U.S. Christians back Israel with petition
Jerry Gordon comment: Pastor Hagee and 100,000 members of Christians United for Israel (CUFI) demonstrated their solidarity behind Israel with this petition to Congress. That is more than the useless idiots at J Street bankrolled by George Soros and cheer-lead by the likes of Timesman Roger Cohen would do. If anything J Street, Soros and Cohen are the direct opposite of CUFI. They would demonize Israel into extinction. And these are Jews? No they are shtadtlanim and worse, traitors.
WASHINGTON (JTA) March 24, 2009 — More than 100,000 American Christians have signed a petition expressing solidarity with Israel.
The petition, organized by Pastor John Hagee’s group Christians United for Israel, was presented Tuesday to members of Congress.
It states that “there is no excuse for acts of terrorism against Israel and Israel has the same right as every other nation to defend her citizens from such violent attacks.
The petition goes on to say that its signers pledge to speak out on behalf of their “brothers and sisters in Israel” whenever and wherever necessary “until the attacks stop and they are finally living in peace and security with their neighbors.”
In a statement, Hagee said, “As our leaders in Washington make decisions about American foreign policy in the Middle East, it is important for them to know that Christians across the country remain solidly committed to a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.”
On John Hagee: Listen!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V1bplJxGkY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct4_ze_FjNo&NR=1
Hagee at his best and who is the Lamb of God?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_LXmq1ir7A
Comment by yamit82 — March 25, 2009 @ 6:51 am
“And these are Jews? No they are shtadtlanim and worse, traitors.”
– Jerry Gordon.
No, Jerry — these ARE Jews, and the sooner other Jews realize it, the sooner they will be able to dig themselves out of the hole they’ve made for themselves. If you start trying to cut off Jews who don’t agree with you politically, where does it end? Whom do you cut off next — those who don’t observe Shabbat? What then? Those who don’t wear kippot? then those who have white tsitsit instead of blue, or blue instead of white? Those who think the Lubavitcher Rebbe is Moshicach? The Neturei Karta? The Modern Orthodox? This sort of thing has no end; and it’s because of this sort of thing that not only are Jews hopelessly divided against one another, but they’re becoming a stench in the rest of the world (including me!).
It’s nice that there are Christians supporting Jews, and that at least a handful of Jews, such as you, acknowledge them; but face it, how can Christians help you when you hate one another so much?
Comment by BlandOatmeal — March 25, 2009 @ 10:11 am
Lets see out of 2.5 billion Christians, 100 thousand signed a petition of support for Israel. You do the Math as to what percentage of Christians that is. Not to belittle the effort which isn’t much on their part and it’s better than the converse and what most American Jews are doing but beyond signing such a petition what?
No doubt! Any Jew who does not support another Jew or rather turns his back on other Jews is a traitor to all Jews.
This is not a Democrat, Republican disagreement this goes to the core of who is a Jew and who isn’t.
These are religiously important but not the critical factor of who is or isn’t a Jew, Judaism is not a religion. Judaism has a religious component but does not define Who is a Jew. Loyalty is up there if not the most important. Loyalty to other Jews
Über Alles. Being a Christian Goy, it is beyond your DNA ability of being able to comprehend the nuances and differences between us and you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR06MF14ckw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuYQGOzF4b0&feature=related
Comment by yamit82 — March 25, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
blandoatmeal, who gave you the authority to determine who is Jewish? As a Jew, I regard J-street as my enemy.
Comment by Laura — March 25, 2009 @ 4:09 pm
2.5 billion Christians, 100 thousand signed a petition of support for Israel. You do the Math as to what percentage of Christians that is
That would be .004%. Makes me feel good to be part of such a chosen few.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 25, 2009 @ 7:28 pm
Tens of millions of Christians worldwide regularly pray for Israel and the Jewish people and for the peace of Jerusalem. They just don’t talk too much about it - except to the One who really matters. Work the maths out on that one…?
Comment by Blaina — March 26, 2009 @ 3:32 am
prayers and thoughts are much appreciated but something more visible and audible would be even nicer, that does not mean we don’t want your kind thoughts and prayers. They need not be exclusive of one to another.
Comment by yamit82 — March 26, 2009 @ 6:23 am
Speaking of Christian Zionist friends of Israel…
British Israelite Orde Wingate
Comment by David BenAriel — March 26, 2009 @ 1:04 pm
Why are you preaching against Christian-Zionists rather than to your fellow Jews (who they often put to shame with their love for Israel)?
Jews Don’t Follow Judaism
Why do Jews prefer to remain in a self-imposed exile? Doesn’t Judaism (not just evangelical “Christianity”) teach Jews belong in the Promised Land of Israel? Isn’t it the Jewish Homeland?
Comment by David BenAriel — March 26, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
Joseph isn’t Jewish!
Israel and Judah Must Get House in Order Before King Messiah Arrives
According to the rabbis, the “Lost Ten Tribes” are for all intents and purposes “Gentiles.” This information constitutes further proof that the “Lost Ten Tribes” are not those diverse claimants (African, Indians, Burmese) who maintain remnants of Judaism from somebody’s former conversion or contact with the religion of Judaism.
Not All Twelve Tribes of Israel are Jewish?
Some, in clear contradiction of the Holy Bible, pretend that all Twelve Tribes of Israel are Jewish. Such woefully ignorant or deceptive people deny the biblical distinctions between the 12 Tribes and pretend there’s only one tribe: Judah.
Comment by David BenAriel — March 26, 2009 @ 1:16 pm
[...] Jews and Christians By David Ben-Ariel Re: U.S. Christians back Israel with petition [...]
Pingback by Jews and Christians « Mount Zion — March 26, 2009 @ 1:34 pm
David BenAriel
Where is your DNA proof you are a goy Israelite? You look very Aryan to me!
Comment by yamit82 — March 26, 2009 @ 5:02 pm
Jews and True Christians both follow and worship the same G-d of Abraham. One beleves Jesus is the Messiah, the other is waiting for messiah.
Isaiah 49 says “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles , that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth.”
Comment by ronmorgen — March 26, 2009 @ 5:04 pm
Also the Easter bunny and Santa Claus.
I can prove if you are willing that we don’t worship the same G-d. Allah is much closer to the Jewish concept.
Comment by yamit82 — March 26, 2009 @ 8:52 pm
Quoting Yamit82:
Allah is much closer to the Jewish concept? What are you talking about? Allah is Satan, the bloodthirsty enemy of Yaweh. Allah hates the Jews. I think you just like to say stupid things.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 26, 2009 @ 11:09 pm
Since you brought up the Name Satan, I will show you briefly what I meant.
Satan in Christianity refers to: * The most common English synonym for ‘Satan’ is ‘Devil’, which descends from Middle English devel, from Old English d?ofol, that in turn represents an early Germanic borrowing of Latin diabolus (also the source of ‘diabolical’). This in turn was borrowed from Greek diabolos “slanderer,” from diaballein “to slander”: dia- “across, through” + ballein “to hurl.”[10] In the New Testament, ‘Satan’ occurs more than thirty times in passages alongside Diabolos (Greek for “the devil”), referring to the same person or thing as Satan.
* Lucifer is sometimes used in Christian theology to refer to Satan, as a result of identifying the fallen “son of the dawn” of Isaiah 14:12 with the “accuser” of other passages in the Old Testament.
* Beelzebub is originally the name of a Philistine god (more specifically a certain type of Baal, from Ba‘al Zebûb, lit. “Lord of Flies”) but is also used in the New Testament as a synonym for Satan. A corrupted version, “Belzeboub,” appears in The Divine Comedy.
* “The dragon” and “the old serpent” in the Book of Revelation 12:9, 20:2 have also been identified with Satan, as have “the prince of this world” in the Book of John 12:31, 14:30; “the prince of the power of the air” also called Meririm, and “the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” in the Book of Ephesians 2:2; and “the god of this world” in 2 Corinthians 4:4.
* Leviathan is described as “that crooked serpent,” which is also used to describe Satan in Revelation 12:9. ‘Sar ha Olam,’ a possible name for Metatron, is described as Satan by Michael, Jehoel and St. Paul. In mainstream Christianity’s understanding of the holy Hebrew scriptures, the Torah, Satan is a synonym for the Devil. For most Christians, he is believed to be an angel who rebelled against God— and also the one who spoke through the serpent and seduced Eve into disobeying God’s command. His ultimate goal is to lead people away from the love of God — to lead them to fallacies which God opposes. Satan is also identified as the accuser of Job, the tempter in the Gospels, the secret power of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2:7
, and the dragon in the Book of Revelation. Before his alleged insurrection, Satan was among the highest of all angels and the “brightest in the sky.” His pride is considered a reason why he would not bow to God as all other angels did, but sought to rule heaven himself. The popularly held beliefs that Satan was once a prideful angel who eventually rebels against God, however, are barely portrayed explicitly in the Bible and are mostly based on inference. Moreover, in mainstream Christianity he is called “the ruler of the demons” (Matt. 12:24), “the ruler of the world” and even “the god of this world.” (2 Cor. 4:4). The Book of Revelation describes how Satan will be cast out of Heaven, down to the earth, having “great anger” and waging war against “those who obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus”. Ultimately, Satan is thrown into the “lake of fire” (Revelation 20:10),not as ruler, but as one among many, being tormented day and night for all eternity.
In other, non-mainstream, Christian beliefs (e.g. the beliefs of the Christadelphians) the word “satan” in the Bible is not regarded as referring to a supernatural, personal being but to any ‘adversary’ and figuratively refers to human sin and temptation.
Contrast the Christians view with the Jewish:
Satan (Standard Hebrew Satan’el, English accuser) is a term that originates from the Abrahamic religions, being traditionally applied to an angel in Jewish beliefs and tradition.
Originally, this figure was the one who challenged the religious faith of humans in the Hebrew Bible (Torah and Oral Law).
The word ‘Satan’, and the Arabic ????? “shaitan”, may derive from a Northwest Semitic root ??n, meaning “to be hostile”, “to accuse.” An alternative explanation is provided by the Hebrew in Job 1:7
When God asks him whence he has come, Satan answers: “From wandering (mi’?u?) the earth and walking on it”. The root ?u? signifies wandering on foot or sailing. ‘Satan’ would thus be “the Wanderer”.
In the Hebrew Apocrypha
In the Book of Wisdom, the devil is represented as the being who brought death into the world.
The 2nd Book of Enoch, also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch, contains references to a Watcher Grigori called Satanael. It is a pseudepigraphic text of an uncertain date and unknown authorship. The text describes Satanael as being the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was “righteous” and “sinful”. A similar story is found in the book of Enoch; however, in that book, the leader of the Grigori is called Semjâzâ.
In the apocryphal literature, Satan rules over a host of angels. Mastema, who induced God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac, is identical with Satan in both name and nature.
For the Chasidic Jews of the eighteenth century, Ha-satan was Baal Davar.
The Book of Enoch contains references to Satariel, thought also to be Sataniel and Satan’el (etymology dating back to Babylonian origins). The similar spellings mirror that of his angelic brethren Michael, Raphael, Uriel and Gabriel, previous to his expulsion from Heaven.
In the Bible
Where Satan does appear in the Bible, he plays the role of the Accuser.
in the prologue to the Book of Job, where Satan appears, together with other celestial beings before the Deity, replying to the inquiry of God as to whence he had come, with the words: ‘From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.’ (Job 1:7) Both question and answer, as well as the dialogue which follows, characterize Satan as having the evil purpose of searching out men’s sins and appearing as their accuser. He is, therefore, the celestial prosecutor, who sees only iniquity; for he persists in his evil opinion of Job even after the man of Uz has passed successfully through his first trial by surrendering to the will of God, whereupon Satan demands another test through physical suffering.
Yet it is also evident from the prologue that Satan has no power of independent action, but requires the permission of God, which he may not transgress. He cannot be regarded, therefore, as an opponent of the Deity; and the doctrine of monotheism is disturbed by his existence no more than by the presence of other beings before the face of God. This view is also retained in Zech. 3:1-2, where Satan is described as the adversary of the high priest Joshua, and of the people of God whose representative the hierarch is; and he there opposes the ‘angel of the Lord’ who bids him be silent in the name of God.
In both of these passages Satan acts only under permission; but in I Chron. 21:1 he appears as one who is able to provoke David to destroy Israel. The Chronicler (third century B.C.) regards Satan as an independent agent, a view which is the more striking since the source whence he drew his account (II Sam. 24:1) speaks of God Himself as the one who moved David against the children of Israel. Since the older conception refers all events, whether good or bad, to God alone, (I Sam. 16:14; I Kings 22:22; Isa. 45:7; etc) it is possible that the Chronicler, and perhaps even Zechariah, were influenced by Zoroastrianism, even though in the case of the prophet Jewish monism strongly opposed Iranian dualism. An immediate influence of the Babylonian concept of the ‘accuser, persecutor, and oppressor’ (Schrader, K. A. T. 3d ed., p. 463) is impossible, since traces of such an influence, if it had existed, would have appeared in the earlier portions of the Bble.”
In the Talmud and other Rabbinic Sources
The Talmud mentions the Satan in many places. In all of these places, the Satan is merely an agent of God, and has no independent existence. Sometimes the Satan is conflated with various demons, such as Asmodai. At times there is even some sympathy for him. Commenting on the Book of Job, the rabbis express sympathy that his job was to “break the barrel but not spill any wine.”
In Kabbalistic literature and its derivative, Hasidic literature, the Satan is seen as an agent of God whose job is to tempt one into sin, and then turn around and accuse the sinner on high. An additional understanding of Satan is from a parable to a prostitute who is hired by the King (God) to tempt his son (a Jew). The prostitute has to do the best she can to tempt the son; but deep down she hopes the son will pass the test. Similarly, Kabbalistic/Hasidic thought sees the Satan in the same situation. His job is to tempt us as best he can; turn around and accuse us; but deep down his wish is that we would resist his blandishments.
In Islam:
Shaitan is the equivalent of Satan in Islam.
While Shaitan from the root š?n is an adjective (meaning “astray” or “distant”, sometimes translated as “devil”) that can be applied to both man (”al-ins”,) and Jinn, Iblis (pronounced [?ibli?s]) is the personal name of the Devil who is mentioned in the Qur’anic account of Genesis.
Whenever the Qur’an refers to the creature who refused to prostrate before Adam at the time of the latter’s creation, it refers to him as Iblis. The Islamic view of Iblis has both similarities and differences with Christian and Jewish views. The character of Satan is generally similar to the one presented in Judeo-Christian thought. However, according to Islamic belief, Satan is not considered to be a ‘fallen’ angel, but a jinn who was among the ranks of angels due to his wisdom and piety; in Islamic belief, angels always follow God’s commands, but jinns (like humans) have free will, which explains why Satan was able to rebel against God’s command of bowing to Adam
Now you tell me who’s beliefs are closer to Jewish thought and beliefs; Christianity or Islam? Christianity ha so corrupted core Jewish thought, beliefs and traditions s to not be recognized or reconcilled except in the minds of Christians and ignorant Jews.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 2:15 am
Yamit, When you argue about Chritianity, but use the false/apostate Christians as your basis instead of the example of Jesus, the apostles, and their writings or the deeds of millions of Godly Christians it is not a valid argument. That’s like looking at a barrel of rotten apples and concluding that apples are bad. Yamit, there have been many saintly Christians, but apparently all you want to see are the bad ones, Why don’t you open your heart to the good ones who love Yaweh and his great nation. Are you afraid you might have to learn something?
