65 Questions for the Christians and Messianics! [Archive]

Cynic Sage

May 19th 2005, 07:20 PM

Thanks to Sephardic-Male in the Jews for Judaism forum, Yes Yoshiyah you know him, A list of 65 Questions was compiled and I felt the need to ask the participating Christians and "messianics" to please answer them.

I will do them a few at a time so please take your time. These questions will encompass the question " Why I should believe in jesus?"

Ok here we go(Not necessarily in order):

Okay.

1. What branch of Christianity are you from? I want specifics, do not just answer Christian?

Messianic Gentile.:lol:

But seriously, I'd have to say Baptist.

2. Why did your "Gods only begotten son" have to die so that people could go to heaven?

I would say to atone for our transgressions against his honor.

3. What happened to everybody BEFORE jesus? Are they in hell? Explain your answer.

I dunno. You expect me to keep track of everyone?

However, if you are refering to the saints of Israel, the Christ's crucifixion paid for their sin as well.

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?

Eschatology isn't my bag, but I lean towards Orthodox Preterism with regrards to the Olivet discourse (http://www.tektonics.org/esch/olivet01.html).

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though G-d states that it is a GOOD thing to be fruitful and multiply, and ENJOY it, that it is a bad thing? why would anybody procreate in the first place?

I don't understand the question, are you saying that Xtians think sex is bad?

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

Pretty much all of 'em.

Darth Executor

May 19th 2005, 07:46 PM

1. What branch of Christianity are you from? I want specifics, do not just answer Christian?

Greek Orthodox.

2. Why did your "Gods only begotten son" have to die so that people could go to heaven?

I don't think He HAD to.

3. What happened to everybody BEFORE jesus? Are they in hell? Explain your answer.

No idea. Can't get a straight answer on this one from either Christians or Jews.

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?

To see the coming of the Son of Man does not mean you have to be around to actually live it. Case in point: revelations. John saw what would happen.

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though G-d states that it is a GOOD thing to be fruitful and multiply, and ENJOY it, that it is a bad thing? why would anybody procreate in the first place?

Original sin has nothing to do with procreation. Adam and Eve disobeyed God. That's the original sin. I wasn't even aware that there were Christian cults that believed anything in that question...

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

Same answer as 2.

furay

May 19th 2005, 08:11 PM

1. I will be doing my best to present an Orthodox Christian perspective. Although, I have not yet converted to Orthodox Christianity, I firmly believe that the Orthodox Church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Christ and His Apostles.

2. It was NOT to appease God's wrath. Take that Protestants :poke: :teeth: "Penal Substitution" is a Western invention and not how historic Christianity (i.e. the Orthodox Church) understood things at all. God is not some immature child who requires His divine wrath to be appeased. On Pascha the Orthodox Church proclaims triumphantly - "Christ is Risen from the Dead trampling down death by death. And upon those in the tombs bestowing life!" Christ died in order to 'divinise' every aspect of our humanity that was fallen. This is why His whole life is important and not just His death. This is why the 'Passion' by Mel Gibson (as great a movie as it was) is almost un-Orthodox in its choice to just portray the last 12 hours of Christ's life - as if that is all that matters. There is a rift that fallen man has brought upon himself by the stain of sin - Christ has bridged the gap and now we have access to God and to the process of 'theosis' or becoming like God.

This is NOT to say that Christ did not atone our sins. Jesus Christ God-man became propitiation for our sins and has washed us clean of sin. Strictly looking at this subject from a juridical point of view causes problems. Let us instead focus on God's mercy and not His wrath... for God is love. The important thing is this: the outcome of the Crucifixion and Resurrection (along with all of Christ's life) is the reconciliation of humanity with God. Am I making sense? I hope so. Listen, these are heavy issues and I am extraordinarily weak at supplying answers. Perhaps some of the posters on these forums more knowledgable in Orthodoxy will put these mysteries in clearer terms.

Let us move onto the next question! :teeth:

3. Nobody was before Jesus. Jesus is God. He is everlasting. That said, everybody who lived before the Son was incarnated (with a few exceptions - Enoch, Elias) was held captive in Hades. When Christ descended into Hades He preached the gosel to them and when He resurrected he 'busted them out' for lack of a better term. :lol: Anyone who is even remotely familiar with Orthodox Iconography will clearly see this being portrayed in the Icon of the Anastasis, or Harrowing of Hell.

Psalm 15:10 (LXX) "For you will not leave my soul in Hell, neither will You suffer to see Your Holy One to see corruption”

Psalm 106:14-16 (LXX) “And He brought them out of darkness and the shadow of death, and broke their bonds asunder… For He broke to pieces the brazen gates and crushed the iron bars”

ETC. There a bunch of typology in the Old Testament referring to this. There's a passage in Esaias that I'm thinking of...

NT: “Christ went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly did not obey when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah." 1st catholic Epistle of St. Peter 3.19-20

There are more scriptures but in the interest of keeping this short I'll move on to Patristics.

“He raised from the dead the prophets of old, who were His pupils in spirit and waited for Him, when He visited them [in Hell] (9.3).” - St. Ignatius - Letter to the Magnesians

St. Hippolytus (commentry on Deuteronomy 33.26): “He is the One Who pulled up from the lowest Hell the first man who was from the Earth and had been lost, having been held captive by the bonds of death. He is the One Who descended from above and brought above him who was down below. He is the One Who preached the Gospel to the dead and redeemed the souls, Who became the resurrection of those that had been buried… He was the Helper of the man who had been conquered; the One Who assimilated Himself with him… the Noble One Who wants to restore to the slave to freedom through His Own obedience"

And so on and so forth. Bleh, I'm getting tired of typing, how many more questions? :wink: Actually, I think I'll take a break here. Whew. Maybe someone else can pick up where I left off. Geez, are there really gonna be 65 questions? Perhaps I should start picking and choosing. Be well.

