Salvation in Judaism

[Cherith]

Have I told anybod at Tweb yet just how much I **love** this section!!!

In our gym debate, Yoshi took exception with me that salvation in the O.T. came about through COMPLETE and TOTAL observance of Torah/Pentateuch. So, I've asked several theologians what their perspective was on salvation in Judaism as well as looked on the web and the general consensus seems to be GOOD WORKS. If that is so, then I have a few questions:

1.) Does salvation by good works apply even if a person does not believe in God?

2.) If "Gentiles" can be eternally "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life - by doing good works (people Jews like to refer to as "righteous Gentiles"), then what is the big deal if someone - specifically a "Jewish" someone - believes in Jesus as the Messiah/Son of God?

3.) WHERE in the Torah/Tanakh does it state that salvation/eternal life is based SOLELY upon "good works"?

Gracias,
--C

[Menachem]

Depends on what the both of you are defining "salvation" to mean. Salvation's meaning to a Jew is much different than the meaning of Salvation to a Christian.

[Cherith]

Salvation's meaning to a Jew is much different than the meaning of Salvation to a Christian.

Of course it is, Eli, but WHAT is its meaning to a Jew?!?

[Goose]

1.) Does salvation by good works apply even if a person does not believe in God?

2.) If "Gentiles" can be eternally "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life - by doing good works (people Jews like to refer to as "righteous Gentiles"), then what is the big deal if someone - specifically a "Jewish" someone - believes in Jesus as the Messiah/Son of God?

3.) WHERE in the Torah/Tanakh does it state that salvation/eternal life is based SOLELY upon "good works"?
These are all loaded questions that assume Jews follow the Christian definition of salvation. Here's a quick rundown of "salvation" in Judaism.

http://www.jewfaq.org/salvatn.htm

[dizzle]

Goose just a quick question sorry for the diversion but what is your position on Jesus or however you wish to say His name now?

[Goose]

Goose just a quick question sorry for the diversion but what is your position on Jesus or however you wish to say His name now?That's somewhat of a loaded question, as it's not the same man of the Christian Gospels that I refer to as Yehoshua, nor do I follow the teachings of the Christian NT writings(however they're commonly defined). The man's name I'm assuming you're inquiring about is Ribi (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_R-S.htm#Df-Ribi) Yehoshua (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_U-Z.htm#Df-Yehoshua) ben Yosef ben David, who was a Pharisaic Ribi and followed the Torah (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_T.htm#Df-Torah)(written and oral) of the time period, non-selectively. I also believe that this Ribi to be Meshiach ben Yosef, as fulfilled in the following prophesies (http://www.netzarim.co.il/MessPro.htm). It's not the same man as J-e-s-u-s. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just need to make my position clear.

I'm an authentic Netzarim (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_N-Q.htm#Df-Netzarim) Talmid (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_T.htm#Df-Talmid) with orthodox geir (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_E-J.htm#Df-Geir) status according to orthodox Jewish halacha, within the authentic, Jewish orthodox Netzarim community, based in Ra'anana, Israel, as blessed by the Head Rabbi of Israel. We authentic Netzarim work within the confines of orthodox halacha, as continuous from the Pharasaic teachings of our Ribi. Our Paqid (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Museum/Sukkah10/Sukkah10.htm#bio-ybd) is an orthodox Jew in good standing, a Mensan, and a member of the board at Moreshet Avot, in Ra'anana, Israel.

There are many Christian Messianics who try to carry the title "Netzarim", but are really "Notzrim"(term for Christians) and have no affiliation within the orthodox community I'm apart of. Anyone saying they are such, but are not registered with us, are liars and counterfeits. I'm not a Christian. I'm not a Messianic. I'm not a "Nazarene Jew" or a "Netzarim Jew", as some try to pass themselves off as true Netzarim. I never even try to say I'm such and I distance myself fully from them.

I'm a geir, a title given by the authentic Netzarim beit din (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_A-D.htm#Df-Beit-Din) in Ra'anana, Israel.

[dizzle]

That's somewhat of a loaded question,

Hey Goose, yeah I figured, but I am really not trying to do so. I am just trying to get a simple feel for where you are coming from now. You know that I would think that you have fallen into serious error and am greatly sad as your friend. Maybe I can make the question a bit simpler just so that I can get a really, reallly basic idea on where you are coming from.

Do you believe that Jesus atoned for your sins in His death?

I may have further questions but that would be helpful. Thanks. Plus it gets you closer to 25 posts to have a goose avatar. If you spammed like we said, you could have it already.

[Goose]

Hey Goose, yeah I figured, but I am really not trying to do so. I am just trying to get a simple feel for where you are coming from now.Yes, I figured. That's why I didn't call it a blatant loaded question, similar to Cheriths. :ahem: Although my teachings aren't new, they're very new to most people, so I try to be gracious.
You know that I would think that you have fallen into serious error and am greatly sad as your friend.Yes.
Maybe I can make the question a bit simpler just so that I can get a really, reallly basic idea on where you are coming from.

Do you believe that Jesus atoned for your sins in His death?No.
I may have further questions but that would be helpful. Thanks. Plus it gets you closer to 25 posts to have a goose avatar. If you spammed like we said, you could have it already.No problem. Ask away.:smile: I'm going to be out of town tonight and tomorrow afternoon(though I'll have wifi access), then I won't be responding probably till the end of the weekend. So, it might take a day or two to respond.

[dizzle]

Yes, I figured. That's why I didn't call it a blatant loaded question

And plus you know me very well, and you know when I am going for blood and when I am being mellow. Right now I am really just interested in trying to slowly get a radar fix on where you are at. This is not something I am terribly familiar with though I think I have had some exposure.



.No.

Okay, that puzzles me then. What place does Jesus (and when I use that word can we please let it be understood between us who I am speaking of even if you disagree on the terminology?) have in your theology? You can just give me the basics. I read some of what you said at The Other Location and it seemed at that time as if you were advocating a kind of En Sof idea of God in which Jesus was an emanation of En Sof? Is that anywhere near correct?

[Goose]

And plus you know me very well, and you know when I am going for blood and when I am being mellow. Right now I am really just interested in trying to slowly get a radar fix on where you are at. This is not something I am terribly familiar with though I think I have had some exposure.Yes, completely understandable.Okay, that puzzles me then. What place does Jesus (and when I use that word can we please let it be understood between us who I am speaking of even if you disagree on the terminology? have in your theology?I'm not understanding. Ribi Yehoshua and J-e-s-u-s are not the same. J-e-s-u-s in my research is the anti-christ setup by Romans, especially circa 135CE. If you're attempting to refer to Ribi Yehoshua as J-e-s-u-s or vice versa, that would be like me calling Dee Dee "Yxboom" and referring to his identity when trying to talk about your identity. There is no need for the confusion. Two different people, with different names.