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 11:25 am
The glory of living in these end times is that the well-documented Christian interpretation of biblical prophecy, will very soon bear all the fullness of fruit - or fall completely flat on it’s face.
We’re living in the extraordinary and privileged time when it’s no longer a question of all arguments being equal because their projected conclusions lie possibly centuries away.
Those of us whose faith is in Jesus Christ as Son of God, Glorified Lord, Saviour, Redeemer and yes, the Messiah spoken of and pointed towards throughout the old Testament, are currently putting our cards on the table and declaring that the time for fulfillment of those prophecies is imminent, and will happen within most of our lifetimes.
And with that declaration of our faith, we give an uneqivocal warning - that those who are outside of Christ at His first and soon appearing, will face a terrible period of tribulation on this earth like nothing ever seen before - a time of hell on earth only brought to an end by His second appearing.
Now, you can fill whole websites with all your pedantic pontifications and comparative definitions of biblical and Koranic terminology, but what you will not be able to say is “we were never warned”.
Those of us whose faith is in Jesus Christ have set out our stand, and know and believe that His love and salvation is freely available to all who reach out to Him, while there is still time. You pay your money and you take your choice.
Comment by Blaina — March 27, 2009 @ 11:36 am
Thank you Blaina, “Those of us whose faith is in Jesus Christ have set out our stand, and know and believe that His love and salvation is freely available to all who reach out to Him”.
Amen, and my faith in Jesus is not blind, but based firmly in the Old Testament (Torah).
Isaiah 53 particularly speaks of the suffering messiah and atonement for our sins. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 12:15 pm
Re:17 18 19.
Gee guys, what did I say to get this great Christian assemble so riled up? You see friends, at least I am on to you and know what you are all about and at least I will stand up for Judaism and our G-d against your attempted spiritual terrorism against Jews.
Pls. take out your Bibles and concordances and Read the following page excerpt. It’s energy exhausting when trying to educate good people who believe in the false demigod/false messiah but here are the true facts. All based on My scriptures the word of the one true Judge and yours?
http://www.mindspring.com/~sjayg7/sample.htm
WHAT BETTER WAY TO END THIS SECTION ON THE IMPORTANCE OF GOD’S LAW, THEN BY QUOTING FROM KING SOLOMON:
ECC012:013 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
WHO DO YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE, KING SOLOMON OR PAUL?
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
ECC012:013 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. Amen, I agee wholeheartedly, and also with Paul.
And The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 5:11 pm
ronmorgen
You didn’t read the link I provided you and if you did you did not understand it and if you did and did understand it and still are not affected then it just goes to show how much of a brain dead hypocrite you are.
Point is Ronie is that you can have Solomon or Paul. You can’t have both. Paul contradicts Solomon which is the word of G-d and Paul ? At best is just Paul. Like Christianity is just Paul and has no relationship to the G-d of Israel and hius Laws which if you you had read the linked piece I provided you would show and demonstrate that the ten commandments is certainly not the Law only the basic principles upon which the laws are based. Even here Christianity rejects some of the most important commandments.
MANY CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THAT THE TEN COMMANDMENTS MAKE UP THE ENTIRETY OF GOD’S LAW. HOWEVER GOD’S LAW IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS “STATUTES, JUDGMENTS AND LAWS” AS SHOWN BELOW:
LEV018:004 Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the Lord your God.
LEV018:005 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord.
LEV018:026 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you:
THIS WOULD CERTAINLY MAKE UP MORE THAN TEN COMMANDMENTS. BESIDES, IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN FORTY DAYS AND NIGHTS FOR GOD TO GIVE MOSES TEN RELATIVELY SIMPLE COMMANDMENTS. IT ALSO APPEARS THAT THE STRANGER HAD TO OBEY GOD’S LAW — NOT JUST THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.
ACCORDING TO THESE PASSAGES, IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE LAW WILL STILL BE IN EFFECT AT THE “END OF DAYS”. GENERALLY CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY DOES NOT MAINTAIN THAT THE LAW IS IN EFFECT DURING THE “END OF DAYS”, SINCE IT IS HELD THAT JESUS FULFILLED IT. THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE ALSO STATES THAT GOD’S LAW WAS FOR THE JEWS AND NOT FOR THE GENTILES. BUT ISAIAH AND MICAH MAKE IT QUITE CLEAR THAT THE OTHER NATIONS (GENTILES) WILL COME AND LEARN THE LAW FROM THE MESSIAH AND FROM THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. REMEMBER GOD REFERS TO ALL OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL AS A KINGDOM OF PRIESTS:
EXO019:006 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
IF JESUS FULFILLED THE LAW, WHY WOULD GOD SAY THAT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WILL TEACH HIS LAW TO THE REMAINING GENTILE NATIONS?
GOD SAYS THROUGH MALACHI THAT ELIJAH COMES AT THE “END OF DAYS”. JESUS AND JOHN THE BAPTIST LIVED TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO, OBVIOUSLY NOT THE “END OF DAYS”
IF GOD DOES NOT CHANGE, HOW CAN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY TEACH THAT WITH JESUS, THE LAW IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT? WE HAVE JUST READ THAT NOT ONLY WILL IT BE IN EFFECT AT THE “END OF DAYS”, BUT WILL BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE GENTILES AS WELL.
THE JEWISH BIBLE TEACHES US THAT THE GREAT PROPHET ELISHA, RECEIVED A DOUBLE PORTION OF HIS PREDECESSOR ELIJAH’S SPIRIT. THE JEWISH BIBLE ALSO TEACHES US THAT ELISHA PERFORMED THE SAME KIND OF WONDERS AND MIRACLES AS JESUS IS SAID TO HAVE DONE. AS A PROPHET AND SPEAKING FOR GOD, ELISHA SAID THE FOLLOWING:
2KI017:037 And the statutes, and the ordinances, and the law, and the commandment, which He wrote for you, ye shall observe to do for evermore; and ye shall not fear other gods.
MAT005:017 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
MAT005:018 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 5:49 pm
I KNOW THAT CHRISTIANS ENJOY READING THE PROVERBS OUT OF THE JEWISH BIBLE BUT DO THEY SKIP OVER THESE TWO?
PRO028:009 He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.
PRO029:018 Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.
IS THERE ANY WONDER WHY THE JEWISH ELDERS, WHO WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE JEWISH BIBLE, REJECTED PAUL’S THEOLOGY? REMEMBER THE BOOK OF PROVERBS IS ATTRIBUTED TO KING SOLOMON, THE WISEST MAN WHO EVER LIVED. WHO DO YOU BELIEVE, PAUL OR KING SOLOMON?
THE BOTTOM LINE IS, IN THE BOOK OF EXODUS GOD MAKES IT CLEAR THAT HE EXPECTS HIS CHOSEN PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE THAT HE MADE A COVENANT WITH, TO KEEP HIS LAWS AND TO BE A HOLY NATION. PAUL CAN NOT DO AWAY WITH GOD’S LAWS AND AT THE SAME TIME BELIEVE GOD’S COVENANT IS NOW WITH THE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN JESUS, INSTEAD OF WITH THE DESCENDANTS OF JACOB.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 6:00 pm
What do you think of this promise? Jeramiah was God’s prophet too.
The time is coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
Jeremiah 31:31-33
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 6:19 pm
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=313&Itemid=228
Before engaging in an examination of Isaiah 53 itself, some preliminary issues must be considered. First is the issue of circular reasoning. Even if we interpret the chapter as the Christians do (forgetting for a minute the mistranslations and distortions of context which will be noted below), the most that could be said is this: Isaiah 53 is about someone who dies for the sins of others. People may have seen Jesus die, but did anyone see him die as an atonement for the sins of others? Of course not; this is simply the meaning which the New Testament gives to his death. Only if you already accept the New Testament teaching that his death had a non-visible, spiritual significance can you than go back to Isaiah and say, “see - the Prophet predicted what I already believe.” Isaiah 53, then, is in reality no “proof” at all, but rather a contrived confirmation for someone who has already chosen Christianity.
Second (and consistent with all Jewish teaching at the time), Jesus’ own disciples didn’t view Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy. For example, after Peter identifies Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16), he is informed that Jesus will be killed (Matt. 16:21). His response: “God forbid it, lord! This shall never happen to you” (Matt. 16:22). See, also, Mk. 9:31-32; Mk. 16:10-11; Jn. 20:9. Even Jesus didn’t see Isaiah 53 as crucial to his messianic claims - why else did he call the Jews children of the devil for not believing in him before the alleged resurrection (Jn. 8:39-47)? And why did he later request that God “remove this cup from me” (Mk. 14:36) - didn’t he know that a “removal of the cup” would violate the gentile understanding of Isaiah 53?
CONTEXT
Since any portion of Scripture is only understood properly when viewed in the context of God’s revelation as a whole, some additional study will be helpful before you “tackle” Isaiah 53.
Look at the setting in which Isaiah 53 occurs. Earlier on in Isaiah, God had predicted exile and calamity for the Jewish people. Chapter 53, however, occurs in the midst of Isaiah’s “Messages of Consolation”, which tell of the restoration of Israel to a position of prominence and a vindication of their status as God’s chosen people. In chapter 52, for example, Israel is described as “oppressed without cause” (v.4) and “taken away” (v.5), yet God promises a brighter future ahead, one in which Israel will again prosper and be redeemed in the sight of all the nations (v.1-3, 8-12).
Chapter 54 further elaborates upon the redemption which awaits the nation of Israel. Following immediately after chapter 53’s promise of a reward for God’s servant in return for all of its suffering (53:10-12), chapter 54 describes an unequivocally joyous fate for the Jewish people. Speaking clearly of the Jewish people and their exalted status (even according to all Christian commentaries), chapter 54 ends as follows: “`This is the heritage of the servants of the L-rd and their vindication is from Me,’ declares the L-rd.”
C. ISAIAH 53
In the original Hebrew texts, there are no chapter divisions, and Jew and Christian alike agree that chapter 53 is actually a continuation of the prophecy which begins at 52:13. Accordingly, our analysis must begin at that verse.
52:13 “Behold, My servant will prosper.” Israel in the singular is called God’s servant throughout Isaiah, both explicitly (Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3) and implicitly (Isa. 42:19-20; 43:10) - the Messiah is not. Other references to Israel as God’s servant include Jer. 30:10 (note that in Jer. 30:17, the servant Israel is regarded by the nations as an outcast, forsaken by God, as in Isa. 53:4); Jer. 46:27-28; Ps. 136:22; Lk. 1:54. ALSO: Given the Christian view that Jesus is God, is God His own servant?
52:15 - 53:1 “So shall he (the servant) startle many nations, the kings will stand speechless; For that which had not been told them they shall see and that which they had not heard shall they ponder. Who would believe what we have heard?” Quite clearly, the nations and their kings will be amazed at what happens to the “servant of the L-rd,” and they will say “who would believe what we have heard?”. 52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah 53. See, also, Micah 7:12-17, which speaks of the nations’ astonishment when the Jewish people again blossom in the Messianic age.
53:1 “And to whom has the arm of the L-rd been revealed?” In Isaiah, and throughout our Scriptures, God’s “arm” refers to the physical redemption of the Jewish people from the oppression of other nations (see, e.g., Isa. 52:8-12; Isa. 63:12; Deut. 4:34; Deut. 7:19; Ps. 44:3).
53:3 “Despised and rejected of men.” While this is clearly applicable to Israel (see Isa. 60:15; Ps. 44:13-14), it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account of Jesus, a man who was supposedly “praised by all” (Lk. 4:14-15) and followed by multitudes (Matt. 4:25), who would later acclaim him as a prophet upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:9-11). Even as he was taken to be crucified, a multitude bemoaned his fate (Lk. 23:27). Jesus had to be taken by stealth, as the rulers feared “a riot of the people” (Mk. 14:1-2).
53:3 “A man of pains and acquainted with disease.” Israel’s adversities are frequently likened to sickness - see, e.g., Isa. 1:5-6; Jer. 10:19; Jer 30:12.
53:4 “Surely our diseases he carried and our pains he bore.” In Matt. 8:17, this is correctly translated, and said to be literally (not spiritually) fulfilled in Jesus’ healing of the sick, a reading inconsistent with the Christian mistranslation of 53:4 itself.
53:4 “Yet we ourselves esteemed him stricken, smitten of G- D and afflicted.” See Jer. 30:17 - of God’s servant Israel (30:10), it is said by the nations, “It is Zion; no one cares for her.”
53:5 “But he was wounded from (NOTE: not for) our transgressions, he was crushed from (AGAIN: not for) our iniquities.” Whereas the nations had thought the Servant (Israel) was undergoing Divine retribution for its sins (53:4), they now realize that the Servant’s sufferings stemmed from their actions and sinfulness. This theme is further developed throughout our Jewish Scriptures - see, e.g., Jer. 50:7; Jer. 10:25. ALSO: Note that the Messiah “shall not fail nor be crushed till he has set the right in the earth” (Isa. 42:4).
53:7 “He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so he did not open his mouth.” Note that in the prior chapter (Isa. 52), Israel is said to have been oppressed and taken away without cause (52:4-5). A similar theme is developed in Psalm 44, wherein King David speaks of Israel’s faithfulness even in the face of gentile oppression (44:17- 18) and describes Israel as “sheep to be slaughtered” in the midst of the unfaithful gentile nations (44:22,11).
Regarding the claim that Jesus “did not open his mouth” when faced with oppression and affliction, see Matt. 27:46, Jn. 18:23, 36-37.
53:8 “From dominion and judgement he was taken away.” Note the correct translation of the Hebrew. The Christians are forced to mistranslate, since - by Jesus’ own testimony - he never had any rights to rulership or judgement, at least not on the “first coming.” See, e.g., Jn. 3:17; Jn. 8:15; Jn. 12:47; Jn. 18:36.
53:8 “He was cut off out of the land of the living.”
53:9 “His grave was assigned with wicked men.” See Ez. 37:11-14, wherein Israelis described as “cut off” and God promises to open its “graves” and bring Israel back into its own land. Other examples of figurative deaths include Ex. 10:17; 2 Sam. 9:8; 2 Sam. 16:9.
53:8 “From my peoples’ sins, there was injury to them.” Here the Prophet makes absolutely clear, to anyone familiar with Biblical Hebrew, that the oppressed Servant is a collective Servant, not a single individual. The Hebrew word “lamoh”, when used in our Scriptures, always means “to them” never “to him” and may be found, for example, in Psalm 99:7 - “They kept his testimonies, and the statute that He gave to them.”
53:9 “And with the rich in his deaths.” Perhaps King James should have changed the original Hebrew, which again makes clear that we are dealing with a collective Servant, i.e., Israel, which will “come to life” when the exile ends (Ez. 37:14).