Dee Dee Warren

May 19th 2005, 08:24 PM

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though G-d states that it is a GOOD thing to be fruitful and multiply, and ENJOY it, that it is a bad thing? why would anybody procreate in the first place?

Explain why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

furay

May 19th 2005, 08:47 PM

Explain why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

If he (and others) had a clue about these doctrines he would not be practicing Judaism. :teeth:

Meh_Gerbil

May 19th 2005, 09:28 PM

1. What branch of Christianity are you from? I want specifics, do not just answer Christian?

I'm from the branch that believes Jesus when He claims to be the only way, the only truth, and the only life.
That is specific as I get.

2. Why did your "Gods only begotten son" have to die so that people could go to heaven?

Here is my question for you: Why did animals had to have their throats slit and their flesh burnt in the Old Testament? The animal did NOT commit a crime. The answer to your question and the answer to my question are virtually identical -- except Jesus was the permanent sacrifice.

3. What happened to everybody BEFORE jesus? Are they in hell? Explain your answer.

Read the book of Hebrews and see that we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses that goes all the way back to Adam. You see, I'd ask a Jew what happened to Enoch or to Abel -- because they weren't Jewish and they came before Abraham.

Hebrews makes it clear there is one G_d over all and that all believers are connected.

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?

I'll defer to Dee Dee on that one.

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though G-d states that it is a GOOD thing to be fruitful and multiply, and ENJOY it, that it is a bad thing? why would anybody procreate in the first place?

Orignal sin and sex have nothing to do with one another, except in backwards superstitious abberations of Christianity.

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

It is amazing to me that a Jew would ask this question. I ask, what sin did the residents of Jericho commit that necessitated the complete extermination of every man, woman, and child -- even the animals (with the exception of Rahab)? I thought Jews read the Old Testament for crying out loud.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 11:51 AM

First I want to make something perfectly and crystal clear. I am copying and pasting these from a list supplied by another person. So let the questions continue after these are answered.

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

I merely copied and pasted the question. I think what the person was getting at is over the sexual transmission of original sin to the descendants of adam and eve.

to better ask this question I would ask:

"How can the sin of Adam and eve be transmitted sexually when G-d told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply and enjoy it?"

In the future before posting these questions I will double check the verses supplied from the GNT to ensure that there are no more problems.

Shalom,

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 12:18 PM

I'm from the branch that believes Jesus when He claims to be the only way, the only truth, and the only life.
That is specific as I get.

And that does not answer the question. I asked for specifics and you avoid giving them how nice of ytou.

Here is my question for you: Why did animals had to have their throats slit and their flesh burnt in the Old Testament? The animal did NOT commit a crime. The answer to your question and the answer to my question are virtually identical -- except Jesus was the permanent sacrifice.

Answering a question with a question is not answering the question. It is merely a dodge. So please try and actually answer the supplied question. If you can not then please move along and let those who can answer them to answer them.

Also on the human sacrifice of jesus note. since you believe that he is this "ultimate sacrifice" then perhaps you could rectify it with G-d and his prohibition of Humans sacrifices see Deuteronomy 12:31

Read the book of Hebrews and see that we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses that goes all the way back to Adam. You see, I'd ask a Jew what happened to Enoch or to Abel -- because they weren't Jewish and they came before Abraham.

Hebrews makes it clear there is one G_d over all and that all believers are connected.

That is not an answer to this question. I did not ask what the book of Hebrew said about a certain thing I asked you:

3. What happened to everybody BEFORE jesus? Are they in hell? Explain your answer.

what you gave does not sufficiently answer this question.

I'll defer to Dee Dee on that one.

If you are going to do that then I will defer you to my post to her and my comments and better asked question. So please answer the new question in place of this one if you can then dont try..

Orignal sin and sex have nothing to do with one another, except in backwards superstitious abberations of Christianity.

If not then why did jesus have to be born of a virgin? Sex is the means of transmission of this "Original sin." See my comments to Dee Dee on this and the new and better question is supplied.

It is amazing to me that a Jew would ask this question. I ask, what sin did the residents of Jericho commit that necessitated the complete extermination of every man, woman, and child -- even the animals (with the exception of Rahab)? I thought Jews read the Old Testament for crying out loud.

Why is it so amazing. If you cant answer then why did he have to be a "sacrifice" in the first place? Obviously I do read the Tanakh a bit mroe frequently than you do because there is no "sin of Jericho" they were merely in the Land that G-d gave thewm and they were to be wiped out because of it. When was the last time you read the book of Joshua? So your question is minute and irrelivent. And Rahab was spared on oath from the two spies in Joshua chapter 2.

Now please answer the question I gave you. If nto then dont bother posting on the matter again.

Shalom,

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 12:25 PM

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

It did come to pass.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

Do you stop and read what someone says before giving us the typical anti-missionary sound bite? Do you? Please do point out where your answer had ANYTHING to do with my response to show me that I am not wasting my time.

to better ask this question I would ask:

"How can the sin of Adam and eve be transmitted sexually when G-d told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply and enjoy it?"

How can certain diseases be passed on to our children if God told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply? Additionally, come on Eli, post some questions that have actually been thought through, when was that command given (even assuming the premise is right, which it isn't)? Before the Fall.

Cynic Sage

May 20th 2005, 12:55 PM

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

I believe that DeeDee is referring to the term "coming in Glory" to refer to the Destruction of the temple in 70AD, simmilar to the way G_d in the OT's "coming on the clouds" refers to the devastation of Egypt.

I think DeeDee could answer your question better than I have.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:01 PM

It did come to pass.

Really? Then maybe you can explain why they all died?

Do you stop and read what someone says before giving us the typical anti-missionary sound bite? Do you? Please do point out where your answer had ANYTHING to do with my response to show me that I am not wasting my time.

Did you not read my post? Obviously not with this response. I made the correction now answer or leave alone.

I will in the future as I stated, which you obviously ignored, To check each reference in the GNT before postng another question.

How can certain diseases be passed on to our children if God told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply? Additionally, come on Eli, post some questions that have actually been thought through, when was that command given (even assuming the premise is right, which it isn't)? Before the Fall.