I read some of what you said at The Other Location and it seemed at that time as if you were advocating a kind of En Sof idea of God in which Jesus was an emanation of En Sof? Is that anywhere near correct?I was probably half-way talking out of my bum, trying to apply a concept that I was totally wrong about. I was probably trying to shoe-horn J-e-s-u-s with his many redactions into something that he isn't. Mysticism is something I know a bit about, but I should focus on basic Torah first. If you could find the text, I could try to explain.

[Timothy Leary]

I don't think that'd be accurate, Goose. From what I can tell, it'd be more like the records of who Anan ben David was. They all are talking about the same person. However, they portray different pictures of him.

[Goose]

I don't think that'd be accurate, Goose. From what I can tell, it'd be more like the records of who Anan ben David was. They all are talking about the same person. However, they portray different pictures of him.If there are 100 different accounts of a specific detailed observation, at least 99 of those accounts, which ever they are, are going to be wrong.

i.e. - If A equals 1; A does not equal 2

Applying the logic above, we therefore either have:

Two made up persons or...
One real person and one made up person or...
Two real, but entirely different people
A common attempt is to say that the observations are different. But I'm not talking about different observations. I'm talking about specific accounts. Example: If one account says Yehoshua was born by normal human procreation and then another account says that J-e-s-u-s was born by divine intervention, with no action by the husband, then they are accounts of two logically different people; not the same person by different names.

Stating that: because they sound similar in some areas, they therefore must be the same, is not logically sound. Just because we both have eyes, a nose, two hears, etc. doesn't mean we're the same person, either.

[Timothy Leary]

Then by the same logic, The late accounts - both Rabbinic/Orthodox and Karaite - accounts of Anan ben David were talking about a different person than Anan ben David, and many Rabbinic accounts of "Karaites" were not talking about "Karaites" at all.

Example, in the Late Accounts - i.e, accounts written after 800 years from the Death of Anan - here are some differences:

(Note: I don't find any of the late accounts to be accurate)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Rabbinic: Anan founded Karaism
Karaitic: Anan was not a Karaite, and clinged to Rabbinical Interperetations, etc.

Rabbinic: Anan attempted to create his own Talmud
Karaitic and Ananite: Anan said "Search the Scriptures well and do not rely on any man's opinion"

Rabbinic: Anan hated Rabbinic Jews
Karaitic: The Rabbinates attempted to assasinate Anan
------------------------------

Here's some examples of some Modern Rabbinic claims about Karaites, which are very... wierd.

Rabbinic: Karaites hold only the shema to be of Divine Origin.
Karaitic: Karaites hold the entire Hebrew Bible to be inspired of God.

Rabbinic: Karaites pray to Muhammed (the "prophet" of Islam)
Karaitic: Muhammed was a False Prophet

Rabbinic: Karaites hang Tzitzit on the walls of their houses
Karaitic: No, we don't. And when we wear them, they include a blue part.

-----------------------------

I could go on, but I think you get the point. They're talking about the same person/group, but one (or both) is presenting an inaccurate record.

[dizzle]

I'm not understanding. Ribi Yehoshua and J-e-s-u-s are not the same. J-e-s-u-s in my research is the anti-christ setup by Romans, especially circa 135CE. If you're attempting to refer to Ribi Yehoshua as J-e-s-u-s or vice versa, that would be like me calling Dee Dee "Yxboom" and referring to his identity when trying to talk about your identity. There is no need for the confusion. Two different people, with different names.

I do not place the same stock in the power of mere words that you seem to. If someone wrote a letter to me and addressed it as Di Di Warrant, I would know it was still to me. Yes I am referring to who you refer to as Ribi Yehoshua, and I am wanting to know what place He places in your beliefs.


I was probably half-way talking out of my bum, trying to apply a concept that I was totally wrong about. I was probably trying to shoe-horn J-e-s-u-s with his many redactions into something that he isn't. Mysticism is something I know a bit about, but I should focus on basic Torah first. If you could find the text, I could try to explain.

Oh no problem. No need to explain something that might have been said hastily and about which you have come to a different understanding in all likelihood.

[Goose]

Then by the same logic, The late accounts - both Rabbinic/Orthodox and Karaite - accounts of Anan ben David were talking about a different person than Anan ben David, and many Rabbinic accounts of "Karaites" were not talking about "Karaites" at all.

Example, in the Late Accounts - i.e, accounts written after 800 years from the Death of Anan - here are some differences:

(Note: I don't find any of the late accounts to be accurate)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Rabbinic: Anan founded Karaism
Karaitic: Anan was not a Karaite, and clinged to Rabbinical Interperetations, etc.

Rabbinic: Anan attempted to create his own Talmud
Karaitic and Ananite: Anan said "Search the Scriptures well and do not rely on any man's opinion"

Rabbinic: Anan hated Rabbinic Jews
Karaitic: The Rabbinates attempted to assasinate Anan
------------------------------

Here's some examples of some Modern Rabbinic claims about Karaites, which are very... wierd.

Rabbinic: Karaites hold only the shema to be of Divine Origin.
Karaitic: Karaites hold the entire Hebrew Bible to be inspired of God.

Rabbinic: Karaites pray to Muhammed (the "prophet" of Islam)
Karaitic: Muhammed was a False Prophet

Rabbinic: Karaites hang Tzitzit on the walls of their houses
Karaitic: No, we don't. And when we wear them, they include a blue part.

-----------------------------

I could go on, but I think you get the point. They're talking about the same person/group, but one (or both) is presenting an inaccurate record.You're obfuscating, so I'll restate the logic:

If A is equal to 1; A cannot equal 2

Is this true or false.

[Goose]

I do not place the same stock in the power of mere words that you seem to. If someone wrote a letter to me and addressed it as Di Di Warrant, I would know it was still to me. Yes I am referring to who you refer to as Ribi Yehoshua, and I am wanting to know what place He places in your beliefs.You're right, in that you can safely assume the person meant you, because you can deduce and safely assume that the emailer had you in mind. Your specific identity.

However, this is not the same case as what I'm talking about, in that I cannot safely assume what the other person has in mind to the identity of the person they're referring to. And if I do know, yet disagree, I do not want to use the same label/name for a given identity/object, if I believe that person to be wrong with the name/title/label, especially in a public forum. The whole reason for a title or name, is for as a mental label for a particular identity/object to be accessed. In other words, we are not only accessing with different names, but to different identities/objects. Therefore, using the same names, when we know the names to be different anyways, is silly and only adds to confusion.