53:9 “He had done no violence.” See Matt. 21:12; Mk. 11:15-16; Lk. 19:45; Lk. 19:27; Matt. 10:34 and Lk. 12:51; then judge for yourself whether this passage is truly consistent with the New Testament account of Jesus.
53:10 “He shall see his seed.” The Hebrew word for “seed”, used in this verse, always refers to physical descendants in our Jewish Scriptures. See, e.g., Gen. 12:7; Gen. 15:13; Gen. 46:6; Ex. 28:43. A different word, generally translated as “sons”, is used to refer to spiritual descendants (see Deut. 14:1, e.g.).
53:10 “He will prolong his days.” Not only did Jesus die young, but how could the days be prolonged of someone who is alleged to be God?
53:11 “With his knowledge the righteous one, my Servant, will cause many to be just.” Note again the correct translation: the Servant will cause many to be just, he will not “justify the many.” The Jewish mission is to serve as a “light to the nations” which will ultimately lead the world to a knowledge of the one true God, this both by example (Deut. 4:5-8; Zech. 8:23) and by instructing the nations in God’s Law (Isa. 2:3-4; Micah 4:2-3).
53:12 “Therefore, I will divide a portion to him with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty.” If Jesus is God, does the idea of reward have any meaning? Is it not rather the Jewish people - who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps. 44) - who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54?
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 6:21 pm
“Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
The critical difference between us and Christians is who to consider a fellow man. Modern Christians unrealistically pronounce all people fellows, and surely fail to treat them as such. But their own parable of the Good Samaritan is instructive: even a despised Samaritan could be one’s fellow if the Samaritan helped him. Fellow is the one from whom help is expected. Such a definition surely excludes Canaanites and Palestinian Arabs from the commandment to love your fellow.
What is the love enjoined to our fellows? The context clarifies: “You shall not oppress your fellow” (19:13), “You shall not hate your brother” (19:17), and the 19:18: “You shall neither take revenge, nor restrain [yourself to take revenge later] at the children of your nation.” This, by the way, refutes the claims that human vengeance is prohibited in Judaism, but is the power of God only. Revenge is prohibited only against fellow Jews, on the double presumption of their general goodwill and efficient law enforcement. In such a society, revenge on the personal level was superfluous. But taking revenge on the enemies of Jews (even their distant offspring) is not merely a right, but an often-reiterated obligation: “a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace” (Ecclesiastes 3:8).
The commandment of love concludes a list which parallels the Decalogue, and is therefore comparable to the prohibition of jealousy (Exodus 20:13).
The prescribed love to one’s fellow is the absence of hatred, vengeance, oppression, and jealousy. While gerim must not be oppressed, fellows must also not be hated. The Torah distinguishes between several circles of people: the closer is the circle, the more rights are accorded to it. Extended family, a closer circle, enjoys still more rights: one must respect his parents. One’s own family, the closest circle, awards generous rights to wives. Later on, when Hebrew society became strong and gerim were fully integrated, the commandment of love was expanded onto them (Deuteronomy 10:19); converts became treated strictly on par with native Jews.
The Torah prescribes, “The ger who resides among you in your land shall be for you like a native, and you shall love him just as you love yourself” (Leviticus 19:34). You cannot be more compassionate than that. But why the Torah, so short on words, reiterates, “in your land”? So that the ger absolutely recognizes the land as ours. And indeed the parallel Exodus 12:48: “And if a ger will reside with you, and will keep the Pesach to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised… he shall be like the native…” In order to be like a Jew, ger must be like a Jew: he must circumcise, keep Jewish customs, and to all purposes become a Jew. Then, sure enough, we must love him just as we love any Jew, including ourselves.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 7:03 pm
The term “new covenant” would be meaningless unless what Jeremiah meant by it was the renewing of the old covenant, which will thereby regain its full original vigor. The covenant of old is of eternal duration, never to be rescinded or to be superseded by a new covenant (Leviticus 26:44-45). The covenant between God and Israel is frequently referred to as everlasting (e.g., Genesis 17:7, 13, 19; Psalms 105:8, 10; 1 Chronicles 16:13-18).
The Christian position concerning Jeremiah’s covenant is the complete opposite of what the Jewish Scriptures teach. Hebrews 8:13 states: “In that he says, a new covenant, he has made the first obsolete. Now that which is being made obsolete and growing old is near to vanishing away.” In stark contrast to this statement, the Scriptures state: “The works of His hands are truth and justice; and His precepts are sure. They are established forever and ever, they are done in truth and uprightness” (Psalms 111:7-8); “The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God shall stand forever” (Isaiah 40:8).
A common belief among Christians is that there is a new covenant that is active today that replices the covenant G-d made with Moses on Mt. Sinai. They say that Jesus is this new covenant, or that the New Testament is this new covenant. The scripture they use to support this claim is Jeremiah 31:31 (cited above). So if Jeremiah isn’t talking about the Christian version of a new covenant, what is Jeremiah talking about?
First, Jeremiah is talking about a new covenant for Israel and Judah. Goyim are not included in this new covenant. Therefore, the new covenant spoken of here can not refer to any Christian idea of a new covenant that includes Gentiles.
Second, the verse states that when the new covenant occurs, “all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed me” and that “no longer will they need to teach one another.” In essence, no one will need to teach the Law because everyone will be keeping it. Are all Christians keeping the Law? No. Assuming that the Law is out, do all Christians love their brothers and follow the words of Jesus? No. No matter how it is interpreted, Christians don’t meet the criteria listed here. Nobody does. The new covenant spoken of here has yet to come.
Christians often attempt to use this verse to demonstrate that the covenants made with Noah, Abraham, and Moses are no longer valid because the new covenant is in effect. This is an error, because nowhere does it say that this new covenant annuls the previous covenants. We see from what G-d stated in His Torah, that this is not the case. God’s Law, his covenant with Moses on Sinai, is eternal.
First Chronicles 16:13 states, “O offspring of Israel, His servant, O descendents of Jacob, His chosen ones. He is the Lord our God; His judgments are throughout the earth. Be ever mindful of His covenant, the promise He gave for a thousand generations, that He made with Abraham, sword to Isaac, and confirmed in a decree for Jacob, for Israel, as an eternal covenant.”
Psalm 105:7 states, “He is the Lord our God; His judgments are throughout the earth. He is ever mindful of His covenant, the promise He gave for a thousand generations, that He made with Abraham, swore to Isaac, and confirmed in a decree for Jacob, for Israel, as an eternal covenant.”
Keep em coming we can refute in scripture everyone!!! or lets finish it now:
God is not a man that he should be deceitful nor a son of man that he should relent. (Numbers 23:19)
This verse states four things. God is not a man, God is not a son of man, God is not deceitful, and God does not relent. For our purposes we need to focus on the first two.
The words translated to son of man are ben adam. They are also adequately rendered mortal man or human being in many translations. While this verse states that God is not a son of man, Jesus uses this title for himself repeatedly in the gospels. Therefore, Jesus is not God according to the Torah.
I will not act on My wrath, will not turn to destroy Ephraim. For I am God, not man, The Holy One in your midst. (Hosea 11:9)
A similar verse; the same applies here as above. This states that God is not a man, while from the gospels we know that Jesus was a man. Therefore, according to Hosea Jesus is not God.
Moreover, the Glory of Israel does not deceive or change His mind, for He is not human that He should change His mind. (1 Samuel 15:29)
Once again we see that God is not a human. However, as noted above, the favorite title for Jesus in the gospels is one that is equivalent to “human being.” According to Samuel, Jesus is not God.
He is not a man, like me, that I can answer him, that we can go to law together. No arbiter is between us, to lay his hand on us both. (Job 9:32-33)
Once again, we see the declaration that God is not a man (while Jesus was). This verse is interesting because it also states that there is no mediator between God and man, contrary to Christian claims that Jesus is a mediator. According to Job, Jesus is neither God nor mediator.
Will you still say, “I am a god” before your slayers, when you are proved a man, not a god, at the hands of those who strike you down? (Ezekiel 28:9)
This is an interesting verse. It demonstrates that mortality is one sure sign that someone is not a deity. Jesus’ mortality was quite clear - he was struck down. While Christians would claim that he rose again, this verse would debate that God could be struck down at all. It seems that according to Ezekiel, Jesus can’t be God.
For your own sake, therefore, be most careful – since you saw no shape when the Lord your God spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. (Hosea 4:15)
This was a warning for Israel. In essence, it states never to worship anything that has an image, because they saw on image on Mt. Sinai. However, Jesus had an image. In addition, the Jews did not see God on Mt. Sinai. Jesus seems to be implicated in this warning by Hosea.
If there appears among you a prophet or a dream-diviner and he gives you a sign or a portent, saying, ‘Let us follow and worship another god ‘ – whom you have not experienced – even if the sign or portent that he named to you comes true, do not heed the words of that prophet or dream diviner. (Deut. 13:2)
This is an important verse for two reasons. For one, it demonstrates that Jesus is not God because the Israelites did not experience Jesus in the desert with Moses. It also demonstrates that false prophets can do miracles, and thus the miracles of Jesus (including his resurrection) do not prove a thing. The Torah seems to warn about Jesus, or people like him.
For I am the Lord, I change not. Therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)
Jesus, as a human being, was in a constant state of change. Only something incorporeal can avoid change. Jesus’ human nature excludes the possibility of Jesus being an unchanging God. And God never changes, according to Malachi. Jesus must not be the God Malachi is speaking of.
There is so much Scriptural evidence against Jesus being God, that entire websites are dedicated to this fact alone. Therefore, I won’t present a detailed commentary on New Testament texts and how they relate to Jesus divinity or the lack thereof. I will only present a few that are absolute and exclusive in nature.
Then Jesus was led up by the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. (Matthew 4:1)
God cannot be tempted, but Jesus was.
But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the son, but only the father. (Mark 3:32)
Jesus was not all-knowing.
The son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do. (John 5:19)
Now he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people an healed them. (Mark 6:5)
Jesus was not all-powerful.
Why do you call me good? No one is good but one, that is, God. (Matthew 19:17)
Jesus was not all-good.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 7:25 pm
Just what we don’t need. Nobody should try to convert anyone. We better learn to respect each other for what we believe. The bottom line is we all believe in God/G-d, the common denominator. I am pretty sure that when we arrive at the holy place set aside for us we will then meet God/G-d as being one in the same.
What we should be doing is working together as one and try to figure the best way to protect Israel from her adversary who are many.
The new government needs to stand tall and stick by her guns. Israel knows what is best for Israel and does not need outside interference. Mitchell stay home.
Where does it say Israel has to recognize either Hamas or the PA or the new unity government.
Put Hamas and the PA on notice if the rockets and suicide attacks don’t stop the IDF and ADF will put them away for good and this time military action will only cease when the mission is completed.
Comment by rongrand — March 27, 2009 @ 7:34 pm
“Such a definition surely excludes Canaanites and Palestinian Arabs from the commandment to love your fellow.”
Not so, God loves all men and we should also, however their are many words in the Greek for love. One describes the kind of love you are referring to, “filadelphia”. It is the type of love we have for our brothers and sisters or family. The statements of Jesus and Paul concerning the love that fulfills the law don’t use that word. They use “agape”. Agape is the highest kind of love. It is “hard” love, because the recipients don’t always feel they are being loved such as when a father disciplines his son to bring about the highest quality of life in him. This is how God loves us. To bring about the highest good for us and his kingdom. This is the love that fulfills the law. Therefore, if anyone or any group is a threat to the highest good of God’s kingdom, it would be in accordance with Agape love to eliminate them or exclude them. That is why there is a hell and also why capitol punishment is needed. You see, we should not be concerned primarily with the good of an individual, but for the whole.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 7:38 pm
rongrand I agree and it was not my attention to get into a religious dispute with anyone. I do have a keen sense of smell though which usually never deceives me and when I smell missionaries I feel a Jewish need to confront not attack. Confrontation is not bad in itself it clears the air and maybe even missionaries trolling on sites like Israpundit. Even if I am wrong here their religious statements unsolicited by me were found to be offensive and unsupported in scripture. I don’t kiss ass just because someone says they are supportive of Israel and throws Christianity at us. I know this was the topic U.S. Christians back Israel with petition For some of us this support is controversial and hundreds of previous posts and thousands of comments have in the past been posted on this subject: Lots of pros and a few cons like mine, although at first like most I was supportive until I began to learn more on the phenomena. While some groups and some individual Christian may like yourself be sincere in your support many if not most I believe are not ( They have ulterior agendas and motives which are not in our besst interests in the long run)
If you haven’t noticed yet I have not been any less critical and confrontational with and about Jews either.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 8:05 pm
I said we differ from Christians or to be exact Christians tooke the platonic concept and called it Humanity later developed into Humanism. There is no Jewish concept for humanity. We call other peoples as the nations of the world as opposed to the Jewish nation. In modern Hebrew we refer to the Land and out of the land 2 poles apart. Judaism is pragmatic Christianity is idealistic. You cannot love everyone therefore the term can’t be applied as it is impractical. Judaism subverts the I as in Individual and individual rights in favor of the Jewish collective. Non Jews are not a top Jewish priority or concern for Jews. First comes immediate family, then extended family (tribe or community) the whole collective of Jewish people and then after we have fulfilled our internal purposed the rest of humanity. We are obligated to give charity for Jews not to non Jews. That is not to say that we are prohibited from helping non Jews but we don’t have a religious obligation towards the non Jew.
To Love everybody is to in the end love nobody. Particularism vs Universalism
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 8:36 pm
I know you mean well and its just your nature to set the record straight. It’s nice being one of G-d’s spokesmen. Just remember me so when God ask me for any reference I can mention your name.
I am concerned about what is happening in the US. The new administration has a lot to be desired. There are many in the administration I believe are anti-Semitic and are bent on appeasing the Arabs at Israeli expense.
I pray that the Netanyahu government will stand tall and not give into any inteference from any outside governments.
If he has any American markers out there I would hope they will be called in. He needs to put a solid PR game plan together to gain the support of the American people to pressure the government to back Israel.
Forget the new unity government being put together. Be hest aussured Hamas will be in command.
Israel needs to put them on notice if the rocket and suicide attacks don’t stop the IDF and ADF will destroy them and this time the end will come when the mission is complete.
Comment by rongrand — March 27, 2009 @ 8:39 pm
Jews don’t believe in hell at least not the Christian concept of Hell.
There is no dogma in Judaism about what awaits us after life in this world, but Jewish sages have speculated extensively and discussed two distinct, yet intertwined notions: spiritual immortality (the belief that each of us possesses a soul which continues to exist after our physical body dies) and resurrection of the dead (the belief that at some time in the future, time as we know it will end and God will resurrect the dead, restoring their bodies to previous health and vigor and breathing new life into them). Spiritual Immortality and Resurrection of the Dead were ideas not original to Judaism, but they have been interpreted and woven into the fabric of Jewish life, and are an integral part of Jewish culture and thought.