That still doesnt rectify the concept of original sin passing sexually from one person to their descendants when G-d said that it was good to be fruitful and multiply.

Simple they are actual biological diseases coming from viruses or bacteria or even genetic. Original sin is not exactly a biological disease with a virus or bacteria nor is it genetic. It is a spiritual concept of the sin of Adam and eve in the garden passing sexually from parents to children. What you are indicating is not the same as the concept of Original sin.

Besides Dee Dee this is a thread with 65 questions. I cant just give them all out at one time that would take the fun out of it.

The next few will be given on Sunday.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:03 PM

That's Darth Yoshiyahu to you, bud :smile:

Oh no, you went and saw it didnt you? I will as soon as the lines clear up a bit. All right Darth Yoshiyahu what is your bidding my Master.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:14 PM

Eli, you once again prove that you do not read. I will show exactly how hopefully later as I am heading out for a weekend family and friends visit. Second, your attitude when Christians are not forced into the box you wish is duly noted as well as the typical anti-missionary spiel. You are not really interested in the answers for you have not at all read mine. Hopefully after explaining it to you for a hundred times you will not pull what you pulled on another thread claiming that you understood all along and that you were just playing a game so that this section would be busier.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:18 PM

I believe that DeeDee is referring to the term "coming in Glory" to refer to the Destruction of the temple in 70AD, simmilar to the way G_d in the OT's "coming on the clouds" refers to the devastation of Egypt.

I think DeeDee could answer your question better than I have.

He is not really interested in my answers. I only picked two as representative sample that the questioner is not even familiar with Christian theology nor cares to be. I am writing more for the few who might read it and to keep it from being the anti-missionary fest that Eli loves to promote.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:19 PM

And that does not answer the question. I asked for specifics and you avoid giving them how nice of ytou.

How nice of you to demand that others fit into your box.

Meh_Gerbil

May 20th 2005, 01:24 PM

And that does not answer the question. I asked for specifics and you avoid giving them how nice of ytou.

Um..okay, sorry.
I'm an orthodox Mhensian.

Answering a question with a question is not answering the question. It is merely a dodge. So please try and actually answer the supplied question. If you can not then please move along and let those who can answer them to answer them.

But I did answer the question.
You only have to explain why animals were sacrificed in the Old Testament and you have your answer. I cannot think of a more thorough answer.

Also on the human sacrifice of jesus note. since you believe that he is this "ultimate sacrifice" then perhaps you could rectify it with G-d and his prohibition of Humans sacrifices see Deuteronomy 12:31

You'll have to ask Abraham about that as well...
Oh wait, G_d made an exception in His law when he commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac -- maybe He just did that again?

That is not an answer to this question. I did not ask what the book of Hebrew said about a certain thing I asked you:

3. What happened to everybody BEFORE jesus? Are they in hell? Explain your answer.

what you gave does not sufficiently answer this question.

But the Book of Hebrews does answer the question.
They are a cloud of witnesses -- in a state of glory, redeemed and with G_d.

If not then why did jesus have to be born of a virgin? Sex is the means of transmission of this "Original sin." See my comments to Dee Dee on this and the new and better question is supplied.

It was prophecied.
It was a sign.
It has nothing to do with sex, that is for sure.

Why is it so amazing. If you cant answer then why did he have to be a "sacrifice" in the first place? Obviously I do read the Tanakh a bit mroe frequently than you do because there is no "sin of Jericho" they were merely in the Land that G-d gave thewm and they were to be wiped out because of it. When was the last time you read the book of Joshua? So your question is minute and irrelivent. And Rahab was spared on oath from the two spies in Joshua chapter 2.

I never claimed there was a 'sin of Jericho'. Apparently your G_d considers the the sin of being alive in a land your parents gave birth to you in is worthy of death?

What was the sin of the Jewish people when they lost their kingdoms to the gentiles? Alot of people died then. You'll find the sins are all pretty much the same.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:25 PM

He is not really interested in my answers. I only picked two as representative sample that the questioner is not even familiar with Christian theology nor cares to be. I am writing more for the few who might read it and to keep it from being the anti-missionary fest that Eli loves to promote.

That is absolutely insane. I cant help it if you get mad when your answers raise a question or two. If you cant handle my questions raised by your answers then tuff leave the thread and dont respond to them

Meh_Gerbil

May 20th 2005, 01:25 PM

How nice of you to demand that others fit into your box.

I think 'answering the question' means 'answering it in a way that allows me to quickly and easily discredit what you believe'.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:26 PM

How nice of you to demand that others fit into your box.

How nice of you to avoid the questions also.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:27 PM

I think 'answering the question' means 'answering it in a way that allows me to quickly and easily discredit what you believe'.

No it means actually answering the question

the first two respondants actually answered them and do you see me knocking them...nope

Meh_Gerbil

May 20th 2005, 01:27 PM

How nice of you to avoid the questions also.

Nobody here is avoiding your questions.
Frankly, they aren't all that provocative.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:30 PM

How nice of you to avoid the questions also.

really? I answered two of them - what I chose - for technically my friend posting as many as you did is against the rules here - however the thread seemed like it was going okay so I didn't report it.. I answered two. Your OP should have been limited to two or three in the first place.

So back to your assertion as I have played enough games with you in the past to know that your debate tactics are manipulative.

Is it true that I avoided the questions? Do you wish to retract that untruth? Isn't it true that I answered two and said I would respond further? Are you going to retract that now?

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:32 PM

Nobody here is avoiding your questions.
Frankly, they aren't all that provocative.

The ones I picked were just downright ignorant.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:33 PM

That is absolutely insane. I cant help it if you get mad when your answers raise a question or two. If you cant handle my questions raised by your answers then tuff leave the thread and dont respond to them

Once again, and I am keeping track. Please explain how your comment AT ALL had anythign to do what I said. You do that often. It didn't. Just like your other. Please read what I say before brining out your canned responses please.