As a Netzarim, there are many wannabees and "Messianics" who use our name. They are thereby guilty of identity theft, and thereby pervert our name, as an identity thief does, thereby keeping the name/title/label, but changing it's meaning and content. It is mandatory that I'm explicit and that my audience understands of what identity/object I'm talking about and with what name/title/label. I know this might seem silly, but it's very serious. I'm sure if someone created an account with the name "Dee Dee Warren" and started teaching on how full preterism was true, you'd feel the same way and you would definately "place stock" in a name/title/label.

If you can't recognize this, then we're not going to effectively communicate.

In the words from the movie "Office Space":

Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): No one is this country can ever pronounce my name right. It's not that hard: Nayee-Nanajar. Nayeenanajar.
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): Yeah, well, at least you're name isn't Michael Bolton.
Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): You know, there's nothing wrong with that name.
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): There WAS nothing wrong with it. Until I was about 12 years old, and that no-talent-***-clown became famous and started winning Grammys.
Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): Why don't you just go by Mike, instead of Michael?
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): No way! Why should I change it? He's the one who sucks.

[Cherith]

...That's why I didn't call it a blatant loaded question, similar to Cheriths. :ahem:

Did I miss something?

Here's a loaded question for you, Goose, this person that you've invented for yourself in place of Jesus Christ, where do you get your information about him? And on what basis do you hope to gain eternal life - i.e. salvation? (I'm still waiting for Yoshi's answer to this one too...)

[Goose]

Did I miss something?

Here's a loaded question for you, Goose, this person that you've invented for yourself in place of Jesus Christ, where do you get your information about him? And on what basis do you hope to gain eternal life - i.e. salvation? (I'm still waiting for Yoshi's answer to this one too...)I don't answer stupid questions. Thanks for the laugh though. I "invented it" yet you ask me where I got my information from. Haha...what a contradiciton. You shouldn't waste my time or the other reader's on this forum with your nonsense, disrespectful questions.

[dizzle]

Goose in my last post to you I used the wording you requested so I would like an answer to the question. You do not have to, I am not looking for a debate, just information. A debate may come later, but that is certainly not my intention now.

[Goose]

Goose in my last post to you I used the wording you requested so I would like an answer to the question. You do not have to, I am not looking for a debate, just information. A debate may come later, but that is certainly not my intention now.Ribi Yehoshua was a Torah observant Pharisee(probably from the House of Hillel), born of Joseph and Mariyam. Not only was he a great teacher as stated in the Netzarim Reconstruction of the Hebrew Matityahu, but he also fulfilled the prophesies concerning Meshiach ben Yosef. For further reading, you can go here (http://www.netzarim.co.il/MessPro.htm).

[Jayrok]

These are all loaded questions that assume Jews follow the Christian definition of salvation. Here's a quick rundown of "salvation" in Judaism.

http://www.jewfaq.org/salvatn.htm

This site is a great read. I didn't know much of the Jewish faith and how it is so different from Christianity. Thanks!

[Timothy Leary]

You're obfuscating, so I'll restate the logic:

If A is equal to 1; A cannot equal 2

Is this true or false.

Karaite not understand big word.

Agree don the logic. But it all comes down to accurate or inaccurate records. Another example would be the International Jewish Conspiracy which I'm supposedly part of.

[Timothy Leary]

Did I miss something?

Here's a loaded question for you, Goose, this person that you've invented for yourself in place of Jesus Christ, where do you get your information about him? And on what basis do you hope to gain eternal life - i.e. salvation? (I'm still waiting for Yoshi's answer to this one too...)

I'll get to it eventually... I just don't have time for a big debate right now. My friend wrote an article on it, maybe I'll have him discuss it.

[Goose]

Another example would be the International Jewish Conspiracy which I'm supposedly part of.Also Karaism, for that matter.

[Timothy Leary]

But the Worldwide Karaite Conspiracy is real! :lmbo:

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

http://www.jewfaq.org/salvatn.htm is about right.

Leviticus 18:5 says:

You shall, therefore, keep My statutes and ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them; I am the Lord.

Our Sages comment: "he shall live by them...", live in this world and the next.

Yohiah_ap! I can't believe that you told them about the International Jewish Conspiracy!! Weren't you warned at the last Secret Committee meeting, never, ever to bring that up? Oh...wait...darn...I shouldn't have mentioned that. Uh...[ssv posts, thinking fast]...there is no International Jewish Conspiracy! No, no, none at all! Pay no attention (to the man behind the curtain?) to what I just posted. :tongue:

Be well!

ssv :hi:

[Cherith]

Why don't you guys just fess up instead of trying to use this reverse psychology on us! Everybody knows that the Jews control the media, the Congress, etc. and Dr. Laura and Judge Judy are the sole judges of righteousness in America! After all, the neo-Nazi skin-heads can supply us with all of the "facts," should we need them!

On a side note, being a country bumpkin I was looking for the lyrics online to the new Gretchen Wilson song "Redneck Woman" last week and found a white supremacist web-board where the fella mistook her line "I'm just the product of my raisin'..." to be "I'm just the product of my race!" He was ecstatic!

P.S. I once saw Larry King interview Judge Judy and after talking about her background, etc. there was some funny dialogue between them about them both being Jews and privacy and such and then Judy said something like "hey, it's not as if we're related and that's any of your business!" To which Larry jokingly agreed. What I found funny was that's precisely what Jews claim - i.e. to be one big happy family descended from Abraham and entitled to Palestine. Oh... I wasn't supposed to go there again, was I? (Because my posts are "stupid" and "nonsensical"...) :brood:

[Menachem]

I was Just wondering if Yoshiah and stillsmallvoice got those "Top secret documents"...ummmmmm.............I mean...........Those packages in the mail yesterday?....

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

eliYosef posted:

I was Just wondering if Yoshiah and stillsmallvoice got those "Top secret documents"...ummmmmm.............I mean...........Those packages in the mail yesterday?....

Oh fer cryin' out loud...WILL YOU PLEASE NOT TALK ABOUT THAT IN A PUBLIC FORUM!! DIDN'T YOU READ LAST TUESDAY'S BRIEFING??

Sheesh!

Be well!

ssv :wink:

[Menachem]

Hi all!

eliYosef posted:



Oh fer cryin' out loud...WILL YOU PLEASE NOT TALK ABOUT THAT IN A PUBLIC FORUM!! DIDN'T YOU READ LAST TUESDAY'S BRIEFING??