The Bible does not refer to life after death. Indeed, the Bible makes it clear that existence ends with death. In the Book of Genesis we read, “Dust you are and to dust shall you return” without any concomitant assurance that anything comes after death.”In respect of the fate of man and fate of beast, they have one and the same fate… Both go to the same place; both came from dust and both return to dust,” opines Kohelet (Ecclesiastes 3:19-20). So, too, do we read: “We must all die; we are like water that is poured out on the ground and cannot be gathered up (II Samuel 14:14). During the biblical period, Jews believed that after death one goes down into a pit called Sheol. According to Numbers 16:30 (also Ezekiel 31:14, Psalm 88:7 and Lamentations 3:55) it is below the earth. According to Jonah 2:7 it is at the base of a high mountain. According to Job 26:5 it is beneath the waters. Psalm 88:13 understands it to be a place of darkness (so, too, Job 10:21, 22) and Psalm 115:17 considers it a place of silence. The prophet Isaiah envisioned it enclosed by barred gates (Isaiah 38:10; so too Job 38:17). Psalm 115 confirms that “The dead cannot praise the Lord, nor any who go down into silence” (verse 17). Psalm 88 provides this graphic description of death as the end of all existence:
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 9:06 pm
He has already started his appeasement and bowing before America (Obama) which can be seen in all his statements till now and the aversion to a right of center government. He is for territorial division and some form of Pali state. In many ways I believe Olmert to be better. At least he daid up front as to what he would do and how he thinks. Not much hiden from the public domain. BB is a moral and political coward at best and has no principles whatsoever. Blind ambition drives him more than serving the people of Israel.
We will all be challenged by Obama but the Jews in America for the first time since WW2 are going to face even tougher times.
As much as I agree with your wishes for us I have to say it won’t happen. We need real leadership but we have only professional politicians with a lot of ego and have no intention of serving the national interest where and probably when it’s most needed.
Wars are great societal levelers.
Comment by yamit82 — March 27, 2009 @ 9:31 pm
Yamit, You see the Jewish and Christian religions as different, but I see the Christian religion as the fulfillement of the Jewish. For me there is only one religion. I have never yet seen a doctrine in the new testament that doesn’t have findable roots in the Torah. So, I assume hell is there also, hummm… let me think. Ok, here’s one, As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you, I will free your prisoners from the waterless pit. Zechariah 9:11 This one even mentions the blood of the covenant
Comment by ronmorgen — March 27, 2009 @ 9:32 pm
The Christian religion cannot be the fulfillment of Judaism! see my next comment on that. I will post later.
This periscope flows naturally from the preceding one and, therefore, the addressee here, as in v. 9, must be Zion or Jerusalem. The connection is established by the particle <G~ (gam), “moreover,” which indicates that the one who has been promised such wonderful blessings as the coming king will provide has even more to anticipate. The introduction of v. 11 by the independent personal pronoun T=a^ (at, “you”) draws attention to that pronoun. It is you, Zion, who are the special object of YHWH’s saving purpose.
Using the metaphor of imprisonment, YHWH says He will release Zion’s prisoners from the waterless pit. This is a backward reference to the release and restoration of the Babylonian exiles as a historical type, though nowhere else is the word “pit” (roB, bor) used to describe that experience. Pits, however, were common places of confinement in the ancient world. Joseph was thrown into a pit—one, it should be noted, without water (Gen. 37:24). Jeremiah, too, was incarcerated in a pit without water (Jer. 38:6). The significance of this is that pits frequently were dug precisely to contain water, so that one without it was unusual. Moreover, a waterless pit would guarantee quick death by thirst unless one were supplied with drinking water
If, indeed, there is reference here to an historical deliverance, the prophet still has an eschatological one primarily in mind as the entire context attests. God’s people had been in the “pit” of Babylonian exile, but they would find themselves in a worse predicament in the end of the age. From that pit God would again retrieve them according to His faithfulness to His covenant promises. What He has done in the past provides encouragement for those who face an uncertain and even hopeless future.
The basis for the release of the prisoners from the pit, Zechariah says, is “the blood of your covenant.” This remarkable statement is most likely a synecdoche in which the blood, the sign of the covenant, stands for the covenant itself. The offering of sacrifices was an indispensable element of covenant making in the ancient Near East. The death of the animal involved, represented by the spilling of its blood, was part of a covenant sanction and suggested not only the binding together of the partners in covenant but the punishment that could be expected were one of the parties to violate its terms. One example of many that could be given is particularly apropos of the covenant here in Zechariah, and that is the sealing of the Sinaitic covenant with blood (Ex. 24:1-8). Once the general and specific stipulations had been disclosed and Israel had sworn to enter covenant with YHWH, an altar and 12 pillars were erected at the foot of the mountain. Peace-offerings then followed, the blood of which was dashed against both the altar, symbolizing YHWH, and the pillars, symbolizing the 12 tribes. Moses then said, “Look, the blood of the covenant” (v. 8), the very terminology used by Zechariah. Clearly, then, YHWH has released the prisoners from Babylonian exile because of the covenant He had made with His people long ago. This is what He had promised to do in the great blessings sections of the covenant texts of Leviticus (26:40-45) and Deuteronomy (30:1-10).
Comment by yamit82 — March 28, 2009 @ 7:29 am
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/law20of20moses/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/sin20and20atonement/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/the20trinity/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/paul/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/zechariah2012-1020new/
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/satan/
http://audio.simpletoremember.com/singer/lb/Rabbi%20Singer%20Answer%20Questions%20Part%201.mp3
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/rabbi20singer20answer20questions20part202/
Comment by yamit82 — March 28, 2009 @ 11:32 am
“What we should be doing is working together as one and try to figure the best way to protect Israel from her adversary who are many. The new government needs to stand tall and stick by her guns.”
You mean like this:
The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew from the LORD, like showers on the grass, which do not wait for man or linger for mankind. The remnant of Jacob will be among the nations, in the midst of many peoples, like a lion among the beasts of the forest, like a young lion among flocks of sheep, which mauls and mangles as it goes, and no one can rescue. Your hand will be lifted up in triumph over your enemies, and all your foes will be destroyed. Micah 5
If my people would but listen to me, if Israel would follow my ways, how quickly would I subdue their enemies and turn my hand against their foes! Those who hate the LORD would cringe before him, and their punishment would last forever.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 28, 2009 @ 3:56 pm
The trinity
Comment by yamit82 — March 28, 2009 @ 4:30 pm
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. Genesis 1:1
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness… Genesis 1:26
Kiss the Son , lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him. Psalms 2:12
Comment by ronmorgen — March 28, 2009 @ 5:33 pm
Here is the Jewish Translation:
Christens as always changed, perverted and as their wont mistranslated on purpose the Hebrew original:
Do homage ( embrace) in(cleanliness) purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, when suddenly His wrath is kindled.
Happy are all they that take refuge in Him. Psalm 2:12
In the book of Psalms there is no Aramiac. Bar is Aramiac and also Hebrew. King James version translates Bar in every case as cleanliness and or purity, except this verse from Psalm, 2:12. Now why do you think they would do that? Might they have an agenda trying to proves preconceived dogma through Jewish scriptures and when they can’t they invent, change and leave out on purpose words, letters, and mistranslate original meanings as well as ignoring correct contexts of their interpretations.
the translation of Gen 1:26. The Hebrew text is contained here
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0101.htm
- this interface doesn’t let me use the Hebrew characters.
The text literally is translated like this:
26 And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’
I can only assume that you’re asking me this question because this is a surefire way for Christians to slam-dunk a concept of trinity down your throat. Well, that would not be a way to do it. I’d like to quote Rabbi Tovia Singer below, and credit him with this answer in its entirety - I am simply repeating what he said in answer to this missionary claim.
This verse appears in missionary literature quite often in spite of the fact that this argument has been answered countless times throughout the centuries. Let’s examine Genesis 1:26, as I have quoted it above.
With limited knowledge of the Jewish scriptures, missionaries advance the above verse in as evidence that there was a plurality in the godhead which was responsible for creation. What other explanation could adequately account for the Bible’s use of the plural pronouns such as “us” and “our” in this verse?
This argument, however, is grievously flawed. In fact, a great number of Trinitarian Christian scholars have long abandoned the notion that Genesis 1:26 implies a plurality of persons in the godhead. Rather, Christian scholars overwhelmingly agree that the plural pronoun in this verse is a reference to God’s ministering angels who were created previously, and the Almighty spoke majestically in the plural, consulting His heavenly court. Let’s read the comments of a number of preeminent Trinitarian Bible scholars on this subject. For example, the evangelical Christian author Gordon J. Wenham, who is no foe of the Trinity and authored a widely respected two-volume commentary on the Book of Genesis, writes on this verse,
Christians have traditionally seen [Genesis 1:26] as adumbrating [foreshadowing] the Trinity. It is now universally admitted that this was not what the plural meant to the original author.
The New International Version is hardly a Bible that can be construed as being friendly to Judaism. Yet, the NIV Study Bible also writes in its commentary on Genesis 1:26,
Us . . . Our . . . Our. God speaks as the Creator-king, announcing His crowning work to the members of His heavenly court. (see 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; I Kings 22:19-23; Job 15:8; Jeremiah 23:18)
Charles Caldwell Ryrie, a highly regarded dispensationalist professor of Biblical Studies at the Philadelphia College of Bible and author of the widely read Bible commentary, The Ryrie Study Bible, writes in his short and to-the-point annotation on Genesis 1:26,
Us . . . Our. Plurals of majesty.
The Liberty Annotated Study Bible, a Bible commentary published by the Reverend Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, similarly remarks on this verse,
The plural pronoun “Us” is most likely a majestic plural from the standpoint of Hebrew grammar and syntax.
The 10-volume commentary by Keil and Delitzsch is considered by many to be the most influential exposition on the “Old Testament” in evangelical circles. Yet in its commentary on Genesis 1:26, we find,
http://www.simpletoremember.com/media/a/the20trinity/
The plural “We” was regarded by the fathers and earlier theologians almost unanimously as indicative of the Trinity; modern commentators, on the contrary, regard it either as pluralis majestatis . . . No other explanation is left, therefore, than to regard it as pluralis majestatis . . . .
The question that immediately comes to mind is: What would compel these evangelical scholars — all of whom are Trinitarian — to determinedly conclude that Genesis 1:26 does not suggest the Trinity, but rather a majestic address to the angelic hosts of heaven? Why would the comments of the above conservative Christian writers so perfectly harmonize with the Jewish teaching on this verse?
The answer to this question is simple. If you search the Bible you will find that when the Almighty speaks of “us” or “our,” He is addressing His ministering angels. In fact, only two chapters later, God continues to use the pronoun “us” as He speaks with His angels. At the end of the third chapter of Genesis the Almighty relates to His angels that Adam and his wife have eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and must therefore be prevented from eating from the Tree of Life as well; for if man would gain access to the Tree of Life he will “become like one of us.” The Creator then instructs his angels known as Cherubim to stand at the gate of the Garden of Eden waving a flaming sword so that mankind is prevented from entering the Garden and eating from the Tree of Life. Let’s examine Genesis 3:22-24.
Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” — therefore the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the Garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.
This use of the majestic plural in Genesis 3:22-24 is what is intended by the NIV Study Bible’s annotation on Genesis 1:26 (above). At the end of its comment on this verse, the NIV Study Bible provides a number of Bible sources from the Jewish scriptures to support its position that “God speaks as the Creator-king, announcing His crowning work to the members of His heavenly court.” The verses cited are: Genesis 3:22, 11:7, Isaiah 6:8, I Kings 22:19-23, Job 15:8, and Jeremiah 23:18. These verses convey to the attentive Bible reader that the heavenly abode of the Creator is filled with the ministering angels who attend the Almighty and to whom He repeatedly refers when using the plural pronoun “Us.”
Outsiders often wonder what binding force keeps the Jewish people united in faith. This is not so odd a question when we consider the inner conflict that has followed our people throughout our extraordinary history. Bear in mind that regardless of the turbulent quarrels that fester among us, the oneness of God remains the binding thread which unites the Jewish people in history and witness. The teachings of the Torah were designed to set forever in the national conscience of the Jewish people the idea that God is one alone and therefore the only object of our devotion and worship.
Keep trying but understand no Christian can win on the facts or truth in those facts. You may believe what you will but know that you according to Judaism you believe in the false and not the truth. There is only one truth the Jewish truth which is what you call the OT.
No Christian in our mutual histories has ever won a debate with a learned Jew. Their sources are also mine and here I have only scratched the surface of what we know about our own beliefs and our own texts. Why would any Jew accept the fake, the false and the lie when we already have the only truth relating to G-d.
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 5:45 am
Yamit I believe you are the proof of the pudding in this case.
Listen stop getting into these pissing contest when you know you are going to be the victor.
Save your talent in working on a solution to uniting all of Israel and hopefully gaining support of the American Jews.
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 6:45 am
Save your talent in working on a solution to uniting all of Israel and hopefully gaining support of the American Jews.
I am hoping Obama will do it for us, or at least provide the catalyst for most Jews uniting. If not? Then we are doubly in deep shit on all counts and on all fronts. You know the old saw: “YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER BUT CAN’T MAKE HIM DRINK”? If Obama and company can’t get the Jews to drink the sweet waters of unity and survival then we will surely drink bitter waters aided by our own indifference and our own self destructive natures. Our problems are as much an internal Jewish problem as any other. We solve the problem either by first solving our own internal differences and facing our external threats together or by having the external threat force the unity of purpose on us; the third option is we cease to exist as a people and except for a small few Judaism will be dead as well. Our divisiveness shows to our enemies our inherent weaknesses and it will be exploited for our folly. This I am sure of, as it has already begun in ERNEST! The jewish reaction in Israel and in the Diaspora is to say the least disheartening but then I look back on our history and realize that we have had similar situations before and some of us survived to live another day, so it will again no matter what! So be it. God never placed a threat before the Jewish people without first putting in place the cure or solution and I expect this time will be no different.
Pissing contest? No pissing contest, Just a Jew willing to challenge a missionary on his own turf using his own weapons.
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 7:23 am
Yamit, thats where it begins. United and standing together can withstand any threat.
Yamit, never let it be said you don’t know what your talking about.
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 7:31 am
Yamit, by the way could I be correct in thinking the person you had this dialouge with is a Jehovah Witness missionary?
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 9:12 am
I don’t know, they all sound the same to my untrained ear. There are so many sects and denominations you need a road map to understand and differentiate one from the other. I personally have no interest in doing so. I got enough to handle just with the Jews.
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 12:39 pm
Listen, your not doing such a bad job with the Jews, soon you will have peskin under control.
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 1:02 pm
Yamit, you said, The Hebrew text is contained here- And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image. What do you think the plurals of “us’ and “our” mean?
God is one. I don’t think there are three God’s, but, he himself speaks of himself in the plural. God is love.
Nope, not a Jehovas witness, don’t go to a church, just my bible.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 29, 2009 @ 3:37 pm
Listen ronmorgen, I think Yamit is trying to tell you find another gig. Right now we are all concerned about Israel. Pretty much of everyone here is either Jew, Christian of a sort or Catholic. Nobody is looking or conversion. Thanks anyway.