Meh_Gerbil

May 20th 2005, 01:33 PM

The ones I picked were just downright ignorant.

Now now....
...there isn't a bad question at TWEB.

:wink:

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:36 PM

Cynic Sage

May 20th 2005, 01:36 PM

Now now....
...there isn't a bad question at TWEB.

:wink:

"If Jesus was Jewish, why the Hispanic name?"

:lol:

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:37 PM

Um..okay, sorry.
I'm an orthodox Mhensian.

Thank you for answering.

But I did answer the question.
You only have to explain why animals were sacrificed in the Old Testament and you have your answer. I cannot think of a more thorough answer.

Answering a question with a question is not an answer at all it is just a dodge.

it was ordained by G-d.

Now answer for yours. Keep in mind G-d forbade human sacrifice deuteronomy 12:31

You'll have to ask Abraham about that as well...
Oh wait, G_d made an exception in His law when he commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac -- maybe He just did that again?

News flash! Avraham didnt sacrifice Isaac. I think you need to read Genesis 22 again.

But the Book of Hebrews does answer the question.
They are a cloud of witnesses -- in a state of glory, redeemed and with G_d.

Merely saying the Book of Hebrews doesnt answer the question. Perhaps you could explain and give examples within this book of Hebrews

It was prophecied.
It was a sign.
It has nothing to do with sex, that is for sure.

Perhaps you could show me some examples in the Tanmakh for the first two.

The last one I would have to say then why is there a concept of original sin and also how is it transmitted then if it is not transmitted through sex from parents to children?

I never claimed there was a 'sin of Jericho'. Apparently your G_d considers the the sin of being alive in a land your parents gave birth to you in is worthy of death?

Then why did you ask the question or even the hypothetical question

see here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1037247&postcount=8)

What was the sin of the Jewish people when they lost their kingdoms to the gentiles? Alot of people died then. You'll find the sins are all pretty much the same.

that does not answer the question. I Did not ask about that i simply asked one question in this regard:

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

this is the second time you have answered this with a question. If you dont know then say you dont know.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:37 PM

"If Jesus was Jewish, why the Hispanic name?"

:lol:

LOL..

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:44 PM

Here's a hint Eli before you go half-cocked, MY ISSUE WITH YOU HAD ZERO TO DO WITH CHECKING THE REFERENCES! You keep ranting that you said you would check the references. That wasn't the issue I siad you were not reading about. Now, why don't you go back to the very first time I said that and read what I said before continuing to rant about something I wasn't even talking about.

Citing post number 6 here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1037184&postcount=6)

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

I corrected myself on your request and asked a better question with regards to your correction.

I also answered the latter half with a comment stating that this is hardly a Jewish concept.If you dont want me to answer that part witha comment dont put it in there.

Explain why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

And I corrected the question with your regards. I merely corrected in regards to the sexual transmission of the original sin

So yes according to your first post it was about the references of the first question. as for the second It was the issue with which i had no clue about and I corrected it saying not that sex was a sin but that it was transmitted sexually based on you pointing it out that the sex act was not the original sin.

So now based on your first post what was your intent especially with your first comment.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:47 PM

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:50 PM

really? I answered two of them - what I chose - for technically my friend posting as many as you did is against the rules here - however the thread seemed like it was going okay so I didn't report it.. I answered two. Your OP should have been limited to two or three in the first place.

Then I will only post two or three the next one in accordance if that is what you are sayin please clarify if only two or three per thread or two or three per post.

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:53 PM

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:53 PM

I will show you exactly later, and hopefully it will show you that you need to slow down and pay attention to each point a person is responding to. If you read my post carefully we would not be in this position IMHO. I will detail it later. In the meantime I am awaiting your retraction that I have answered none of your questions.

you have answered the ones you chose to answer. I admit that and apologize. Now as to your clarification of your original intent. please continue.

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 01:54 PM

Eli, I have asked a noninvovled moderator to give you guidance. I cannot moderate a thread I am involved in.

That is fine

Dee Dee Warren

May 20th 2005, 01:54 PM

Thank you. I hope to later tonight. I will be gone a great deal though and not sure of my traveling Internet access.

Faramir

May 20th 2005, 03:12 PM

Eli, I have asked a noninvovled moderator to give you guidance. I cannot moderate a thread I am involved in - they will review the thread and see if the nature of the thread seems like you should start separate ones or just separate posts. That will be their call.

I actually noticed this thread yesterday, and started to report it myself. The policy does limit OP’s to 2-3 questions, however as many of the questions were simple and were related to each other, I do not feel that it violated the "spirit" of the law, and I decided to let it go.

However, if additional questions are added to the thread, it would be nearly impossible to keep someone from bringing up question #4 when the bulk of the thread has progressed to questions #34-37.

In order to avoid a thread with so many different questions going on at once, I think it would be best to start a new thread for every 2-3 questions.

Thanks,

Faramir

Admin Assistant

Menachem

May 20th 2005, 04:43 PM

Thank you Faramir for the clarification of the guidelines

Dee Dee Warren

May 21st 2005, 10:06 PM

Okay Eli, let’s go through this:

Here is my first post

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though G-d states that it is a GOOD thing to be fruitful and multiply, and ENJOY it, that it is a bad thing? why would anybody procreate in the first place?

Explain why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

Now here is what you said:

First I want to make something perfectly and crystal clear. I am copying and pasting these from a list supplied by another person. So let the questions continue after these are answered.

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

I merely copied and pasted the question. I think what the person was getting at is over the sexual transmission of original sin to the descendants of adam and eve.

to better ask this question I would ask:

"How can the sin of Adam and eve be transmitted sexually when G-d told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply and enjoy it?"

In the future before posting these questions I will double check the verses supplied from the GNT to ensure that there are no more problems.
Now here is where we start having issues, here is my next post:

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

It did come to pass.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

Do you stop and read what someone says before giving us the typical anti-missionary sound bite? Do you? Please do point out where your answer had ANYTHING to do with my response to show me that I am not wasting my time.

to better ask this question I would ask:

"How can the sin of Adam and eve be transmitted sexually when G-d told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply and enjoy it?"