Sheesh!

Be well!

ssv :wink:


ROFL...........

[Cherith]

I don't answer stupid questions. Thanks for the laugh though. I "invented it" yet you ask me where I got my information from. Haha...what a contradiciton. You shouldn't waste my time or the other reader's on this forum with your nonsense, disrespectful questions.

You really are a silly Goose aren't you?

You think it's stupid for a person to ask you what the basis for your beliefs are? Or perhaps you think it's stupid to HAVE a basis for your beliefs... :shrug:

You know what I think? I think you are the one full of stuff and nonsense. I think you are the one who can't define what you believe. Furthermore, I think you're scared to defend your position and are trying to put me off by name-calling.

Show me where I've posted stupid, nonsensical and/or disrespectful stuff and then show me how your theological system can withstand the scrutiny of logic!

"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews."

[Goose]

You really are a silly Goose aren't you?

You think it's stupid for a person to ask you what the basis for your beliefs are? Or perhaps you think it's stupid to HAVE a basis for your beliefs... :shrug:

You know what I think? I think you are the one full of stuff and nonsense. I think you are the one who can't define what you believe. Furthermore, I think you're scared to defend your position and are trying to put me off by name-calling.

Show me where I've posted stupid, nonsensical and/or disrespectful stuff and then show me how your theological system can withstand the scrutiny of logic!

"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews."I stated quite clearly in my reply to Dee Dee about my beliefs. Quit wasting my time and everyone elses. If you don't care enough to take the time to read my posts, then why would I take the time to enlighten you. The purpose of a bulletin board system, is so that when a post is made, everyone who has access can see them. Can you not see my previous posts? Did you not read them?

[Timothy Leary]

You know what I think? I think you are the one full of stuff and nonsense. I think you are the one who can't define what you believe. Furthermore, I think you're scared to defend your position and are trying to put me off by name-calling

Cherith, before you indulge in any more hipocrisy, perhaps you might actually try reading what he has posted?

[Cherith]

Cherith, before you indulge in any more hipocrisy, perhaps you might actually try reading what he has posted?

Are you trying to make a play on words and imply that I'm a hippo, Yoshi?

Hypocrisy? What hypocrisy have you seen me display? I've read everything he's posted on this thread and it doesn't answer any of my questions. Here, I'll show you:

These are all loaded questions that assume Jews follow the Christian definition of salvation. Here's a quick rundown of "salvation" in Judaism.

http://www.jewfaq.org/salvatn.htm


That's somewhat of a loaded question, as it's not the same man of the Christian Gospels that I refer to as Yehoshua, nor do I follow the teachings of the Christian NT writings (however they're commonly defined). The man's name I'm assuming you're inquiring about is Ribi (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_R-S.htm#Df-Ribi) Yehoshua (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_U-Z.htm#Df-Yehoshua) ben Yosef ben David, who was a Pharisaic Ribi and followed the Torah (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_T.htm#Df-Torah)(written and oral) of the time period, non-selectively. I also believe that this Ribi to be Meshiach ben Yosef, as fulfilled in the following prophesies (http://www.netzarim.co.il/MessPro.htm). It's not the same man as J-e-s-u-s. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just need to make my position clear.

I'm an authentic Netzarim (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_N-Q.htm#Df-Netzarim) Talmid (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_T.htm#Df-Talmid) with orthodox geir (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_E-J.htm#Df-Geir) status according to orthodox Jewish halacha, within the authentic, Jewish orthodox Netzarim community, based in Ra'anana, Israel, as blessed by the Head Rabbi of Israel. We authentic Netzarim work within the confines of orthodox halacha, as continuous from the Pharasaic teachings of our Ribi. Our Paqid (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Museum/Sukkah10/Sukkah10.htm#bio-ybd) is an orthodox Jew in good standing, a Mensan, and a member of the board at Moreshet Avot, in Ra'anana, Israel.

There are many Christian Messianics who try to carry the title "Netzarim", but are really "Notzrim" (term for Christians) and have no affiliation within the orthodox community I'm apart of. Anyone saying they are such, but are not registered with us, are liars and counterfeits. I'm not a Christian. I'm not a Messianic. I'm not a "Nazarene Jew" or a "Netzarim Jew", as some try to pass themselves off as true Netzarim. I never even try to say I'm such and I distance myself fully from them.

I'm a geir, a title given by the authentic Netzarim beit din (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_A-D.htm#Df-Beit-Din) in Ra'anana, Israel.


Yes, I figured. That's why I didn't call it a blatant loaded question, similar to Cheriths. :ahem: Although my teachings aren't new, they're very new to most people, so I try to be gracious.

Yes.

No.

No problem. Ask away.:smile: I'm going to be out of town tonight and tomorrow afternoon(though I'll have wifi access), then I won't be responding probably till the end of the weekend. So, it might take a day or two to respond.


Yes, completely understandable.I'm not understanding. Ribi Yehoshua and J-e-s-u-s are not the same. J-e-s-u-s in my research is the anti-christ setup by Romans, especially circa 135CE. If you're attempting to refer to Ribi Yehoshua as J-e-s-u-s or vice versa, that would be like me calling Dee Dee "Yxboom" and referring to his identity when trying to talk about your identity. There is no need for the confusion. Two different people, with different names.

I was probably half-way talking out of my bum, trying to apply a concept that I was totally wrong about. I was probably trying to shoe-horn J-e-s-u-s with his many redactions into something that he isn't. Mysticism is something I know a bit about, but I should focus on basic Torah first. If you could find the text, I could try to explain.


If there are 100 different accounts of a specific detailed observation, at least 99 of those accounts, which ever they are, are going to be wrong.

i.e. - If A equals 1; A does not equal 2

Applying the logic above, we therefore either have:

Two made up persons or...
One real person and one made up person or...
Two real, but entirely different people
A common attempt is to say that the observations are different. But I'm not talking about different observations. I'm talking about specific accounts. Example: If one account says Yehoshua was born by normal human procreation and then another account says that J-e-s-u-s was born by divine intervention, with no action by the husband, then they are accounts of two logically different people; not the same person by different names.

Stating that: because they sound similar in some areas, they therefore must be the same, is not logically sound. Just because we both have eyes, a nose, two hears, etc. doesn't mean we're the same person, either.

You're obfuscating, so I'll restate the logic:

If A is equal to 1; A cannot equal 2

Is this true or false.

You're right, in that you can safely assume the person meant you, because you can deduce and safely assume that the emailer had you in mind. Your specific identity.