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 3:53 pm
I’m sorry, I don’t think I’ve introduced myself. I am a Christian, but none denominational. I believe I may also be Jewish by blood, but that is debatable do to no family records. I am pro-Israel in the extreme and also pro-Jesus in the extreme. Read Zionist Christian. Of course being a believer love demands I would want all Israeli’s to come to Jesus their messiah and be saved. I believe that will happen and it is scripturally established. I am not your enemy. Please don’t feel threatened. I promise I will only use words. I also want to say when I was in Israel it felt so good, I was overwhelmed with God’s peace and impressed by the Jewish worshippers. Shalom
Comment by ronmorgen — March 29, 2009 @ 3:57 pm
ronmorgen, Amen. By the way you used your alloted words.
Yamit thanks you, Ted thanks you and we all thank you.
Comment by rongrand — March 29, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
Ok, God bless you all, and God bless Israel.
Comment by ronmorgen — March 29, 2009 @ 4:25 pm
The answer to this question is simple. If you search the Bible you will find that when the Almighty speaks of “us” or “our,” He is addressing His ministering angels. In fact, only two chapters later, God continues to use the pronoun “us” as He speaks with His angels. At the end of the third chapter of Genesis the Almighty relates to His angels that Adam and his wife have eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and must therefore be prevented from eating from the Tree of Life as well; for if man would gain access to the Tree of Life he will “become like one of us.” The Creator then instructs his angels known as Cherubim to stand at the gate of the Garden of Eden waving a flaming sword so that mankind is prevented from entering the Garden and eating from the Tree of Life. Let’s examine Genesis 3:22-24.
How romantic!
I don’t love G-d.
Jewish concept of love, as any ancient notion, is less romantic than the one in European poetry. Jews are commanded to love God, but he also loves them – apparently, with no romantic connotations. We must love neighbors, and Psalmist “loves the law.” The slave may ignominiously choose to remain with his master whom he “loves.” The Hebrew word is best rendered as “longing” or “attaching oneself to someone or something,” such as in Ecclesiastes 5:9: “He who longs for money, will not be satisfied with money.” It is a sensible notion that Jews should attach themselves to God, and he likewise attaches himself to the chosen people. There is no love in the modern sense. Fear and attaching ourselves to God go hand in hand. God is undoubtedly wise and acts correctly – but he is not merciful, as the generation of Holocaust can testify.
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 4:45 pm
Back to topic of Christians support Israel with petition:
Hagee clip with negative commentary by Liberal Leftists.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct4_ze_FjNo&NR=1
I happen to generally agree with Hagee’s understanding of why the Holocaust happened and what that can mean for the rest of Jewry in the diaspora: It is easy to justify Holocaust from the divine point of view. He warned Jews repeatedly; we have prophecies and precedents. By far, most of the Jews who perished would have perished anyway – peacefully, in the ovens of assimilation, in a generation or two. It is telling that the Holocaust started in Germany, the birthplace of reformism, Jewish assimilationist movement. It afterwards wiped out the residents of European countries who remained Jewish only in their names, and often changed the names, too.
Their morality being decomposed by the fear endemic to the Exile, those Jews should not be allowed to enter the Promised Land: we have enough problems with leftist defeatists and couldn’t afford seven millions of Jews with no fighting spirit. The generation of the Exodus likewise died before entering the Promised Land.
European Jews committed an incredible sin of refusing to move to the Promised Land as soon as they had an occasion in the early twentieth century. They posed a tremendous threat to Judaism, they perverted the Torah centered on the Holy Land and they made Judaism into a religion; you can observe it in Boro Park today. Their Judaism became a religion of Sabbath rites and yeshivas, not the way of the real life.
The perversion had to be removed. Are American Jews next?
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 5:25 pm
Back to topic of Christians support Israel with petition:
Hagee clip with negative commentary by Liberal Leftists.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct4_ze_FjNo&NR=1
I happen to generally agree with Hagee’s understanding of why the Holocaust happened and what that can mean for the rest of Jewry in the diaspora: It is easy to justify Holocaust from the divine point of view. He warned Jews repeatedly; we have prophecies and precedents. By far, most of the Jews who perished would have perished anyway – peacefully, in the ovens of assimilation, in a generation or two. It is telling that the Holocaust started in Germany, the birthplace of reformism, Jewish assimilationist movement. It afterwards wiped out the residents of European countries who remained Jewish only in their names, and often changed the names, too.
Their morality being decomposed by the fear endemic to the Exile, those Jews should not be allowed to enter the Promised Land: we have enough problems with leftist defeatists and couldn’t afford seven millions of Jews with no fighting spirit. The generation of the Exodus likewise died before entering the Promised Land.
European Jews committed an incredible sin of refusing to move to the Promised Land as soon as they had an occasion in the early twentieth century. They posed a tremendous threat to Judaism, they perverted the Torah centered on the Holy Land and they made Judaism into a religion; you can observe it in Boro Park today. Their Judaism became a religion of Sabbath rites and yeshivas, not the way of the real life.
The perversion had to be removed. Are American Jews next? God is undoubtedly wise and acts correctly – but he is not merciful, as the generation of Holocaust can testify.
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 5:27 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct4_ze_FjNo&NR=1
Comment by yamit82 — March 29, 2009 @ 5:31 pm
God is undoubtedly wise and acts correctly – but he is not merciful, as the generation of Holocaust can testify.
Yamit, you are only seeing what your physical eyes can see. The Holocaust came to bring about the greater good of bringing Israel back to the land of their forfathers to serve him.
“This is what the LORD says: “‘Cries of fear are heard — terror, not peace. Ask and see: Can a man bear children? Then why do I see every strong man with his hands on his stomach like a woman in labor, every face turned deathly pale? How awful that day will be! None will be like it. It will be a time of trouble for Jacob, but he will be saved out of it. In that day, declares the LORD Almighty, I will break the yoke off their necks and will tear off their bonds; no longer will foreigners enslave them. Instead, they will serve the LORD their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them. Jeremiah 30:5-9 NIV
Notice the resurrection of David’s son prophecied in this verse. We know David is in his grave, so who could this be talking about? David’s son Jesus, the king of Israel, who is not in his grave. Open your spiritual eyes, you have rejected your king long enouph.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 5:30 pm
ronmorgen:
We can all say amen to that. The fulfillment of that statement is furnished by the election of Obama-America’s only salvation and redemption from a truly devillish,evil regime.
Comment by h peskin — June 28, 2009 @ 5:46 pm
Quote Peskin: Obama-America’s only salvation and redemption from a truly devillish,evil regime.
Peskin, You forgot your sarc tag. Or do you really believe that.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 6:18 pm
ronmorgan: I do, I truly do. And if you looked into your heart, deep down, you too would see how very bad, America’s situation was under the unmentionable previous leadership.
Ron it is wake-up time- the alarm has wrung. Time to get up and join the forces for change, salvation, and spiritual redemption. See the error of your ways and turn the page.
Comment by h peskin — June 28, 2009 @ 6:31 pm
Now how do we get from King David to Jesus and How do we get from, King Davids son to Jesus?
Jeremiah prophesied in Babylon and he was speaking about that day: The day of the assassination of Belshazzar and the downfall of Babylon. Another explanation: the day of the downfall of Gog.
no longer will foreigners enslave them. Instead, they will serve the LORD their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them. Jeremiah 30:5-9 NIV
8. And it shall be on that day, says the Lord of Hosts, [that] I will break his yoke off your neck, and I will break your thongs, and strangers shall no longer enslave them.
I will break his yoke: The yoke of the heathens will be removed from Israel.
9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and David their king, whom I will set up for them. Hebrew translation!http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16027/showrashi/true
Whose Gospel do you follow The authors of the Matthew and Luke “gospels” for determining the linage of your god on a stick?
THE “messiah” is supposed to be descended from the blood-line of King David? Your Guy was no blood decedent!!!!!
For sure. God’s promise to David was explicit: his throne was always to pass from a father to his natural son (the Hebrew word zera, seed, literally means semen or sperm) “who came out of his genitals” (2 Sam. 7:12, 16)—
“ki yim’l'u yamecha v’shachav’ta et avotecha, vahakimoti et zar’acha aharecha asher yétzé mimei’echa vahachinoti et mam’lach’to… v’ne’man beit’cha umam’lach’t'cha ad olam l’fanecha—kis’acha yih’yeh nachon ad olam.”
“When your days are ended and you have passed away, I shall raise up your own ’seed’ who will come out of your genitals and I will make his kingdom secure… your dynasty and your kingdom are secure for ever—your throne will be established [in this way] for all time.”
When God made this promise to King David, He established at the same time the law of succession to the throne of Yisrael: it passes by blood and by blood only: an adopted “son” has no claim to the succession because he is not “the king’s own ’seed’ who came out of his genitals”. This last point is very important, as will become apparent in a moment.
The authors of the Matthew and Luke “gospels” try very hard to establish that Yéshu was a direct descendant of the blood-line of King David. Unfortunately, though, the two writers disagree about the lineage, and provide two completely different ancestries! But in any case, the whole exercise is futile, because in fact they are not tracing Yéshu’s ancestry at all—they are tracing the ancestry of “Joseph”, who they then say was not actually the baby’s biological father! And, if he was not the baby’s biological father, his ancestry is irrelevant. Aha, they say… but Yéshu was Joseph’s “adopted son”, which is as good as being his natural son… well, no it isn’t—an adopted son is not from the Royal blood-line, as I have already explained.
Ah, the christians say, but the reason the two “lineages” are different is because one was Yéshu’s “legal” ancestry and the other was his “biological” ancestry (whatever that is supposed to mean!), and furthermore, they claim, only the lineage in Matthew 1:2-16 is “really” Joseph’s—the one in Luke 3:23-38 is “really” Mary’s.
Yeah, right. What utter boloney! First of all, the mother’s ancestry is totally irrelevant when we are considering heirdom to the throne. Why?—because a woman cannot be “king” in Hebrew law, and a king’s daughter does not have “royal blood”. A mother cannot pass on to her child something she does not have herself, and hence the daughter of a king cannot pass on “royal blood” to her son. So Mary’s ancestry is irrelevant, and a Hebrew writer would have known this; but “Luke” was a gentile, as all christians admit.
In fact, it simply is not true that an adopted child’s name is quoted in Hebrew culture using the adoptive father’s name, rather than the biological father’s name, as christians claim. As ever, this claim is always made without any Scripture being cited as precedent—for no precedent exists to support it. On the contrary: the only instance of adoption in Scripture that I can think of discredits the claim. In Esther 2:5-7, it is recorded that—
ish y’hudi hayah b’shushan habirah ush’mo mordochai ben ya’ir ben shim’i ben kish ish y’mini…
vay’hi omén et hadassah hi estér bat dodo ki ein lah av va’ém…
uv’mot avihah v’immah l’kahah mordochai lo l’vat.
A certain Judæan man was living in Susa, the capital—his name was Mordochai son of Ya’ir, a descendant of Shim’i son of Kish—a man of [the tribe] Binyamin…
…who was raising his cousin Hadassah—that is, Estér—because she didn’t have a father or a mother… when her parents died, Mordochai had adopted her as his own daughter.
Here is an explicit example in Scripture of the adoption of a Hebrew orphan: “when her parents died, Mordochai had adopted her as his own daughter”. But is she ever called “Estér daughter of Mordochai”? No—on the contrary, her full name is used twice in the text, both times as “Estér daughter of Avihayil”—her biological father (Esther 2:15, 9:29). There is no instance of an adoped child ever being called the “son” or “daughter” of the adoptive father; indeed, that would be considered most disrespectful to the memory of the deceased biological father (the references to “keeping alive the name of the dead one” in Ruth 4:5 & 4:10 refer to the Hebrew custom, which is still practised, of naming a child of the next generation in memory of a departed parent or grandparent to “keep alive” that parent’s or grandparent’s name).
Secondly, the lineage given in Luke 3:23ff is not Mary’s, however much christians pretend that it “really” is. This is very clear in the actual text, which begins…
23 kai autoV hn o ihsouV wsei etwn triakonta arcomenoV wn wV enomizeto uioV iwshj tou hli
24 tou matqat…..
23 And Yéshu himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli,
24 Which was [the son] of Matthat…..
In fact, both the “ancestries” are unreliable and show that these two writers were not familiar with Scripture. The “Luke” version has an extra generation between Shem’s son Arpach’shad (”Arphaxad”) and his son Shelah (”Salah”)—the additional name quoted is “Cainan”, the same as the grandson of Shet (”Seth”) nine generations earlier. The “Matthew” version begins with Abraham and reckons correctly the 14 generations from him until David (inclusive), but then it only lists 14 of the eighteen generations from Solomon to Jehoiachin (also called Jechoniah), who was exiled by the Chaldæan king Nebuchadnezzar II in 597 BCE. Aha, christians will tell you (they have an answer for everything, don’t they?), it is common in Scripture for lineages to be abbreviated. Well yes, it is—but here, the author is not intending to abbreviate the lineage, because he counts the number of generations and he is very specific about how many generations he claims that there were (Matthew 1:17)—
17 pasai oun ai geneai apo abraam ewV dabid geneai dekatessareV kai apo dabid ewV thV metoikesiaV babulwnoV geneai dekatessareV…..
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations…..
…except there were not 14 generations “from King David until the carrying away into Babylon”, there were eighteen, as can be readily verified by studying Kings and Chronicles:
1. Solomon, son of David
2. Rehoboam, son of Solomon
3. Abijam (also called “Abijah”), son of Rehoboam
4. Asa, son of Abijam
5. Jehoshafat, son of Asa
6. Jehoram (also called “Joram”), son of Jehoshafat
7. Ahaziah, son of Jehoram
8. Joash (also called “Jehoash”), son of Ahaziah
9. Amaziah, son of Joash
10. Azariah (called “Uzziah” in Chronicles), son of Amaziah
11. Jotham, son of Azariah/Uzziah
12. Ahaz, son of Jotham
13. Hezekiah, son of Ahaz
14. Menasheh, son of Hezekiah
15. Amon, son of Menasheh
16. Josiah, son of Amon
17. Jehoiakim, son of Josiah
18. Jehoiachin (also called “Jechoniah”), son of Jehoiakim
The devices that christians employ to try to explain away the glaring error in Matthew’s false statement that “there were fourteen generations from David until the carrying away into Babylon” are so contrived that they are laughable: some will claim that the writer is “not counting those kings who were wicked” (oh yes? then why does he include Ahaz and Menasheh, who were probably the two worst ones of all?), others even try to pretend that a “generation” has some completely different “meaning” in Hebrew culture—how do they know this? It’s news to me, and to any other native-born Hebrew! In fact, the Hebrew word dor, a “generation”, means exactly the same as the English word used to translate it—a single father-to-son step in the listing of a person’s ancestry. I have no doubt that the dishonest christian clergy who, even today, continue to promulgate this kind of deception, know perfectly well that Matthew’s statement is false and whatever they say will be an attempt to cover it up and explain it away—what constantly amazes me is that the ordinary rank-and-file christians can be so stupid that they never question anything they are told and fall for such transparent lies time after time!