How can certain diseases be passed on to our children if God told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply? Additionally, come on Eli, post some questions that have actually been thought through, when was that command given (even assuming the premise is right, which it isn't)? Before the Fall.

Now let’s stop here because it is right here that I first stated you are not reading. I accepted ALL of your clarifications on what the author must have intended, and I accepted that you will be more careful the next time you post his questions. THAT is not the issue. Here is the breakdown:

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse.

I rebutted that Matthew 16:27 was about the ‘end of the world’ and stated that said verse was couched in Jewish imagery. In response you said:

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

To which I said:

Do you stop and read what someone says before giving us the typical anti-missionary sound bite? Do you? Please do point out where your answer had ANYTHING to do with my response to show me that I am not wasting my time.

This is because CLEARLY your response went on about how a “Son of man” has the power to save humanity from its sins and how that is not a Jewish concept. But I NEVER even mentioned that ONCE in my post. My comment about Jewish imagery was in the context that a certain passage was not about the end of the world. What you said had ZERO relevance to what I said, which is why I accused you of not reading what I said. It had nothing to do with the sloppiness of the original author of the questions. It had to do with you trotting out a pat answer to an issue I never even raised. It is like I said, “How do I get to the highway,” and you answered, “Milk is on sale today.”

That is the issue. And the fact that you did not see that was my complaint when I challenged you to show how your response to my quote had anything to do with my quote shows you went on to not read carefully what I said but rather I guess what you thought I should say.

Now I hope that is straightened out. I will deal with your other substantive points once this is dealt with.

Menachem

May 22nd 2005, 01:36 PM

Okay Eli, let’s go through this:

Here is my first post

Sigh. Explain where Matthew 16:27-28 is about the "end of the world" - the fact that me, a gentile, would have to explain Jewish imagery to a Jewish person is sad. But it gets worse....

Explain why you ask a question about a doctrine you clearly don't have a clue about?

Now here is what you said:

First I want to make something perfectly and crystal clear. I am copying and pasting these from a list supplied by another person. So let the questions continue after these are answered.

Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I think what he was getting at, not necessarily the end of the world part which I would not have included here but rather. Since he prophesied the above. Why has this never come to pass? That is how i would have asked this question with regards to these verses.

You call this a "Jewish" Idea. LOL If thise were anything I would never consider this a Jewish concept. We do not and never believe that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins. That is a Non-Jewish concept.

I merely copied and pasted the question. I think what the person was getting at is over the sexual transmission of original sin to the descendants of adam and eve.

to better ask this question I would ask:

"How can the sin of Adam and eve be transmitted sexually when G-d told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply and enjoy it?"

In the future before posting these questions I will double check the verses supplied from the GNT to ensure that there are no more problems.
Now here is where we start having issues, here is my next post:

It did come to pass.

Do you stop and read what someone says before giving us the typical anti-missionary sound bite? Do you? Please do point out where your answer had ANYTHING to do with my response to show me that I am not wasting my time.

How can certain diseases be passed on to our children if God told us that it was good to be fruitful and multiply? Additionally, come on Eli, post some questions that have actually been thought through, when was that command given (even assuming the premise is right, which it isn't)? Before the Fall.

Now let’s stop here because it is right here that I first stated you are not reading. I accepted ALL of your clarifications on what the author must have intended, and I accepted that you will be more careful the next time you post his questions. THAT is not the issue. Here is the breakdown:

I rebutted that Matthew 16:27 was about the ‘end of the world’ and stated that said verse was couched in Jewish imagery. In response you said:

To which I said:

This is because CLEARLY your response went on about how a “Son of man” has the power to save humanity from its sins and how that is not a Jewish concept. But I NEVER even mentioned that ONCE in my post. My comment about Jewish imagery was in the context that a certain passage was not about the end of the world. What you said had ZERO relevance to what I said, which is why I accused you of not reading what I said. It had nothing to do with the sloppiness of the original author of the questions. It had to do with you trotting out a pat answer to an issue I never even raised. It is like I said, “How do I get to the highway,” and you answered, “Milk is on sale today.”

That is the issue. And the fact that you did not see that was my complaint when I challenged you to show how your response to my quote had anything to do with my quote shows you went on to not read carefully what I said but rather I guess what you thought I should say.

Now I hope that is straightened out. I will deal with your other substantive points once this is dealt with.

Thank you for your clarification of what you meant. I see where we went off arguing two different things. Thank you for taking the time to clarify.

Ponfyr

May 24th 2005, 09:54 PM

Also on the human sacrifice of jesus note. since you believe that he is this "ultimate sacrifice" then perhaps you could rectify it with G-d and his prohibition of Humans sacrifices see Deuteronomy 12:31

Eliyosef,

I am not so sure I understand Deuteronomy 12:31 to be a prohibition of Human sacrifices. Might they not also be a violation of “without blemish” [מאום ] or “Firstborn/Firstlings” [בכור ]? How do you rectify Jephthah sacrificing his only daughter as a burnt offering? His sacrifice seems to be accepted.

29 Then the spirit of HaShem came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon. 30 And Jephthah vowed a vow unto HaShem, and said: 'If Thou wilt indeed deliver the children of Ammon into my hand, 31 then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, it shall be HaShem'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering.' 32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and HaShem delivered them into his hand. 33 And he smote them from Aroer until thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto Abel-cheramim, with a very great slaughter. So the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel. 34 And Jephthah came to Mizpah unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances; and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said: 'Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art become my troubler; for I have opened my mouth unto HaShem, and I cannot go back.' 36 And she said unto him: 'My father, thou hast opened thy mouth unto HaShem; do unto me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as HaShem hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon.' 37 And she said unto her father: 'Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may depart and go down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my companions.' 38 And he said: 'Go.' And he sent her away for two months; and she departed, she and her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains. 39 And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed; and she had not known man. And it was a custom in Israel, 40 that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.