However, this is not the same case as what I'm talking about, in that I cannot safely assume what the other person has in mind to the identity of the person they're referring to. And if I do know, yet disagree, I do not want to use the same label/name for a given identity/object, if I believe that person to be wrong with the name/title/label, especially in a public forum. The whole reason for a title or name, is for as a mental label for a particular identity/object to be accessed. In other words, we are not only accessing with different names, but to different identities/objects. Therefore, using the same names, when we know the names to be different anyways, is silly and only adds to confusion.

As a Netzarim, there are many wannabees and "Messianics" who use our name. They are thereby guilty of identity theft, and thereby pervert our name, as an identity thief does, thereby keeping the name/title/label, but changing it's meaning and content. It is mandatory that I'm explicit and that my audience understands of what identity/object I'm talking about and with what name/title/label. I know this might seem silly, but it's very serious. I'm sure if someone created an account with the name "Dee Dee Warren" and started teaching on how full preterism was true, you'd feel the same way and you would definately "place stock" in a name/title/label.

If you can't recognize this, then we're not going to effectively communicate.

In the words from the movie "Office Space":

Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): No one is this country can ever pronounce my name right. It's not that hard: Nayee-Nanajar. Nayeenanajar.
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): Yeah, well, at least you're name isn't Michael Bolton.
Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): You know, there's nothing wrong with that name.
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): There WAS nothing wrong with it. Until I was about 12 years old, and that no-talent-***-clown became famous and started winning Grammys.
Samir (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Naidu,+Ajay): Why don't you just go by Mike, instead of Michael?
Michael Bolton (http://www.garnersclassics.com/Name?Herman,+David+(I)): No way! Why should I change it? He's the one who sucks.

I don't answer stupid questions. Thanks for the laugh though. I "invented it" yet you ask me where I got my information from. Haha...what a contradiciton. You shouldn't waste my time or the other reader's on this forum with your nonsense, disrespectful questions.


Ribi Yehoshua was a Torah observant Pharisee (probably from the House of Hillel), born of Joseph and Mariyam. Not only was he a great teacher as stated in the Netzarim Reconstruction of the Hebrew Matityahu, but he also fulfilled the prophesies concerning Meshiach ben Yosef. For further reading, you can go here (http://www.netzarim.co.il/MessPro.htm).


Also Karaism, for that matter.

I stated quite clearly in my reply to Dee Dee about my beliefs. Quit wasting my time and everyone elses. If you don't care enough to take the time to read my posts, then why would I take the time to enlighten you. The purpose of a bulletin board system, is so that when a post is made, everyone who has access can see them. Can you not see my previous posts? Did you not read them?

So where's the hypocrisy Yoshi? And where's this great insight into his theological views? Why can't he answer a simple question? Is he too far above that for a bulletin board? Here, I'll ask them again (after all, I started this thread specifically to have an answer to the second question!):

1. This person that you've INVENTED for yourself in place of (the REAL) Jesus Christ, where do you get your information about him?

2. And on what basis do YOU hope to gain eternal life - i.e. salvation?

Now, are those too hard for such an obviously high-brow thinker as Goose?

[Timothy Leary]

Are you trying to make a play on words and imply that I'm a hippo, Yoshi?

I find even the suggestion of that offensive. Are you actually here to learn, or are you here to play childish games?

[Cherith]

I find even the suggestion of that offensive. Are you actually here to learn, or are you here to play childish games?

Touchy, touchy, touchy. Really, Yosh, is THAT the BEST you can do to defend your post and your friend?!?

[Timothy Leary]

No, it isn't. But hear this clearly:

If you are going to be childish, instead of acting like civil "adults" are supposed to act like, I'm not going to waste my time on you. I could be slaughtering ArcadeJunkie on Halo, which is much more fun :)

Seriously now - I'm not going to put up with insults like that. I'm going to spend the 18th year of my life having fun, not being dissed on.

[Jezz]

Depends on what the both of you are defining "salvation" to mean. Salvation's meaning to a Jew is much different than the meaning of Salvation to a Christian.
That actually depends on what you consider the "Christian" view of salvation.

The view that the Judaism FAQ (http://www.jewfaq.org/salvatn.htm) seemed to be defending itself against seems to be the Protestant view. However, after reading a lot about Eastern Orthodox Christianity recently, and reading through the "salvation" FAQ, I can honestly say that I feel there is no difference between the concepts of salvation in Judaism and Orthodox Christianity.

An example:

When the Torah speaks of G-d as our Salvation or our Redeemer, it is not speaking of salvation or redemption from sin; rather, it speaks of salvation from the very concrete, day-to-day problems that we face, such as redemption from slavery in Egypt, or salvation from our enemies in war.
This is pretty much the Orthodox Christian view. The Orthodox Christian view of "salvation" is also that God saves us from our concrete, day-to-day problems. However, to be fair I think that the idea of "salvation from sin" is also valid - though not in the way that Protestants typically think. Orthodox Christians hold (and I'm pretty sure that Jews would agree - correct me if I am wrong here guys) that the concrete, day-to-day problems that we face are caused by sin - either our own, or our ancestors', or someone else's, or a combination. Certainly, God is not at fault - and the only thing that God does not have control over is our free will to sin (because He chooses to allow us that free will), so therefore, only our sin can be to blame. In Orthodox Christianity, therefore, being saved from the concrete, day-to-day problems that we face is the same thing as "being saved from the effects of sin" - or simply "being saved from sin". From what I read in the Judaism FAQ, I don't think that this interpretation is something Jews would disagree with.

Western Christians (and especially Protestants), however, seem to interpret this differently. misunderstanding has come from - they've taken the legitimate interpretation of the Orthodox concept of "being saved from sin", but distorted it to mean something different - ie, that when we die, our sins will send us to hell, and this is something that we need to be saved from. This is the view that the Judaism FAQ seems to be focused on distinguishing itself from - yet it is not a view that is supported by Orthodox Christianity.

Of course, by far the greatest of the concrete, day-to-day problems that everyone faces is death - so the greatest need for "salvation" is "salvation from death". For this reason, Christianity sometimes uses "salvation" to refer specifically to "salvation from death" without further qualification.

[Cherith]

No, it isn't. But hear this clearly: If you are going to be childish, instead of acting like civil "adults" are supposed to act like, I'm not going to waste my time on you. I could be slaughtering ArcadeJunkie on Halo, which is much more fun :)

Seriously now - I'm not going to put up with insults like that. I'm going to spend the 18th year of my life having fun, not being dissed on.

