean it is the Truth of what Isaiah said. Therefore that argument is moot and I also won't use it as an argument until further notice.
Now you keep mentioning God is infinite without anything to back it up, many trained theologians will note, as that Atheist pointed out, to have God be infinite is to have a warped view of what God is, you claimed some Jewish people will go as far as to claim God is the known world. We as Christians conform our beliefs to fit Scripture while Jews from what ive gathered so far do the opposite.
Physics have explained to us that YHWH can be within our Universe and outside at the same time because there exist multiple time dimensions. With Just two time dimensions the possibilities are endless and as such YHWH could exist in 3 forms that coexist at the same time within different dimensions. The Holy Spirit or what is referred to YHWH in the OT is the form by which he travels through ALL dimensions and this doesn't mean God is infinite. That statement has problems associated with it that you haven't even considered yet, not to mention Modern Physics has already revealed to us that there exist many dimensions especially Time dimensions which are important.
Finally you are very mistaken on Jesus's disciples, who very much believed Jesus was in fact God. In fact I'm appalled that you would attribute Paul with any wrong doing just because you can't accept Christ as the Lord. The fact is Jesus already prophesied that Jewish people wouldn't believe Him, while many Gentiles(non-Jew's) would gladly accept Him. Jesus also states why certain people refuse to believe in Him, and will be caste into Sheol for not believing. Also majority of the disciples were killed in gruesome manner because frankly they believed they had seen Jesus resurrect and appear to them. Peter I believe was crucified upside down and St. Bartholomew was skinned alive to note a few.
Also as one more attempt to show how Jewish logic is flawed(I mean this to only inform you of the Truth and not to insult), take a look at what John Gill had to say:
Firstly Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the laws of the prophets.
Mat 5:17 Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled. Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
He came to fulfill Prophecy
the prophecy of place of birth micah 5:2 fulfillment Mat 2:1-6
lineage Jereiah 23:5 fulfillment acts 13:22-23
Prophet priest king Deut 18:17-19 psalm 110:4-4
fulfillment acts 3:20-23 hebrews 7:17 8:1
fore runner john the baptist Isiaah 40:3-4 fulfillment Luke 3:2-5
triumphal entry Zechariah 9:9 fulfillment mat 21:1-9
Death by Crucifixion Psalm 22:16-18 34:20 fulfillment john 19:18-37
Died for others guilt Isaiah 53:4-12 fulfillment 1Peter 2:21-25
Buried in rich mans tomb Isaiah 53:9 fulfillment mat 27:57-60
Resurrection Psalm 16:10 fulfillment acts 2:24-32
As for kosher
Act 10:14 - But Peter said, not so, Lord,.... God forbid I should do this, so contrary to the law of God, and to my own practice, throughout the whole course of my life:
for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean; in a ceremonial sense, which was in common use with Gentiles, but unclean by the law of Moses: this shows that Peter as yet closely adhered to the ceremonial law, nor did he know that it was abolished by Christ; and notwithstanding the commission given to him and the rest of the apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature, and the extraordinary gifts of speaking with divers tongues for that purpose, bestowed on them at the day of Pentecost; yet he and they remained greatly strangers to the calling of the Gentiles, and the admitting of them to a civil and religious conversation with them; the knowledge of every truth was not at once communicated to them, but gradually, as it pressed the Lord to enlighten their minds.
Act 10:15 - And the voice spake unto him again the second time,.... The following words,
what God hath cleansed; that is, hath pronounced clean and lawful to be used, as he now had all sorts of food, Mat 15:11 Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a man; but that which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.
that call not thou common; or pronounce it to be unholy or unclean, and unlawful to be used: and the same holds good of men, as well as things; for as hereby the Lord instructed Peter, that there was nothing of itself common, or unclean, and unfit for use; so that no man, not any Gentile, Barbarian, Scythian, or be he who he would, was common or unclean, and his company to be avoided as such. Distinctions both of men and meats were now to be laid aside; and the Jews themselves own, that what is now unclean, will be clean in the time to come, or the times of the Messiah; they say (f),
"every beast which is unclean in this world,
the holy blessed God מטהר ×ותה,
cleanses it, in the time to come, (the times of the Messiah,) as they were at first clean to the sons of Noah Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herb. wherefore, as the herb was clean to all, and as the beasts were clean to the sons of Noah; so also in the time to come he will loose what he has bound, or forbidden.''
And particularly they observe, that a swine is call הזיר from הזר, "to return", because the Lord will return it unto Israel. (g).
-john gill
Kree2005-02-17 06:18:55
Shoulda known better than to get into a discussion such as this, anyone could present a good arguement for any point of view. At least in person we could throttle each other to see who is right
In case none of you could tell that was humor heh. Well sorta...
See you all in Lusternia
In case none of you could tell that was humor heh. Well sorta...
See you all in Lusternia
Daganev2005-02-17 06:25:02
If the Jewish perspective is null and void than why quote the old testement, use Hebrew and in otherwise try to use Jewish sources to prove the divinity and Trinity of your god and Jesus?
I don't mention Judaism at all when discusing Hindu ideas.
You asked why Jews don't believe in Jesus and I explained to you from the Jewish perspective why Jews find it absured to believe in Jesus.
That does not negate your right to believe, in addition I believe that you will be fully rewarded to the extent that you think you should for following your beliefs.
Jews are unique, they are given unique laws and those laws and perspectives are in no way binding to anyone who is not Jewish.
I don't mention Judaism at all when discusing Hindu ideas.
You asked why Jews don't believe in Jesus and I explained to you from the Jewish perspective why Jews find it absured to believe in Jesus.
That does not negate your right to believe, in addition I believe that you will be fully rewarded to the extent that you think you should for following your beliefs.
Jews are unique, they are given unique laws and those laws and perspectives are in no way binding to anyone who is not Jewish.
Unknown2005-02-17 06:30:43
I said Jewish perspective is biased, not null, your principles and traditions some of which we christians believe have been declared null and John Gill already states why. Prophets are Word of God, traditions and principles in of themselves don't have to come from God but could have been implimented by anyone and assimilated.