-- JPS Electronic Edition

wfaber

May 24th 2005, 10:36 PM

I see nothing in this passage that suggests that God approved of a human sacrifice or even sanctioned it.

Pythagoras

May 25th 2005, 05:09 AM

Actually even Eliyosef's claim that Jews never believed "that a certain "Son of man" has the power to save humanity from its sins" is false. In this regard, there is a remarkable Jewish tradition which states that Abraham actually killed his son Issac and that Isaac atones for Israel's sins, just as does Jesus.

source: The Torah: A modern Commentary(New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1981), p. 151 n.5

Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut

"There is a remarkable tradition that insisted that Abraham completed the sacrifice and that afterward Isaac was miraculously revived... According to this haggadah, Abraham slew his son, burnt his victim,and the ashes remain as a stored-up merit and atonment for Israel in all generations."

And consider the following Midrash:

Song of Songs Rabbah 1:14:1

"My beloved is unto me as a cluster of Henna. Cluster refers to Isaac, who was bound on the alter like a cluster of Henna(Kofer): because he atones(mekapper) for the iniquities of Israel."

-- Soncino Midrash Rabbah(vol. 9, second part, p. 81)

good luck,

Menachem

May 25th 2005, 01:17 PM

Eliyosef,

I am not so sure I understand Deuteronomy 12:31 to be a prohibition of Human sacrifices. Might they not also be a violation of “without blemish” [מאום ] or “Firstborn/Firstlings” [בכור ]? How do you rectify Jephthah sacrificing his only daughter as a burnt offering? His sacrifice seems to be accepted.

Deuteronomy 12:31. You shall not do so to the Lord your God; for every abomination to the Lord, which he hates, have they done to their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burned in the fire to their gods.

in this very statement G-d is telling the Israelites that other nations sacrifice their sons and daughters to their gods and G-d at the end implicitly commands that we not do as they do and offer other human beings as sacrifices to G-d. because it is an abomination.

29 Then the spirit of HaShem came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon. 30 And Jephthah vowed a vow unto HaShem, and said: 'If Thou wilt indeed deliver the children of Ammon into my hand, 31 then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, it shall be HaShem'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering.' 32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and HaShem delivered them into his hand. 33 And he smote them from Aroer until thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto Abel-cheramim, with a very great slaughter. So the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel. 34 And Jephthah came to Mizpah unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances; and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said: 'Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art become my troubler; for I have opened my mouth unto HaShem, and I cannot go back.' 36 And she said unto him: 'My father, thou hast opened thy mouth unto HaShem; do unto me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as HaShem hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon.' 37 And she said unto her father: 'Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may depart and go down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my companions.' 38 And he said: 'Go.' And he sent her away for two months; and she departed, she and her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains. 39 And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed; and she had not known man. And it was a custom in Israel, 40 that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.

-- JPS Electronic Edition

The Talmud explains (Taanit 4b) that in the instance Yephetah made an error in judgement. That there was no way he could have known for certain that an animal would be the first thing to walk through. By making a vow to G-d to sacrifice the first thing that walks through the door he had to go on with it even if it was a human being, his daughter. Even Yaphetah knew what he was doing was wrong look at verse 35 he is distrought and says that he has made an oath and must keep it no matter how much he recants of it.

His punishment comes along in the next chapter in verse 7. It says he was literally buried in "the cities of gilead." this has the implication that he had more than one burial in more than one city. The midrash puts it that his body was torn limb from limb for his atrocity with his daughter and that each of his limbs were buried in the city at which he resided at the time.

This "human sacrifice" no matter whether it is in there or not is not accepted by G-d and Yephetah pays for it later on.

Shalom,

Menachem

May 25th 2005, 01:17 PM

I see nothing in this passage that suggests that God approved of a human sacrifice or even sanctioned it.

good eyes :thumb:

Krusader

May 25th 2005, 02:25 PM

I just noticed this thread and would like to respond to the first five questions:

1.What branch of Christianity am I from - Born-again Christian attending Baptist Church.

2. Why did God's Son need to die so that people could go to heaven? - Primarily God is Love, for Scripture states, "God so loved the world, that He sent His only Begotten Son." God has given us this law: the wages of sin is death. Who will pay that "wage?" Either the sinner will pay, or someone will pay on his behalf. This is why animal sacrifice was instituted - the blood of animals was poured out in lieu of the sinner's blood. So, to satisfy divine justice, there must be a propitiatory sacrifice. The Temple was the primary site of propitiatory sacrifices in Old Testament/New Testament times.

God, Himself, in the Person of Christ, offered to become that sacrifice for sin. Remember when the Passover lamb was slain and the blood placed above the doors of the Jews - when the Angel of Death came, those under the blood were spared. In the same way, Jesus, our Passover Lamb, shed his blood - that those who trust in that Blood are spared eternal death, and will experience eternal life.

3. What happened to everybody before Jesus. Are they in Hell? - No, the New Testament clearly states that the Old Testament saints are saved in the same way as New Testament believers - by grace through faith. The merit of Christ's sacrifice is eternal and efficacious for all sins (past, present and future). While the faith of those before Christ looked forward to God's provision of salvation, Christians look back to it.

4. Is Matthew 16:27-28 a false prophecy and should the prophet be killed: Please note that this prophecy was fulfilled - and immediately. Chapter 17 shows the fulfillment of this prophecy: James, Peter and John did not taste of death before they saw the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom - they saw this on the Mt. of Transfiguration.

5. Explain why there is original sin, even though God said be fruitful and multiply: You are mixing up a Roman doctrine with biblical doctrine. Nowhere does Scripture teach that original sin is sexual. Original sin means this: Men, after the fall of Adam, are born spiritually dead to God. Remember when God told Adam that in the day he ate the forbidden fruit, he would surely die? Well, what died that day? It was Adam's spirit within him which died spiritually - and from thence, all the offspring of men are born spiritually dead. This is why the Lord Jesus said, "you must be born-again." He was not speaking of reincarnation, but of man's spirit coming alive through faith, and coming back into relationship with God.