Pardon me, Yoshi, I didn't realize YOU were a petulant child pretending to be an adult. Obviously you haven't lived long enough to know what constitutes a real insult or real disrespect. In fact, in light of your admission I can understand better now why you couldn't defend - or even understand - your own theological position in our debate. (Perhaps Tweb should be segregated so that adults would KNOW when they were dialoguing with teenagers... You know, a "if you are over 18 click here" type of thing...)

So that's fine. Go back to the arcade and play your little video games with your little friends. And perhaps next time you'll consider our Southern axiom: "If you can't RUN with the big dogs, then STAY on the porch!"

Adieu

[RaineLovesJ]

If no one minds, I'd like to address Cherith's original questions.[/COLOR]


Cherith asked: 1.) Does salvation by good works apply even if a person does not believe in God?

Raine replies: You're coming at this from a completely different position than that found in the TaNaKh. Salvation is a physical type of deliverance from a physical danger.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Navy]Cherith asked: 2.) If "Gentiles" can be eternally "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life - by doing good works (people Jews like to refer to as "righteous Gentiles"), then what is the big deal if someone - specifically a "Jewish" someone - believes in Jesus as the Messiah/Son of God?

Raine replies: The big deal about someone believing those things about Jesus is because a) they're not true, b) they're adding to the TaNaKh,and c) in most cases it's idolatry.

[COLOR=Navy]Cherith asked: 3.) WHERE in the Torah/Tanakh does it state that salvation/eternal life is based SOLELY upon "good works"?

Raine replies: I don't see eternal life mentioned in the TaNaKh. I also don't see obedience to the Torah as "good works".

[Cherith]

If no one minds, I'd like to address Cherith's original questions.

Cherith asked: 1.) Does salvation by good works apply even if a person does not believe in God?

Raine replies: You're coming at this from a completely different position than that found in the TaNaKh. Salvation is a physical type of deliverance from a physical danger.

Well, I certainly don't mind, Raine, and I'm glad to see you're over 21! :wink: In fact, it looks like we have more than a couple of things in common...

Anyway, back to the issue at hand. If "salvation" is strictly a physical thing in Judaism, then what word do Jews use for the concept of obtaining life in the hereafter? Or is everyone guaranteed this or does everyone achieve this? And based on what? And do you guys then refer to that as heaven?

Cherith asked: 2.) If "Gentiles" can be eternally "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life - by doing good works (people Jews like to refer to as "righteous Gentiles"), then what is the big deal if someone - specifically a "Jewish" someone - believes in Jesus as the Messiah/Son of God?

Raine replies: The big deal about someone believing those things about Jesus is because a) they're not true, b) they're adding to the TaNaKh,and c) in most cases it's idolatry.

Ok, first I think I made it clear in my post that I was equating the term "saved" (i.e. salvation) with enjoying "eternal life" and that that was accomplished - in Judaism - on the basis of good works. Is that part correct or not? If a "gentile" is not "righteous" or doesn't do any good works will he or can he achieve eternal life/salvation in heaven with God?

Secondly, where does it say in the Tanach that if someone a) believes something that is not true, b) adds to the Tanach and/or c) practices idolatry that they cannot be "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life with God - especially if they are a "gentile"? (I could probably think of a few verses for point c but not specifically directed at "gentiles"...)

Thirdly, your personal convictions aside, would you be willing to grant that IF what Christians said was true - i.e. that Jesus was a) God Himself, b) The Son of God, c) the Messiah, the son of David and that they were not in fact "adding" to the Tanach, but rather correctly interpretating it and therefore they were not guilty of idolatry that they could obtain eternal life?

I realize that this is an enormous IF for you - like IF pigs could fly, but all I'm asking is for you to consider the possiblity before you answer.

You see, a rabbi that Yoshi referred to has an article trying to tear down the historicity and circumstances of Jesus' birth. He uses several different tacts - saying that because Jesus was not BIOLOGICALLY the son of Joseph that he is therefore discounted from being the heir to David's throne, but that would only leave him with a far worse alternative - that of denying that right to God Himself, since THAT is the claim of Christians.

Cherith asked: 3.) WHERE in the Torah/Tanakh does it state that salvation/eternal life is based SOLELY upon "good works"?

Raine replies: I don't see eternal life mentioned in the TaNaKh. I also don't see obedience to the Torah as "good works".

Fair enough. Do YOU believe in life after death and if so - since you don't believe that it is even mentioned in the Tanach - then on what basis? And if you don't believe in life after death at all, then what purpose does it serve to be correct in your beliefs no matter what they are whether Judaism, Christianity, Hindu or Islam? And since you are a homeschooler and I know there are plenty of schools in your area, then what possible reason could you have for wanting to home-school your children if not to shield them from ideas and philosophies that you don't share a belief in?

Also, if obedience to the Torah isn't considered "good works", then what would you consider it? And/or by what standard could "good works" be measured?

Thanks for responding Raine. I look forward to your answers.
--C

[RaineLovesJ]

Anyway, back to the issue at hand. If "salvation" is strictly a physical thing in Judaism, then what word do Jews use for the concept of obtaining life in the hereafter? Or is everyone guaranteed this or does everyone achieve this? And based on what? And do you guys then refer to that as heaven?


I don't know of a word, or concept in the Hebrew scriptures concerning a life hereafter, or heaven (as Christianity understands heaven).


Ok, first I think I made it clear in my post that I was equating the term "saved" (i.e. salvation) with enjoying "eternal life" and that that was accomplished - in Judaism - on the basis of good works. Is that part correct or not? If a "gentile" is not "righteous" or doesn't do any good works will he or can he achieve eternal life/salvation in heaven with God?

Righteousness results in a good life here and now. I don't find eternal life mentioned anywhere in TaNaKh.

Secondly, where does it say in the Tanach that if someone a) believes something that is not true, b) adds to the Tanach and/or c) practices idolatry that they cannot be "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life with God - especially if they are a "gentile"? (I could probably think of a few verses for point c but not specifically directed at "gentiles"...)

Ex. 22:20 “He who sacrifices to any god, except to YHWH only, shall be utterly destroyed." There are 65 other verses that deal with serving other gods, and idolatry.

Thirdly, your personal convictions aside, would you be willing to grant that IF what Christians said was true - i.e. that Jesus was a) God Himself, b) The Son of God, c) the Messiah, the son of David and that they were not in fact "adding" to the Tanach, but rather correctly interpretating it and therefore they were not guilty of idolatry that they could obtain eternal life?

I realize that this is an enormous IF for you - like IF pigs could fly, but all I'm asking is for you to consider the possiblity before you answer.

If this were true then YHWH would be a liar, and I likely wouldn't follow Him.