Finally, the last section of Matthew’s “ancestry”—which cannot be corroborated from any Scriptural or external source—contains only thirteen names up to and including iwshj ton andra mariaV ex hV egennhqh ihsouV o legomenoV cristoV (”Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Yéshu, who is called messiah”—1:16)… and yet in this case, too, verse 17 claims that
…..kai apo thV metoikesiaV babulwnoV ewV tou cristou geneai dekatessareV…..
…..and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Messiah are fourteen generations……
I doesn’t seem to matter a jot to the deceitful author that “Joseph” was not Yéshu’s father: after all, he (the author) knew that none of his readers would even notice this detail, and wouldn’t care about it anyway, even if they did notice; and he seems to deliberately obfuscate the issue by writing “Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Yéshu”—implying that, at least in some sense, Yéshu was “born of” both of them.
In fact, the “gospels” never call Yéshu “the son of David”. The Hebrew name David is spelt dauid (delta, alpha, upsilon, iota, alpha—”DAUID”) in the pseudo-septuagint, but the name of Yéshu’s alleged ancestor is consistently given as dabid (delta, alpha, beta, iota, alpha—”DABID”) throughout the Textus Receptus of the “gospels”. I have no clue who “Dabid” was, but being a “son of Dabid” gives him no claim to messiahship.
I think Ronmorgen you had better dump your false Messiah, False deity, False Prophet: You can’t base your beliefs on Jewish scripture it won’t cut the mustard.
Comment by yamit82 — June 28, 2009 @ 8:15 pm
Now how do we get from King David to Jesus and How do we get from, King Davids son to Jesus?
Jesus and Mary were both of the house of David. His resurrection proved he was the prophecied messiah.
2 Samuel 7:8-16 (Samuel through Nathan for David)
“Tell my servant David, ‘This is what the LORD Almighty says:… When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.
I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever. (offspring is singular meaning Christ)
Or here:
Isaiah 53
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot,and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. 3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. 4Surly he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. 5But he was pierced for our transgressions (John 20:25), he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. 6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. ( 1 Pet 1:18, Hebrews 9 ) 7He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. 8By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. 9He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death (Mt 27:57-60) , though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. 10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand. 11After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light [of life] and be satisfied ( Psalm 16:10, Psalm 17:15, Jeremiah 30:8, Lk 24, 1Corinthians 15:3-6 ) ; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. 12Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 9:03 pm
Yamit, to answer your enthusiasm about Obama. You will soon see what he does for Israel. He is no friend of Israel. But God is. Trust in Him not Obama.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 9:16 pm
as the generation of Holocaust can testify.
Key word here is merciful! I never said that G-d was not correct and I explained why.
No I am not!
The Holocaust came to bring about the greater good of bringing Israel back to the land of their forfathers to serve him.
ee
The greater good? If he caused all the Christians to die a horrible death like those Jews, then I might agree about your concept of greater good. It’s going to happen anyway according to Zach 14
Be careful Ronmorgen the Prophet says that we Jews have the truth and in the end you will all come to the Jews and not the other way around. The Jews have the truth you have the lie and the false belief.
11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside Me there is no saviour. Isa 43:11
Whom to believe Isaiah or you?
Comment by yamit82 — June 28, 2009 @ 9:33 pm
Whom to believe Isaiah or you
Do believe Isaiah. He is known as the Messianic prophet and points to Jesus many times.
Why don’t you read Isaiah 53 about the suffering of Messiah for our sins:
Isaiah 53:1-54:2
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. 9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
11 After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light [of life] and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 10:01 pm
Hmm Isaiah 53 when all you Christians are down you hope to hit us with the old reliable Isa 53. Tell me have you ever read Isaiah 52, 51, 54 59 etc. I be you haven’t and even if you have you understand zilch: Christian like to shoot arrows into a tree and then paint a bulleye target around it and that’s exactly what you are doing here. First of all the Tanach has no defined chapters it’s a wholly Christian invention. Jews apparently liked the idea as it was necessary for Jews to be on the same plane as Christians when we were forced into disputations. Of Course if the Jews won Jews would be killed and pillaged and if we Lost Jews would be killed and pillaged sort of like a lose lose situation.
Isaiah 53, I will skip most of the historical backround but you need to know it to understand Isaiah correctly. So on your own time get a Jewish history book written by Jews and learn.
First thing is to dump your NT and your concordances as most will not be too much help in understanding most of Hebrew scripture. You see ron the Christian had and have an agenda and that is to show where you stick god fits into our holy scriptures. The fact of the matter is none of them really do:
The first verse of this passage starts Hinneh, yaskil avdi… or “See, My servant will succeed…” The speaker is clearly God Himself (nobody will argue about that), but whom is He referring to as His “servant”? Naturally, christians insist that the “servant” is Yéshu, their idol-man, but is that consistent with the way Y’shayahu uses that term in other places? Clearly it is critically important that we identify correctly whom or what the prophet means when he speaks about God’s “servant” if we are to discover what the “Suffering Servant” passage is really all about.
It is widely recognised that Y’shayahu’s book is really two books in one (chapters 1-39 and chapters 40-66) ? some christians even assert that it’s actually the work of two different authors, and call the second half by the name “Deutero-Isaiah” ? so I need not cover that topic at any length here. Suffice it to say that the whole tone and language of the book changes at the start of chapter 40.
Whether the two halves of Y’shayahu were written by the same author or by two different authors, the writer in the second half was very fond of the term “God’s servant”, which he uses many times as a metaphor for Yisrael ? that is to say, the whole Hebrew nation, not the individual named Yisrael, i.e. the patriarch Ya’akov (whom christians call “Jacob”). Here are some examples:
“But you, Yisrael ? My servant Ya’akov, whom I chose ? My beloved Avraham’s zera….” (41:8)
“You are My witnesses,” says Adonai, “My servant whom I chose….” (43:10)
[the whole of chapter 43 is addressed explicitly to Yisrael in its opening verse]
“And now, listen, Ya’akov My servant, and Yisrael whom I have chosen….” (44:1)
“….Don’t be afraid, My servant Ya’akov, Y’shurun whom I have chosen….” (44:2)
“Remember these things Ya’akov, Yisrael : you are My servant ? I made you to be a servant to Me, Yisrael….” (44:21)
“For the sake of My servant Ya’akov ? Yisrael My chosen one….” (45:4)
“Adonai has redeemed His servant Ya’akov!” (48:20)
“You are My servant, Yisrael….” (49:3)
Having used the metaphor “God’s servant” so many times in chapters 41-49, and made it so abundantly clear that by it he meant the nation of Yisrael every time he used it, I guess the writer didn’t feel he needed to spell it out yet again when he reached chapter 53; but of course he didn’t reckon with christianity coming along and twisting his words. Maybe, if he had realised what was going to happen, he would have spelt it out again, in words of one syllable, in the “Suffering Servant” chapter. But in any event, the evidence of his many previous usages of the metaphor is there for all to see, and there is no indication that the intended meaning in the “Suffering Servant” chapter is any different. Can anyone deny that Yisrael has suffered through the ages? The consequence is that whenever the writer refers to the “servant” using the pronouns he, him or his, we must take into account when translating his poetic metaphors that he is talking about an entire nation rather than an individual person, so that it is actually more appropriate in a translation to use the plural forms they, them and their.
The first three verses of the chapter (i.e. the three that are transplanted to the end of chapter 52 in modern printed Bibles), which segue seamlessly into the beginning of “chapter 53″ in the original Hebrew text, read as follows:
My “servant” will succeed in becoming uplifted, and will become exalted and very powerful. Just as many used to marvel about you and say “Their appearance is too hideous to be human,” so [in the future] many nations will exclaim the same thing ? their kings will be speechless because [suddenly] they will see things that were never talked about and will realise things that were never heard of [before]! “Who would have believed our report?” [they will say.....]
The “kings of the gentile nations” continue speaking throughout most of “chapter 53″ (apart from the last few verses where God Himself responds to them): looking back on the events of the past from their vantage-point in the distant future, they confess their own guilt for the part the gentile nations have played in the unjust persecution that we, Yisrael, have endured at their hands throughout history ? how we, God’s “servant”, have suffered because of the “sins” that they committed against us. It is the several remarks of that nature in this passage which, because they are deliberately mis-translated in christian “Per-Versions” with the preposition for cunningly substituted in place of through or because of, are mistaken by naïve and unsuspecting christians for allusions to their idol-man who ? or so they are taught ? suffered and died “for” their “sins”.
This is how Isaiah 53 should be read note the commentary:
52:13. My “servant” will succeed in becoming uplifted, and will become exalted and very powerful.
My servant - Yisrael.
52:14. Just as many used to marvel about you and say “Their appearance is too hideous to be human”,
“Their appearance is too hideous to be human” - Hebrews have frequently been carricatured as hideously ugly: deformed, swarthy and with exaggerated hooked noses.
52:15. so will he scatter many nations ? their kings will be speechless because [suddenly] they will see things that were never talked about and will realise things that were never heard of [before]!
he will scatter - Hebrew ?????? yazzeh, the same verb as that used for the “splashing” of the blood of the atonement sacrifices by the Chief Kohen in Vayikra 16:14.
will be speechless - literally “will shut their mouths”. They will be so astonished that they will not know what to say.
things that were never talked about… that were never heard of [before] - a nation so universally despised and derided rising to such eminence.
53:1. Who would have believed our report [they will say,] about the ones that Adonai’s Arm was revealed to?
“our report” - who can believe what we used to say about Yisrael?
“Adonai’s Arm” - a reference to the Exodus (see Shmot 6:6, D’varim 4:34, 5:15, 26:8, M’lachim Beit 17:36 and many similar references).
53:2. For they came up before Him like a suckling babe, like a root out of dry ground; they had neither appearance nor splendour; and, when we saw how unattractive they were, [we said] “Why should we desire them?”
“they” - literally “he”, i.e. God’s “servant”, Yisrael
“came up” - out of Egypt, the usual Scriptural terminology for Yisrael’s departure from Egypt, as in Shmot 13:18 and many other places. Leaving Egypt is described as “going up” for two reasons: firstly, the Goshen region where Yisrael had been living (in the Nile Delta) is very low-lying, so the people “went up” in a very literal sense when they left; and secondly, because Egypt was a God-less place so that Yisrael also “went up” in a spiritual sense when they left there.
“before Him” - almost immediately after leaving Egypt, Yisrael appeared before God at Mount Horev in the Sinai Desert.
“like a suckling babe” - a similar metaphor for the “newly-born” Yisrael nation to that used by Hoshé’a when he says “When Yisrael was a lad, I loved him…” (11:1).
“they had neither appearance nor splendour” - the newly-liberated slaves were ungroomed and unkempt.
53:3. They were despised and isolated from humanity ? men of pains, accustomed to illness; they were despised like those that people turn their faces away from and we considered them worthless.
Can anyone deny that all these things have been said about Yisrael in the past (and are still being said about us today by some)?
53:4. Indeed, they tolerated our ills and our pains ? they bore them; but [we convinced ourselves that] they were being plagued, stricken by God and afflicted.
“they tolerated our ills and bore our pains” - they (Yisrael) were forced to put up with all the “ills” and “pains” that we brought upon them.
“we convinced ourselves” - the “gentile kings” are too embarassed to reveal their own foolishness by actually articulating the words “we convinced ourselves”, but they are nonetheless implied ? indeed, verses 2 through 5 all end with a statement of what “we” said or thought.
53:5. They were pained because of our rebellious sins and crushed because of our iniquities; [we thought that] punishing them would benefit ourselves, and through their wounds we would be healed.
“they were pained because of our rebellious sins, crushed because of our iniquities” - we caused them (Yisrael) much pain and suffering by our own rebellious sinning.
“[we thought that] punishing them…” - see commentary on verse 4 (s.v. “we convinced ourselves”).
53:6. We strayed like sheep, each one of us turned in his own direction, but Adonai accepted their prayers for the iniquity of all of us.
“We strayed like sheep…” - the “gentile kings” frankly confess their own guilt.
“but Adonai accepted their prayers” - even though we persecuted Yisrael grievously and unjustly, they nevertheless prayed on our behalf and we were forgiven by God (see also verse 12).
53:7. They were persecuted and afflicted, but they did not protest; they would be brought [to their death] like sheep [being led] to slaughter, like a ewe that is silent before her shearers, and they would not open their mouths.
“they would be brought [to their death] like sheep [being led] to slaughter” - how tragically, and how literally, was this fulfilled at the Nazi death-camps of the 1940s (not to mention during the numerous auto da fés of the centuries-long christian “Inquisitions”)!
53:8. Now that they have been released from detention and judgement, who could have imagined such a generation? for they were removed far from the land where they lived, and a plague came upon them through the transgression of my people.
“Now that they have been released…” - when Yisrael’s long exile is finally ended, the gentiles will marvel that we could have survived such a long absence (sinfully inflicted upon us by them) from our own land.
“the land where they lived” - literally, “the land of [their] life”.
“a plague” - the term “plague” (Hebrew ?????, nega’) is used in the Scriptures to denote all forms of suffering.
53:9. They submitted to the grave with the wicked and joined with the wealthy in their deaths, even though they had committed no crime and there was no deceit in their mouths.
“They submitted to the grave with the wicked…” - treated like common criminals, they submitted to the Divine Will and accepted God’s judgement upon them.
“even though they had committed no crime…” - this does not mean that every Hebrew who was ever persecuted was totally flawless; guilt and innocence are relative concepts and even if they had been guilty of minor infringements they did not deserve the inhuman treatment to which they were subjected.
It is common for christians to think of the terms “righteous” and the “wicked” as absolutes, referring to people who are either totally “good” or thoroughly “evil” ? but life is not that black-and-white. No man is ever 100% “good” OR 100% “evil” ? we are ALL somewhere in between. The Hebrew words tzaddik (”righteous”) and rasha (”wicked”) are used as relative terms as can be seen, for example, from D’varim 25:1 ? “If there is a dispute between two men and they bring it before a Court and you judge them, then you shall rule in favour of the ‘tzaddik’ and against the ‘rasha’…”.
53:10. It was Adonai who desired to persecute them ? He plagued them; their souls needed only to acknowledge their guilt and then they would see their offspring [live] and have long life, and that which Adonai desires would prosper in their hands.
“It was Adonai who desired to persecute them” - The persecution inflicted upon Yisrael by the gentile nations was in fact God’s intention… those gentile nations were actually acting as God’s agents, even though they did not realise it, used by Him to punish us for our rebellion against Him and ultimately to bring us back to serving Him so we would be worthy to fulfil our rôle in leading the World to His service.
“He plagued them” - It was God Himself who caused our persecution by the gentile nations.
“their souls needed only to acknowledge their guilt…” - The reason He caused us to be persecuted was to make us repent and acknowledge our guilt.
“that which Adonai desires” - the final rehabilitation of Yisrael and the emergence of the King-Messiah who will usher in the final stage of Mankind’s evolution when all will live in peace, serving God and Him alone.