Well, I hope this response has been helpful. I usually don't post here for various reasons, but I found these questions really needed to be dealt with. Crusader

InChristAlways

May 25th 2005, 03:23 PM

4. If a prophet makes a false prophecy, then he should not be believed, and should be killed according to the Jewish Bible. Explain why the end of the world has not yet come (Matthew 16:27-28) ?
Hi Eliyosef. What prophecies are you saying Jesus and God didn't fulfill out of curiosity? Could revelation be showing a fulfillment of those, as I view it?

Isn't it ironic that God would have the jews build a 2nd temple just to destroy it in the future?

Revelation 11:1 Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, "Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there.

Matt 23:37 " O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under [her] wings, but you were not willing! 38 "See! Your house is left to you desolate;

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

Hi Eli. It depends on what SIN[singular in both Jeremiah and John 1] is spoken of in Jeremiah that His anger for them burns forever. And why is it specifically for Judah and not all of Israel? Read Luke 16 Parable of the Rich Man[Judah] and Lazarus[Lost sheep]http://www.newjerusalemcommunity.com/articles/132/1/The-Rich-Man-and-Lazarus
It appears He came for Israel, not us "gentiles"or to save the rulers/Priests in Jerusalem. Must have been something pretty bad for God to put a curse on the jews in Malachi 2. Is that curse still on them to this day? Just curious.

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4 And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the SIN of the world!

Malachi 2:1 "And now, O priests, this commandment is for you. 2 If you will not hear, And if you will not take [it] to heart, To give glory to My name," Says the LORD of hosts, "I will send a curse upon you, And I will curse your blessings. Yes, I have cursed them already, Because you do not take [it] to heart.

Krusader

May 25th 2005, 04:06 PM

I also note that there was a sixth question that I couldn't get to before lunch. The question is "What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?"

I think this can best be answered by forgetting the concept of "little sins" and "big sins." Sin is sin, and separates us from God, no matter its size. The Lord God instituted animal sacrifices (as a type of the ultimate propitiatory sacrifice of Christ), as a consequence of sin, which is transgression of God's law.

Now, note that it was animal sacrifice and not human sacrifice. God clearly forbade participation in pagan practices (such as practiced by the surrounding civilizations). But, we see clearly in the Old Testament that sin is paid for by blood. God, loving His creation, became flesh so that the blood price could be paid by His own infinite sacrifice. For, the blood of animals never took away sin, or really paid the price of sin, buit was only a type, a shadow of that to come - but the Blood sacrifice of an Infinite God has infinite qualities, and therefore could pay the price of every sin ever committed.

Of course, I don't ask that you agree with me - but I'm trying to give some clarification to Christian beliefs. Shalom

Ponfyr

May 25th 2005, 04:40 PM

The Talmud explains (Taanit 4b) that in the instance Yephetah made an error in judgement. That there was no way he could have known for certain that an animal would be the first thing to walk through. By making a vow to G-d to sacrifice the first thing that walks through the door he had to go on with it even if it was a human being, his daughter. Even Yaphetah knew what he was doing was wrong look at verse 35 he is distrought and says that he has made an oath and must keep it no matter how much he recants of it.

As I have failed to locate the text of Ta'anit 4b of the Talmud (in English) anywhere online I will have to take your word for it. Regardless, I agree that Yephetah made an error in judgment.

My point was G-d knew who would be first; it doesn’t matter if Yephetah made an error in judgment. G-d still knew and accepted it.

His punishment comes along in the next chapter in verse 7. It says he was literally buried in "the cities of gilead." this has the implication that he had more than one burial in more than one city. The midrash puts it that his body was torn limb from limb for his atrocity with his daughter and that each of his limbs were buried in the city at which he resided at the time.

(Judges) 12:"]6 then said they unto him: 'Say now Shibboleth'; and he said 'Sibboleth'; for he could not frame to pronounce it right; then they laid hold on him, and slew him at the fords of the Jordan; and there fell at that time of Ephraim forty and two thousand. 7 And Jephthah judged Israel six years. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead. 8 And after him Ibzan of Beth-lehem judged Israel.

Source: Jewish Publication Society Electronic Edition (Emphasis mine)

Perhaps you could suggest a better translation ( I prefer ‘online’ and ‘free’) but I don’t see anything indicating an ominous or untimely death nor anything particularly violent about his death. I am willing to state for the record that I am a novice in Hebrew and I will defer to your superior judgment in matters of Hebrew translation. However, it would seem to me from what you stated that this is a major error on the part of the Jewish Publication Society, and not just a simple typo.

In regards to the midrash, I have taken two quotes from the web page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash:

“Traditionally, understanding of Biblical text in Judaism is divided between peshat (direct meaning), remez (hints), derash (exegesis) and sod (mystical). The Midrash concentrates on remez but even more on derash.”

“Some Midrash discussions are highly metaphorical, and many Jewish authors stress that they are not intended to be taken literally.”

Do you agree with either of them?

Darth Executor

May 25th 2005, 05:51 PM

InChristAlways

May 26th 2005, 01:11 PM

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for? "Our God"?!
It appears the SIN was what Israel/Judah comitted, not "gentiles" and was so bad, God even cursed the jews in Malachi 2 and He appears to have put a nice pretty Gold Dome where this SIN was comitted, perhaps to remind them of it?.

Hi Eli. It depends on what SIN[singular in both Jeremiah and John 1] is spoken of in Jeremiah that His anger for them burns forever. And why is it specifically for Judah[jews] and not all of Israel? Read Luke 16 Parable of the Rich Man[Judah] and Lazarus[Lost sheep]http://www.newjerusalemcommunity.com/articles/132/1/The-Rich-Man-and-Lazarus

It appears He came for Israel, not us "gentiles" and not to save the corrupt murderous rulers/Priests in Jerusalem. Must have been something pretty bad for God to put a curse on the jews in Malachi 2. Is that curse still on them to this day?