Fair enough. Do YOU believe in life after death and if so - since you don't believe that it is even mentioned in the Tanach - then on what basis? And if you don't believe in life after death at all, then what purpose does it serve to be correct in your beliefs no matter what they are whether Judaism, Christianity, Hindu or Islam? And since you are a homeschooler and I know there are plenty of schools in your area, then what possible reason could you have for wanting to home-school your children if not to shield them from ideas and philosophies that you don't share a belief in?

I see a physical resurrection mentioned. If there is nothing other than this life, Torah observance is still very beneficial according to Deut. 28.
I homeschool because I do not believe it is the job of the state to raise my children, but my own. While our beliefs play a part in it, their education was our main consideration when we began.

Also, if obedience to the Torah isn't considered "good works", then what would you consider it? And/or by what standard could "good works" be measured?

I, as an Israelite, would consider it doing what we're required to do, holding up our end of the covenant, ensuring a good long life, and hopefully helping to bring about the Kingdom of YHWH faster.

[Timothy Leary]

You see, a rabbi that Yoshi referred to has an article trying to tear down the historicity and circumstances of Jesus' birth. He uses several different tacts - saying that because Jesus was not BIOLOGICALLY the son of Joseph that he is therefore discounted from being the heir to David's throne.

Considering that tribal lineage is paternal, that would be correct.

[Cherith]

I, as an Israelite, would consider it doing what we're required to do, holding up our end of the covenant, ensuring a good long life, and hopefully helping to bring about the Kingdom of YHWH faster.

I haven't forgotten about you, Raine, I've just been preoccupied with other things... However, since I've spent the better part of the afternoon in this section of Tweb, I thought I would at least respond to this statement of yours.

I understand the modern use of the term "Jew" to represent those who follow the religion of Judaism. So I don't have a qualm with those who are adherents to that religion calling themselves Jews in that sense. But you intrigued me with your use of the term "Israelite." An Israelite is an ethnic/familial distinction quite different from the religious designation of "Jew." I'm sure if you've read any of my posts, then you know where I'm heading next. :wink:

What makes you think that you are an "Israelite" - i.e. a descendant of the children of Israel? Or do you simply use the terms interchangeably without regard to their etymological distinctions?

--C

[Timothy Leary]

'Jew' is also used in an ethnic sense - even in the GNT.

[Cherith]

'Jew' is also used in an ethnic sense - even in the GNT.

Hey Yoshiah, what is "GNT" (Gentile New Testament)?

If that be the case, I wouldn't argue that point since I believe that of course there were still ethnic Jews around in the first century. My problem is with the intervening 2,000 yrs of no proof of covenant faithfulness.

[Timothy Leary]

GNT = Greek New Testament. It's a term I picked up on these forums.

[Timothy Leary]

GNT = Greek New Testament. It's a term I picked up on these forums.

It seems I made an error - I picked up the term (and the more generally used abbreviation, GT) from the Jews for Judaism forums (http://www.jewsforjudaism.com/phpBB2/index.php).

[WebToaster]

That's somewhat of a loaded question, as it's not the same man of the Christian Gospels that I refer to as Yehoshua, nor do I follow the teachings of the Christian NT writings(however they're commonly defined). The man's name I'm assuming you're inquiring about is Ribi (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_R-S.htm#Df-Ribi) Yehoshua (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_U-Z.htm#Df-Yehoshua) ben Yosef ben David, who was a Pharisaic Ribi and followed the Torah (http://www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Glossary/Glos_T.htm#Df-Torah)(written and oral) of the time period, non-selectively. I also believe that this Ribi to be Meshiach ben Yosef, as fulfilled in the following prophesies (http://www.netzarim.co.il/MessPro.htm). It's not the same man as J-e-s-u-s. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just need to make my position clear.
Goose, hope you make it back to this forum, but the prophesies link above is broken, and I can't seem to locate this page. Without really getting into the events around 135 CE, I'll grant you that Christianity became decidely more gentile sometimes around this time. Given that, how do you come to the belief that Ribi Yohoshua is Meshiach ben Yosef?

From your site's front page (http://www.netzarim.co.il/) it says he is the last teacher shared by all Abrahamic faiths and the only one able to unify the faiths. But under this view, isn't he also the reason for the split between the faiths? Also, if you are correct that his teachings were redacted beyond all recognition, how do you really know what this man taught? It seems you're only left with trying to form conclusions about an individual's teachings from what is historically believed to be 1st century Pharisaic beliefs.

[Goose]

Given that, how do you come to the belief that Ribi Yohoshua is Meshiach ben Yosef?Based on extant documents and logical deduction, the (authentic) Netzarim have made a reconstruction of Ribi Yehoshua's life. Within the reconstruction we find the archetype of the Meshiach ben Yosef(a suffering servant archetype). I'm sorry the prophesy page is closed. I'll try to get that fixed. It's not my website however.

From your site's front page (http://www.netzarim.co.il/) it says he is the last teacher shared by all Abrahamic faiths and the only one able to unify the faiths. But under this view, isn't he also the reason for the split between the faiths?There's more to the split of the faiths then that. However, what the facts about Ribi Yehoshua do, is create a common ground which can help entertain dialogue instead of murder.

Also, if you are correct that his teachings were redacted beyond all recognition, how do you really know what this man taught? What we find in extant manuscripts and quotes, coupled with logic. We don't use circular reasoning, if that's what you're thinking.

We have a reconstruction, not the actual text. But none the less, when you put all the information together, it's the most accurate in the world. Even if you don't agree that he was the Meshiach ben Yosef, it's historical value is significant, and brings to life the identity of someone more realistic.

It seems you're only left with trying to form conclusions about an individual's teachings from what is historically believed to be 1st century Pharisaic beliefs.We use extant manuscripts and form a reconstruction using deductive reasoning of all the information. It's not ex nihilo or from circular reasoning. Nor do I think our reconstruction is perfect; but I think it's the best the world has.

[kofh2u]

Based on extant documents and logical deduction, the (authentic) Netzarim have made a reconstruction of Ribi Yehoshua's life. Within the reconstruction we find the archetype of the Meshiach ben Yosef(a suffering servant archetype). I'm sorry the prophesy page is closed. I'll try to get that fixed. It's not my website however.

There's more to the split of the faiths then that. However, what the facts about Ribi Yehoshua do, is create a common ground which can help entertain dialogue instead of murder.

What we find in extant manuscripts and quotes, coupled with logic. We don't use circular reasoning, if that's what you're thinking.

We have a reconstruction, not the actual text. But none the less, when you put all the information together, it's the most accurate in the world. Even if you don't agree that he was the Meshiach ben Yosef, it's historical value is significant, and brings to life the identity of someone more realistic.