53:11. In their souls’ turmoil they will realise [the purpose] and they will accept [it]; the righteous among My “servant” will be vindicated publicly by their knowledge, because they had to tolerate their wrongdoings.
“In their souls’ turmoil” - Throughout the centuries of Yisrael’s suffering at the hands of the gentile nations.
“they will realise [the purpose] and they will accept [it]” - Yisrael will come to understand why God allowed so much suffering to come upon us and will accept His judgement.
“the righteous among My ’servant’ will be vindicated publicly by their knowledge” - the torah-scholars will eventually receive the respect and recognition they deserve.
“because they” (Yisrael) “had to tolerate their” (the gentiles’) “wrongdoings” (against us).
53:12. Therefore I will assign to them an allocation among the many and they will share out the powerful as plunder, because they gave up their souls in death and were considered as outcasts, and even when suffering the sins of the many they were praying for those wicked ones.
“I will assign to them an allocation among the many” - God will eventually raise Yisrael to the full status of a nation in the eyes of the World.
“they will share out the powerful as plunder” - ultimately Yisrael will triumph over its enemies.
“they gave up their souls in death and were considered as outcasts” - i.e. submitted to persecution by their enemies.
“even when suffering the sins of the many they were praying for those wicked ones” - Hebrews have always prayed for the governments and people of whatever country they were living in, even while they were being persecuted in those lands, as the prophet Yirm’yahu, speaking in God’s Name, had advised the exiled deporteees in Babylonia: “Work for the good of the place to which I have exiled you and pray to God for it, because your own well-being is dependent on its well-being” (Yirm’yahu 29:7). Compare verse 6.
Comment by yamit82 — June 28, 2009 @ 10:33 pm
Your “comentaries” are written by your false teachers. They supposedly tell you what it means. The commentaries are not God’s word. The proper way is to read it, then ask God what it means, and be willing to learn.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. Matthew 23:13-15 KJV
Today they are the same.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 10:56 pm
I have already explained to you quite definitively why Your god idol can’t have come through the lineage of King David: Do you have eyes but do not see and ears that do not hear? You’ve been had, duped, lied too and you do not see clearly? Your brain can not accept the truth and you revel in the lie: Your choice but don’t preach those lies to Jews, You have been warned.
Ressurection: Pagan belief most Knowledgeable Christians even find this one hard to believe. I will come back to this point later.
The death of a “messiah” does not provide “atonement” or “forgiveness of sins”. Scripture indicates several ways of “atoning” for sin, but none of them involves human sacrifice. Rather, obtaining God’s forgiveness requires penitence, remorse, contrition and prayer. The most striking example of this is the story the prophet Yonah’s mission to the Assyrian capital, Nineveh (Yonah 3:1-10)—
Adonai’s word came to Yonah for a second time: “Stand up, and go to that great city Nineveh, and call out to it the announcement that I will tell you”.
So Yonah stood up and went to Nineveh, as Adonai had commanded him (now Nineveh was an enormously large city—it was three days’ walk across). Yonah started to walk into the city and, when he had gone about one day’s walk, he began to call out: “In another forty days, Nineveh will be overthrown!”
The people of Nineveh believed in God; so they declared a Public Fast and dressed themselves in sacking, from the greatest to the least of them. When Nineveh’s king heard about it, even he rose from his throne, removed his royal robes, dressed himself in sacking, and sat on ashes; on the advice of his officials he ordered that it should be proclaimed throughout Nineveh: “Neither man nor livestock—cattle and sheep—shall eat or drink anything; all of them—both people and livestock—must cover themselves in sacking and cry out loudly to God; all men must repent from their evil ways and the violence in their hands! Who knows, perhaps God will relent and change His mind, and turn His blazing fury away from us and not destroy us?”
And when God saw their deeds—that they had repented from their evil ways—God did change His mind about the destruction He had decreed that He would bring upon them—and He did not do it.
The situation for Yisraelites is exactly the same. For us, God has provided the annual “Atonement Day”, Yom Kippur, on the 10th day of Tishri, the 7th month (reckoned from the Spring month, in accordance with the commandment of Ex. 12:2). Sure, there was an “atonement sacrifice” on that day that was offered while the Temple existed, but the sacrifice was purely ceremonial and symbolic: it was not the actual sacrifice that “atoned” for Yisrael’s sins. How do we know this? Well, first of all apply a little logic: can anyone really think that God is so “cheap” that He can be “bought off” with one little goat to pay for all the sins committed by an entire nation in a whole year? And secondly, look at what the chapter that prescribes the Yom Kippur rituals says after the ceremonies have been described (Lev. 16:29-30)—
v’hay’tah lachem l’hukat olam: bahodesh hash’viy’i be’asor lahodesh t’annu et naf’shoteichem v’chol m’la’chah lo ta’asu…..
…..ki bayom hazeh y’chapper aleichem, l’tahér et’chem mikol hato’teichem—lif’nei adonai tit’haru!
It will be an eternal law for you that you will fast and do no work on the 10th day of the 7th month….. for on that day, [God] will provide atonement for you, to purify you from all your sins—you will be purified before Adonai!
and again, just a few verses later (Lev. 16:34)—
v’hay’tah zot lachem l’hukat olam l’chapper al b’nei yisra’el mikol hato’tam ahat bashanah…..
This will be an eternal law for you, for providing atonement to the Yisraelites for all their sins on one day every year…..
Sadly, christians have a tendency to sneer at the idea that fasting can get forgiveness (although, of course, just fasting by itself, and nothing else, indeed does not accomplish atonement: fasting is only an outward demonstration, and it is effective only if it is accompanied by sincere repentance and heart-felt prayer); but it was God who ordained fasting as a sign of repentance on Yom Kippur, so when they scoff at fasting, it is God Himself they are ridiculing.
Scripture is also very clear about the individual bearing personal responsibility for his own actions. This concept is found throughout the Scriptures, starting at the very beginning: a careful analysis of chapter 3 of Genesis reveals that the offence for which the adam was being punished when he was expelled from Éden was his refusal to take responsibility for his own actions, trying instead to lay the blame both on the woman and even on God Himself! The point is emphasized by Deut. 24:16—
Back to your resurrection claim
As Paul candidly admits, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.” (I Corinthians15:17) In essence, the validity of Christianity stands or falls on this claim. Bear in mind that Christianity is not the only religion in human history to proclaim to the Jewish people that their savior or demigod was resurrected from the grave. The claim of a deity who has defeated the grip of death is one of the most common themes embedded in the plethora of religions that have emerged since time immemorial.
the claim of a divine savior who is born of a virgin birth, suffers a brutal death, and ascends to heaven was so very common among pagan and Gnostic religions during the first century (this was especially true for the regions around Tarsus, Paul’s hometown). Mythologies throughout the Roman Empire and beyond contained widespread beliefs that notable mortals and god-men were born of virgins and returned from the dead. See accounts of Romulus, Apollonius of Tyana, Drusilla, Claudius, Dionysus-Bacchus, Tammuz-Adonis, Mithra, Osiris, Krishna, and Buddha.
The question for the Jewish people is simple. Should we accept the numerous claims made by widespread religions of a miraculous resurrection from the dead simply because their zealous defenders promoted them, regardless of how soon following the supposed event it was alleged to have occurred? Claims of biased followers need to be particularly scrutinized, especially if they were the only claims that exist.
Since the belief in Jesus’ resurrection is the foundation of Christianity, we should certainly examine the credibility of this story. What is the evidence for the belief that Jesus rose from the grave? Aside from the accounts in the New Testament, there is no independent supportive documentation, nor is there any circumstantial evidence. There is not even one contemporaneous historian who mentions one word about the resurrection. The entire claim hangs exclusively on the New Testament texts. Moreover, it was the creators and defenders of Christianity who promoted the stories of the resurrection. Their biased testimony must therefore be examined more carefully. Is this testimony reliable? As a seeker of truth, you are the judge.
Obviously, a judge must be impartial, and objectively weigh all of the relevant evidence. Realize this is not a routine case; your relationship with God is at stake. As an individual examining the case for the resurrection, you should not be swayed by conjecture or hearsay, but demand clear proof.
If you were the judge presiding over a murder case, you would want to be absolutely certain before convicting the defendant. If the prosecutor called his key witnesses, but each told a different story, his case would be very shaky. The defense attorney would argue for the acquittal of his client by demonstrating the weakness of the prosecutor’s case. He would impeach the state’s witnesses by showing how their accounts are contradictory.
The resurrection narratives in the Gospels may be convincing testimony for people who have not read them very carefully. As a responsible judge, though, you can’t be satisfied with just a casual examination of the evidence, especially if biased witnesses gave the testimony. The stories told in the New Testament, and the passion narratives in particular, are so inconsistent, that the resurrection story collapses under careful scrutiny. The conflicting testimonies of the evangelists are so unreliable, they would not stand up to critical cross-examination in any court of law. In fact, there is virtually not one detail of the crucifixion and resurrection narratives upon which all four Gospel authors agree. Yet, it is upon this story that the entire Christian religion stands or falls.
The Crucifixion Date:
On Which Day Was Jesus Crucified?
Even the date of the crucifixion is an issue of contention among the four Gospels.
A perfunctory examination of New Testament texts reveals that the Books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke all agree that the Last Supper was actually a Passover Seder. Bearing in mind that Jesus was crucified on the very next day following the Last Supper, that would mean that according to all three synoptic4 Gospels, Jesus was crucified on the first day of Passover, or the 15th day of the Jewish month of Nissan (for example, if tonight were a Passover Seder, then tomorrow would be the first day of Passover).
The author of the Book of John, however, completely contradicts the first three Gospels, and maintains that Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover, or the 14th day of Nissan. The Book of John reads, “Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover . . . . Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.” (19:14-16)
The implications of this stunning contradiction cannot be overstated because both claims cannot be true. In essence, this is not the sort of inconsistency that can be explained away by missionaries insisting that the reason for the varying Gospel accounts is due to different perspectives of the Gospel writers. Jesus was crucified either of the eve of Passover, which is the 14th day of Nissan, as John contends, or on the first day of Passover, which is the 15th day of Nissan, as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke maintain. Jesus could not have been crucified on both days.
As a result of this conflict over the crucifixion date, numerous other aspects of John’s passion narrative will differ radically with the synoptic Gospels. For instance, John’s description of what transpired during the Last Supper is entirely different from the accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. John cannot include a Passover Seder in his version of the Last Supper because according to his reckoning of the date of the crucifixion, the night of the Last Supper fell on the night of the 13th day of Nissan, which was not a holiday. Therefore, in his Last Supper no aspect of the Seder ceremony occurs. In fact, in John’s Last Supper, there is neither eating of the matzo nor drinking of the wine because in John’s Gospel the evening before the crucifixion does not occur on the festival of Passover. In the book of John (chapter 13), where the events that occurred the night before the crucifixion are described, we therefore find no mention of anyone drinking wine, or eating matzo and herbs as we find in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. John’s account of the Last Supper only describes Jesus’ washing the feet of the disciples.
Moreover, John begins his 13th chapter by saying, “Now before the festival of the Passover . . . .” This is a stunning opening statement because according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke that momentous night wasn’t “before the festival of Passover, but rather it was the festival of Passover. Also, according to John, when Judas Iscariot mysteriously leaves the Last Supper with the moneybag, the disciples immediately presume that he is taking money to purchase food for the festive meal (13:29). Why would Judas be purchasing food for the feast if, according to the first three Gospels, they had just eaten it?
Furthermore, John’s story describes how, when the Jews were handing Jesus over to Pontius Pilate to be crucified on the morning of the crucifixion, “They [the Jews] themselves did not enter the headquarters, so as to avoid ritual defilement and to be able to eat the Passover.” (John 18:28) Why were these Jews concerned about not being able to eat the Passover? According to Matthew, Mark, and Luke they had already eaten it because the Passover Seder took place the previous night. This is not a problem for John because John states that Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover, so that this statement makes perfect sense in his story. In contrast, the synoptic Gospels never mention in their accounts the fear the Jews had of entering the home of Pilate. Such concern would be preposterous because in Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s story, the Jews had already eaten the Passover lamb the previous night.
The first question that naturally comes to mind is: Why would John change the crucifixion date from the 15th day of Nissan to the 14th day? Why was it so important to the author of the fourth Gospel that Jesus be crucified on the eve of Passover rather than the first day of Passover, as the other three Gospels claim?
The simple answer becomes quite clear when we have a good understanding of what message John’s Gospel was trying to convey to its reader.
Remembering that the book of John was the last of the four Gospels to be written, the author was trying to appeal to a second century church that had already become predominantly gentile. Bearing this in mind, John had to appeal to these pagans of the Greco-Roman world whom he was addressing. This was accomplished by carefully integrating heathen practices with elements of the Jewish faith. The notion that an animal was to be revered and sacrificed as a god was well known and widely practiced throughout the Roman Empire in mystery religions such as Mithraism, which flourished during the time that the Book of John was being written. This book’s author was well aware of this and seamlessly fused together the Mithraic sacrifice of the redeeming bull with the Jewish sacrifice of the Paschal lamb.
It is for this reason that only in John’s Gospel does John the Baptist proclaim of Jesus, “Behold, the Lamb of God . . . .” (1:29, 36) In fact, of the four Gospels, only John ever equates Jesus with the Passover lamb. If Matthew, Mark, and Luke agreed with the fourth Gospel that the lamb was the antitype of Jesus, as John insisted, why is it that when the synoptic Gospels described the communion at the last supper, Jesus raised the matzo saying, “This is my body”? He should have raised the Paschal lamb. At mass, priests should be giving their parishioners lamb chops rather than a wafer for communion.
In addition, only John’s narrative includes the story of the Roman soldiers who pierced the side of Jesus rather than break his legs on the cross (John 19:31-37). This brief narrative only fits into the theological story line of the fourth Gospel. This is because only the author of the Book of John was eager not to have Jesus’ bones broken so as not to violate the prohibition of breaking the bones of the Paschal lamb found in the Book of Exodus (12:46).
Therefore, we have come to the reason that John places the crucifixion on the 14th day rather than the 15th. Because the Torah commands Israel to slaughter the Paschal lamb on the eve of Passover or on the 14th day of Nissan (Exodus 12:6), John’s Jesus is also “slaughtered” (i.e. crucified) on the eve of Passover or the 14th day of Nissan.
Read the rest if you dare!!
http://www.outreachjudaism.org/resurrection.html
Comment by yamit82 — June 28, 2009 @ 11:42 pm
I have enjoyed the exchange Yamit. God bless you.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 28, 2009 @ 11:53 pm
I see I have rattled you a bit ronmorgan:
ronmorgan what can I say: Jewish scripture written in a Jewish language studied,learned by the greatest minds the world has ever known their wisdom handed down and written down for we of lesser intellect and learning so that we may profit from their life long endeavors many martyred for their beliefs and life work and you call them what? “false teachers”.
Figures when a Christian is beaten all the Jew hatred comes pouring out. Just like your god idol who as you quoted was not a very nice god. Had a very mean temper he did.