But don't worry, messianics and Zionist christians say He will come back again to save you and take the curse of Malachi 2 off you. {BTW, I am considered "heretical" by the creedal churches because of my view}. http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

Blessings and Peace.

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4 And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the SIN of the world!

Malachi 2:1 "And now, O priests, this commandment is for you. 2 If you will not hear, And if you will not take [it] to heart, To give glory to My name," Says the LORD of hosts, "I will send a curse upon you, And I will curse your blessings. Yes, I have cursed them already, Because you do not take [it] to heart.

Pythagoras

May 26th 2005, 01:55 PM

Basically Eliyosef has trapped himself.

He says;

The Talmud explains (Taanit 4b) that in the instance Yephetah made an error in judgement. That there was no way he could have known for certain that an animal would be the first thing to walk through. By making a vow to G-d to sacrifice the first thing that walks through the door he had to go on with it even if it was a human being, his daughter. Even Yaphetah knew what he was doing was wrong look at verse 35 he is distrought and says that he has made an oath and must keep it no matter how much he recants of it.

In other words it is more important to keep a vow to God , more urgent to santify God's name, than it is to worry about Halakak difficulties. That's why Yephetah's burnt offering was not rejected by God. That's why he was not condemned by the Almighty. Yephetah was faced with two unpleasant choices: either break his word to God or save his daughter. Yephetah proved himself to be God fearing. Eliyosef would have saved his daughter.

Abraham was faced with a virtually identical dilemma at Mt. Moriah, and like Yephetah he would have killed his child, had an angel not intervened. However, in God's eyes, it was as though the deed was done-- "Now I know you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."(Gen 22:12). Also see Gen. 22:15. Not only did God not condemn Abraham for his willingness to kill Issac, but He highly commended the patriarch , and blessed him.

Saddida tells(regarding Akedah) that "the moral of the story is that Jews should be ready to sacrifice their lives for the santification of God's name, seemingly overloking the fact that the traditional interpretation of the Akdeah requires murder, not to sanctify God's name in the accepted sense of adhering to God's Commandmends, but in the sense of violating those Commandmends, including the fundamental precept of "be killed rather than kill another without proper cause."

best wishes,

InChristAlways

May 26th 2005, 01:57 PM

Pytha
Saddida tells(regarding Akedah) that "the moral of the story is that Jews should be ready to sacrifice their lives for the santification of God's name, seemingly overloking the fact that the traditional interpretation of the Akdeah requires murder, not to sanctify God's name in the accepted sense of adhering to God's Commandmends, but in the sense of violating those Commandmends, including the fundamental precept of "be killed rather than kill another without proper cause."
Quote:

6. What is the sin that people committed that was so horrible that your god had to become flesh and blood to die to atone for?

It appears the "SIN" was what Israel/Judah comitted, not "gentiles" and was so bad, God even cursed the jews in Malachi 2 and He appears to have put a nice pretty Gold Dome where this "SIN" was comitted, perhaps to remind them of it?.

But don't worry, messianics and Zionist christians say He will "come back again" to save you and take the curse of Malachi 2 off you. {BTW, I am considered "heretical" by most the "creedal carnal" churches because of my view of the bible being fulfilled}. This site is more heretical than I ever can be. http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm (http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm)

Hi Pytha. Can you give him a chance to respond to my post concerning the "SIN". And how do you feel about Christ coming again to save them and his reference to "our god"?

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the SIN of the world!

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4 And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

Krusader

May 26th 2005, 03:49 PM

So, when do we get more questions?

InChristAlways

May 26th 2005, 04:13 PM

Hi Pytha. Can you give him a chance to respond to my post concerning the "SIN". And how do you feel about Christ coming again to save them and his reference to "our god"?

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the SIN of the world!

Jeremiah 17:1 "The sin of Judah written with a pen of iron; With the point of a diamond [it is] engraved On the tablet of their heart, And on the horns of your altars, [i]2 While their children remember Their altars and their wooden images By the green trees on the high hills. 3 O My mountain in the field, I will give as plunder your wealth, all your treasures, [And] your high places of sin within all your borders. 4 And you, even yourself, Shall let go of your heritage which I gave you; And I will cause you to serve your enemies In the land which you do not know; For you have kindled a fire in My anger [which] shall burn forever."

So, when do we get more questions?Hi Crusader. My post on the "SIN" of Judah hasn't been responded to yet by christians, messianics or jews yet..

But I got another one. According to messianics and christians, what prophecies did Jesus fail to accomplish for the jews? If christians believe in Christ, why is it that jews and muslims fail to believe in Him?

One question I have is what is this Day in Ezekiel that "God Glorifies Himself" to the jews and world?It isn't in the Torah and Talmud, so they will have to study the prohets a little more deeply on "their own" I think.

This is also the same event as in our own book of revelation, chapt 19/20, how ironic. Simply amazing!!!!!
I still think revelation should have been after Malachi in the OT and perhaps the jews[and muslims] would have looked at it more.
Thanks and blessings.

Ezekiel 39:1 "And you, son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "Behold, I [am] against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal; 7 "So I will make My holy name known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not [let them] profane My holy name anymore. Then the nations shall know that the LORD, the Holy One in Israel. 12 "For seven months the house of Israel will be burying them, in order to cleanse the land. 13 "Indeed all the people of the land will be burying, and they will gain renown for it on the Day that I am Glorified," says the Lord GOD.[i]17 " And as for you, son of man, thus says the Lord GOD, 'Speak to every sort of bird and to every beast of the field: "Assemble yourselves and come; Gather together from all sides to My sacrificial meal Which I am sacrificing for you, A Great Sacrificial Meal on the mountains of Israel, That you may eat flesh

reve 19:17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, "Come and gather together for the supper of the great God, 18 "that you may eat the flesh of kings,

Reve 20:8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number [is] as the sand of the sea.