We use extant manuscripts and form a reconstruction using deductive reasoning of all the information. It's not ex nihilo or from circular reasoning. Nor do I think our reconstruction is perfect; but I think it's the best the world has.

I wonder just what significance m9ght be , as I read about the suffering messiah, Ribi Yehoshua, whose life would be little known and barely recognized among Jews, in terms of the prayers of the Jews over these last 2000 years.

I mean, has something important in terms of all the hope in a messiah actually come to be which we can exclusively attribute to Ribi Yehoshua?

Can we expect, belatedly, that the reconstructionism taken so laboriously in this more recent era can resurrect this Ben Joseph AND re-educate the Jews to his esteemed arrival with a momentum to bring all Israel back into the fold?

What do you see in regard to past and future importance in re-recognizing this messiah?

[Goose]

Can we expect, belatedly, that the reconstructionism taken so laboriously in this more recent era can resurrect this Ben Joseph AND re-educate the Jews to his esteemed arrival with a momentum to bring all Israel back into the fold?It's a start :)

What do you see in regard to past and future importance in re-recognizing this messiah?Recognition of the Messiah is not a "salvation" issue like it is in Christianity. Whether you follow the Torah should be the primary concern. When you keep Torah, then you will recognize the Messiah.

[Sacrificial Ram]

Have I told anybod at Tweb yet just how much I **love** this section!!!

In our gym debate, Yoshi took exception with me that salvation in the O.T. came about through COMPLETE and TOTAL observance of Torah/Pentateuch. So, I've asked several theologians what their perspective was on salvation in Judaism as well as looked on the web and the general consensus seems to be GOOD WORKS. If that is so, then I have a few questions:

1.) Does salvation by good works apply even if a person does not believe in God?

2.) If "Gentiles" can be eternally "saved" - i.e. enjoy eternal life - by doing good works (people Jews like to refer to as "righteous Gentiles"), then what is the big deal if someone - specifically a "Jewish" someone - believes in Jesus as the Messiah/Son of God?

3.) WHERE in the Torah/Tanakh does it state that salvation/eternal life is based SOLELY upon "good works"?

Gracias,
--C
The concept of 'salvation' is different in Judaism than in Christianity. Judaism is concerned with the living in the here and now, not in the afterlife. Salvation meant in THIS world.. not in the next. The first
century Jews were looking for 'salvation' from rome. The Jewish religion
is very works oriented... so it is works that are stressed.

I have to address the other two questions out of order. Judism does not
stress 'eternal life'. There is some speculation about it. It is believed (but not stressed), that when someone dies, they go into a place that is similar in concept to the Catholic Limbo, and have their souls purified for up to a year. They then go to heaven. Souls that are beyond hope are given obliviation (i.e.. no 'hell').

The places that the laws god gave to the Gentiles to follow is Genesis 9:8-9 and 16. It is also talked about in the Talmud (Sanh.56a)

One of the restrictions is not following Idolary. Although much debated, some consider
following 'God made flesh' to be idoltry, which is against the 7 Noahie3 laws. Of course,
others feel that since Christians believe in their own mind they are following the one god, that meets the laws.

However, the belief amoung many Jews is that God has given the obligation to follow the Jewish Laws to be a light unto the world, and therefore if more and more people leave the Jewish tradition, then they will have failed, since there won't be any Jews left to follow the way the God commanded the Jews to worship him.

[Adze]

Bumpas liberalis...back by popular demand.


I say SAVED is a way of life (knowing Gd)..this means not deceased, but actually living in the world. Repairing the world, one tiny step at a time; even a tiny fruit can save a starving person.

There was also a movement started in the 60's called "born again Judaism", where one Jew saved is a formerly non-observant Jew who returns to traditional WAY.

[Adze]

http://sites.kehilla.org/homepage/parsha-reflections-1/reflections-miketz-5768-ready-or-not-here-i-come

In a "big" parsha of dreams, ascent, drama, turmoil and tears, one "minor " pasuk looms large:


Then Paroh sent and called Joseph, and they brought him hastily out of the dungeon: and he shaved himself, and changed his clothing and came in unto Paroh.(Bereishis, 41:14)


In this verse, with a stunning Seforno insight embellished by a beautiful Chofetz Chaim mashal, one finds great comfort and contemporary relevance for the Jew.


The question here is somewhat obvious. That Yosef is rushed, changes his clothing and shaves seems too mundane to be significant. Let the Torah simply state that Yosef was brought before Paroh.


First, consider that Yosef has been languishing in prison for twelve years and away from his family for thirteen. A thirty year old bachelor on a depressing career path, Yosef is going nowhere quickly. One might be tempted to say that Yosef is at the absolute low point in his life. The perceptive observer knows that Yosef has been working on himself, overcoming trial after trial of great import. He s readying himself for greatness, even as he has no idea how it will happen.


One fine day, he receives the call – and then it all happens so quickly. Here we turn to Seforno:


This is the manner of all Divine salvations that happen "in but a moment" as it says .. "for My salvation is closely approaching" (Yeshayahu, 56:1) and as it says " if only My nation would listen to me in an instant I would subdue their foes (Psalms 81).


Why mention Yosef's hasty summons? The good Lord doesn’t dawdle. When the pre-redemption process is over, don't expect transition and absorption time. In one swift fell swoop, stunning in its immediacy, redemption happens. That very moment you deserve it, it shall come.

On a side note. Reading Rabbi Ze'ev Haim Lifshitz commentary on reward and punishement, he makes an interesting observation.
Ibn Ezra and Nahmanides had a dispute referencing performing the commandment of the paschal sacrifice in relation to why the Jews were saved out of Egypt.
Ibn Ezra believes it is so (performing caused the saving) but Nahmanides argues that the creators salvation prompted the the Passover.

Nahmanides further brings to "light" whether the Torah is the cause for mans belief in Gd or whether belief in Gd caused man to study?

[OneSizeFit]

The concept of 'salvation' is different in Judaism than in Christianity. Judaism is concerned with the living in the here and now, not in the afterlife.
[/size][/font]


Boo yow. I was about to post something similar to this, Jews are very practical, God is useless if evidence of his work is not actively observed. In fact the Genesis account of creation were we see the phrase "and it was good" would better be translated, "and it worked"

Jesus as Messiah just didn't fit the requirements for Messiah according to the Prophets, he did not bring Salvation, ie. a physical Kingdom of Judah, the Day of the Lord, just the opposite occurred, the Temple was destroyed, Jews expelled, enslaved etc. The average Christian doesn't understand this.