In fact, not only was Yéshu a false prophet, but he did not even follow the Torah (although he claims in Matthew 5:17 that he “was come to fulfil it”). Just look at this passage (taken from Matthew 12:46-50)—
46 ¶ While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
His own mother comes to see him and, instead of jumping up and running to the door to welcome her, he leaves her standing outside while he chats with his friends! Is that showing respect for her, as the Torah demands? No, it most definitely is not; in fact it shows what a thoroughly despicable person he really was!
I have saved the best for last. There is an incident in Yéshu’s life that gives a glimpse of his true character, for those whose eyes are not blinded by “faith”; it is reported by Matthew at chapter 15, verses 22ff. The English translation I give here is my own:
22 kai idou gunh cananaia apo twn oriwn ekeinwn exelqousa ekraugasen autw legousa elehson me kurie uie dabid h qugathr mou kakwV daimonizetai
23 o de ouk apekriqh auth logon kai proselqonteV oi maqhtai autou hrwtwn auton legonteV apoluson authn oti krazei opisqen hmwn
24 o de apokriqeiV eipen ouk apestalhn ei mh eiV ta probata ta apolwlota oikou israhl
25 h de elqousa prosekunei autw legousa kurie bohqei moi
26 o de apokriqeiV eipen ouk estin kalon labein ton arton twn teknwn kai balein toiV kunarioiV…..
22 Just then a Canaanitish woman who was from that region cried out to him “Take pity on me, master, David’s son! my daughter is mentally ill, and she is suffering terribly!”—
23 but he completely ignored her. His students came and begged him “Get rid of her—she keeps pestering us”,
24 and he replied “I was only sent to the house of Yisrael’s lost sheep”.
25 Then she came again and bowed in front of him, saying “Please help me, master!”—
26 but all he said was “It’s wrong to take the food from one’s own children and throw it to dogs”…..
The poor woman came to him begging for help, and he at first ignored her and then, when his followers begged him to do something for her just to get rid of her, he called her and her sick daughter dogs! This disgusting, appalling show of racism against a Canaanitish woman who was from that region is in stark contrast to what the Torah teaches, which is that the “foreigner who lives among us” is to be treated with exactly the same respect, and love, as any native Yisraelite (Lev. 19:34). As always, christians try to “explain away” this glaring character-flaw in their hero, but the facts speak for themselves: he was a narrow-minded, cruel bigoted racist.
“If only you knew the truth, it would set you free”.
Comment by yamit82 — June 29, 2009 @ 12:13 am
It is obvious to all that you are full of hate for Christ, and Christians. Does this not proove your religion has done you no good? I say your religion because I do not get this hate from anyone else on this blog, or in Israel. I think yours is the religion of the Pharases: hypocritical, and hardened. You have no love. That’s the fruit of the Holy Spirit that proves you know God. That is the fulfillment of the law. If you have the letter of the law and not the Spirit of the law you are not obeying God and are lost. You don’t know him friend and yet you preach like you are an expert. You are the false teacher man.
Comment by ronmorgen — June 29, 2009 @ 8:46 am
christianity is
- pure idolatry
- immoral
- decadent
- antisemitic
- silly, absurd, idiotic
- full of platitudes
- lacks profound contents and analysis
- to blame for
* wars
* violence
* rape
* corruption
* asininity
* terror
* antisemitism
* pogroms
* Shoah
* AIDS
* homosexuality
the christians that do not like yamits very good analysis can switch to one of theit idol-worship-sites BYE BYE
Comment by Tar Yag — June 29, 2009 @ 10:43 am
ron old friend, I think you have bit off a bit more than you can handle. Most Jews on this site are so ignorant of their own heritage history and beliefs even if they wanted to challenge you they lack the tools or they just ignore those like yourself.It’s not just a matter of hate, that to but not just. We don’t hate you ronmorgen we or should I just say I, I hate your religion because A- It is a false religion based on lies and untruths,B- It is Pagan by every criteria spelled out in Judaism (based solely on Jewish scripture).C- Then of course I must think of all my relativs and ancestors who were butcheered by Christian love of the Jews.
Now I think it was you ronmorgen who reopened this thread and directing your comments to me specifically and I answered you in kind. I didn’t come looking for you. Now what is hateful and disrespectful is your comments in #57
God is undoubtedly wise and acts correctly – but he is not merciful, as the generation of Holocaust can testify.
Yamit, you are only seeing what your physical eyes can see. The Holocaust came to bring about the greater good of bringing Israel back to the land of their forfathers to serve him.
Notice the resurrection of David’s son prophecied in this verse.
I think by these statements wholey unsolicited by ne and anyone else here can easily see your disrespect for anothers beliefs and nor i think any Jew would enterany Christion web site and insult in a desrectful manner in which you have done here. You then have the Chutzpa (Gall) to accuse me and others of being hateful to your god and religion?
Never ever quote NT verses to a Jew unless you are prepared to get hammered As I have done in the above posts. My Big Bombs I haven’t even thought to use yet. I have learned all your missionary talking points and all of my replys are almost pre programed.
ron some closing thoughts as my liver is quite agitated by you!!!
The veracity of everything that Paul stated and wrote is called into question by the fact that these quotes are found in the books he himself authored. Or, did he?
You called our rabbis and sages false teachers?
The gospels of Matthew 1:20 and Luke 1:31 describe “angels” appearing to Jesus’ mother and her husband informing them of her forthcoming “immaculate conception” and “virgin birth” to the “Son of God,” the “Messiah.” When compared with the way Jesus’ family and neighbors treated him, it is absurd to believe that “angels” really visited them:
Mark 3:21: Upon hearing of it, his family went out to seize him, for they said, “He is beside himself.”
To offset the startling fact that Jesus’ family thought that he was insane, some New Testament editions replace “they” with “people,” although “they” is in the original Greek text.
John 7:5: For even his brothers did not believe in him.
Luke 4:16: And Jesus came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and he went to the synagogue, as his custom was, on the Sabbath day…
There, Jesus hinted to his friends and neighbors that he was the Messiah, however:
Luke 4:28: When they heard this, all in the synagogue were filled with wrath. And they rose up, and put him out of the city, and led him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, that they might throw him down headlong.
How very strange it is, that during all the years in which Yeshu grew up with them, his brothers, friends, and neighbors did not notice that he was a “divine being.” And could it have been that his parents forgot or didn’t tell anyone what they experienced? This stretches one’s imagination.
Christianity is based on the unique belief that Jesus was God’s Son, born of a virgin, sacrificed for the Salvation of man. In reality, as sacrificed virgin-born Savior Son of God, Jesus was not unique. Not even close.
The Jesus mythos simply followed the traditional model of the ancient pagan savior-gods.
At the time of Jesus of Nazareth, as for centuries before, the Mediterranean world roiled with a happy diversity of creeds and rituals. Details varied according to location and culture, but the general outlines of these faiths were astonishingly similar. Roughly speaking the ancients’ gods:
Were born on or very near our Christmas Day
Were born of a Virgin-Mother
Were born in a Cave or Underground Chamber
Led a life of toil for Mankind
Were called by the names of Light-bringer, Healer, Mediator, Savior, Deliverer
Were however vanquished by the Powers of Darkness
And descended into Hell or the Underworld
Rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to the Heavenly world
Founded Communions of Saints, and Churches into which disciples were received by Baptism
Were commemorated by Eucharistic meals
Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki; the Savior Dionysus was born of the virgin Semele. Buddha too was born of a virgin, as were the Egyptian Horus and Osiris. The old Teutonic goddess Hertha was a virgin impregnated by the heavenly Spirit and bore a son. Scandinavian Frigga was impregnated by the All-Father Odin and bore Balder, the healer and savior of mankind.
Mithras was born in a cave, on December 25th, of a virgin mother. He came from heaven to be born as a man, to redeem men from their sin. He was know as “Savior,” “Son of God,” “Redeemer,” and “Lamb of God.” With twelve disciples he traveled far and wide as a teacher and illuminator of men. He was buried in a tomb from which he rose again from the dead — an event celebrated yearly with much rejoicing. His followers kept the Sabbath holy, holding sacramental feasts in remembrance of Him. The sacred meal of bread and water, or bread and wine, was symbolic of the body and blood of the sacred bull.
The celebration of Christmas on December 25 was originally the pagan birthday of Mithras, the sun god, whose day of the week is still known as “Sunday.” The halo of light which is usually shown surrounding the face of Jesus and Christian saints, is another concept taken from the sun god. The theme of temptation by a devil-like creature was also found in pagan mythology. In particular, the story of Jesus’s temptation by Satan resembles the temptation of Osiris by the devil-god Set in Egyptian mythology.
Pls. Note:
Numbers 23:19: God is not a man, that He should be deceitful, nor the son of man, that He should repent. Would He say and not do, or speak and not confirm?
Psalms 146:3: Do not rely on princes nor in the son of man, for he holds no salvation.
Matthew 20:28: Just as the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve.
False teachers you say?
Christian scholar Rt. Rev. George Arthur Butterick, in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, a book written by to prove the validity of the New Testament, states:
“A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings.…
There are 304,805 letters (approximately 79,000 words) in the Torah. In the over 3,000 years since Moses received the original Scripture from Mt. Sinai and wrote the 13 copies (twelve of which were distributed among the Tribes), spelling variants have emerged on a total of nine words — with absolutely no effect on their meaning. The Christian Bible, in comparison, has over 200,000 variants and in 400 instances, the variants change the meaning of the text; 50 of these are of great significance.
False teachers? False Teachings? What G-d has to say is in the Jewish Tanach Period!!!
ronmorgen: I saved this little tidbit for last I hope you will learn something and appreciate how much you have been lied to and deceived.
It has been said that the christianity cult is “a lie built on a mountain of deceptions”.
Postscript: The significance of the “heart” in the Scriptural context
One of the many accusations frequently made by christians about Hebrews is that we have book knowledge but do not understand “with our hearts”. We do not have “circumcised hearts”, they sneeringly mock (a crude misrepresentation Deut. 10:16 and other passages). But christians who say this are falling into a trap of their own making: they assume that references to the “heart” in Scripture refer to the seat of the emotions, just because the heart is seen as the seat of the emotions in their culture.
But in ancient Hebrew culture—and, hence, in the Scriptures—the heart was not seen as the seat of the emotions… it was seen as the seat of wisdom and the intellect. There are so many verses that demonstrate this; here are just a few—
“…speak to every wise-hearted man…” (Ex. 28:3)
“…Adonai never gave you a heart to know, eyes to see or ears to hear until today…” (Deut. 29:3)
“…please grant to Your servant an understanding heart so I can judge Your people and distinguish right from wrong…” (1 Kings 3:9)
By contrast, in ancient Hebrew culture—and, hence, in the Scriptures—the seat of the emotions was considered to be the liver. This is evidenced by the prophet Jeremiah’s tragic poems lamenting the calamitous events that occurred when the Babylonian armies over-ran Jerusalem in 587/586 BCE—
“…my eyes are blocked with tears and my stomach churns—my liver is poured out onto the ground—because of the rape of my people’s daughter; because children and suckling-babes are dying of hunger in the city’s streets…” (Lam. 2:11)
Have a nice day!!!
Comment by yamit82 — June 29, 2009 @ 2:30 pm
Finally some Christians on the same wavelength (so it seems at least) on Israpundit, I mean Blaina and ronmorgen. yamit, I agree w/ronmorgen, & at my church we study from Genesis to Revelation, Solomon & Paul, no conflict at all.
Comment by soren — June 29, 2009 @ 3:20 pm
soren, now why am I not surprised?
Comment by yamit82 — June 29, 2009 @ 4:02 pm
ron and soren and I will add for good measure Blaina:
What do any of you know of the Law? The Law of the Hebrews? Do you Study our Law? Do you read and write in the language of our Laws? Have you every studied Jewish Texts without a NT and without Christian talking points?
Isaiah 43
Who to believe Isaiah or Paul?
Isaiah is speaking G-d’s words, are you calling G-d a liar?
Comment by yamit82 — June 29, 2009 @ 4:24 pm
soren, ron, Blaina:
OOPS: No Satan either: Satan is also a Pagan concept!
Comment by yamit82 — June 29, 2009 @ 4:32 pm
Shalom Yamit HaYaqar !
How’s going ? I appriciate your fight against idolatry and stupidity. I had a lot of discussions like this and I always asked myself how comes that even intelligent people for instance Nobel prize winners believe in all these stupidities ? The answer that I found studying the works of Rabbi Kook is the follwoing: xtianity does not respond to an intelectual demand but to a sentimental one, so if you attack them by demonstrating incoherencies and even proving contradictions with the reality, that does not change anything, since the sentimental answer they found there they cannot find anywhere else. So unfortunetaly there is no hope for those kind of people. Your posts, however, do have a sens — for assimlated Jews who need to be saved from those insane people.
Comment by Tar Yag — June 30, 2009 @ 1:44 pm
Tar Yag:
Correct you are so in reality I write for the occasional Jew, at least those who claim to be Jewish. In Malachim (Kings) l:8
Solomon during the inauguration of our Temple Blessed the whole people of Israel with the most beautiful and meaningful prophetic prayer in our tradition; The Temple Mount, referred to in the Book of Deuteronomy tens of times as “The place the L-rd will choose,” called the ritual center by Biblical scientists, and of which was said in the beautiful, the mother of all prayers, of Solomon of the Temple “The L-rd said that the He would dwell in, a settled place for you to abide forever.” As if Solomon were saying to G-d that “as long as you are obscured there cannot be any contact between us. I am building you a tangible, clear, geographic home in which you can receive the prayers of your people Israel and the prayers of any who wish to pray to you,” for “your eyes to be open toward this house night and day.” A request for G-d to center his prayer-accepting heart around this house. “What prayer and supplication be made by any man, or by all your people Israel… and he shall spread forth his hands toward this House.”
“And also the foreigner who is not of your People Israel…when he shall come and pray toward this House, and you shall hear.”
“If your people go out to battle against their enemy, and they shall pray to the L-rd toward the City which you have chosen and the House I have built for your name.” This is the real Zionism! Jews in EXILE took the land and the temple with them into exile on a spiritual level and on the level of longing for: The time of the Return The redemption of Israel.
And so all, individual and collective, Hebrew and non-Jew, shall find the way to G-d only through this House. Not only by entering it, for those far away too, there is no other way to the Heavens: “If they sin against you, and their captors carry them away to the land of their enemy, and pray to you toward their Land which you gave to their fathers, the City which you have chosen and the House I have built for your name, and you will hear.”
The imagery and phrasing of this prayer are so concrete and concise that they make it the ultimate expression of Hebrew belief. It rises above all that philosophers and theologians and even prophets have written in all the generations that followed. The localization of the Temple, despite Solomon’s full knowledge that “not even the Heavens can contain you,” and the idea is wider and more open than pantheism, yet nonetheless, or perhaps precisely because of this, there is a need for tying to this one spot a gate open to foreigners.
Comment by yamit82 — June 30, 2009 @ 2:43 pm
yamit, what part of “both” do you not understand?
Answer: both, there is no conflict.
Comment by soren — June 30, 2009 @ 3:51 pm
Lets hear the explanation.
Comment by yamit82 — June 30, 2009 @ 4:57 pm