A Long Standing Argument....

[OneSizeFit]

OP, in your original post, I think you've answered your own question!

[religi-ninja]

OneSizeFit... how so? Please explain your comment. Anything that could lead me toward further enlightenment is definitely more than welcome.

[NormATive]

Hang with me here, i could use the input on this....

My wife and I have a long standing argument. It deeply troubles her, and in turn, that deeply troubles me. See, we have differing viewpoints on religion. She is a staunch Christian believer raised in the Baptist Faith. I was raised in the Christian faith as well, but when I started asking questions, as a youth, that the older people in the church couldn't answer, my faith wavered. Quite a bit. There was something, a BIG thing, that I just couldn't wrap my head around. I'm hoping maybe I could get some answers here...

PLEASE, I ask you to forgive me ahead of time, I mean no offense to anyone. I'm writing this as if I am speaking to friends, so please, try to understand and help. Forgive me for not incorporating verses here, I'm writing this a little quick.

The Bible says some very conflicting things. I'm not here to point them out, but rather to ask for explanation.

Christians say that the only way to God and Heaven is to be be saved and accept Jesus in your heart as the way.

Jesus, in the New Testament Bible (I think its in Matthew but I could be wrong), says himself that it is more important to acknowledge God as the Father than to know Jesus.

In the Old Testament, God warns us to only love him, and to never put another god, person, or image on the pedestal where he belongs.

If I am too love God, as I do, very much, then how is it I should pray to someone other than God himself? Why is it I should worship someone other than God himself?

As I mentioned above, even Jesus is recorded as saying that it is more important to love God than to love Jesus. In fact, only people have said to love Jesus before God.

I know many Christians that don't even acknowledge God, but rather solely Jesus.

I guess I'm just very confused, and I was hoping some of you, my new friends and fellow twebbers, could help me out with distinguishing the truth from opinion on this, a very important and debated topic between my wife and I.

It's getting to the point where we can no longer discuss religion, as it does nothing but upset her. She is devout in her faith, but knows the scriptures not well, which leads to her repeating herself a lot, and as you can imagine, that furthers the problem.

So what do you say? Some kindly advice? I appreciate all who take the time to respond. Thanks for reading all of this....

Your dillema is that you are merging two completely separate religions. It's not your fault, and you are not alone in your situation. I went through the very same thing.

You see, in Judaism, one is commanded to love G-d and G-d only (the Shema).

In Christianity, it is more complex, because G-d is a man - Jesus. This is antithetical to Jewish faith. To worship a human being is idolatry. I know, I know; the trinity explains everything. Well, not to a Jew. Sorry.

The answer is to just accept either Christianity or accept Judaism. You cannot do both. Both are complete religions in and of themselves. One need not be conflicted. I don't think Christianity really needs all the prophecy things to prove it is "true." To me, the faith stands on its own. Paul's teaching is all you really need. All you succeed in doing is misunderstanding Judaism, and that's not fair to Jews.

Myself; I chose Judaism. I just cannot wrap my head around trinitarianism. It doesn't make any sense.

So, my advice to you would be to just accept Christianity at face value and not worry about breaking the Jewish commandments against idolatry. You aren't obligated to obey the Tanakh.

NORM

[religi-ninja]

Accepting anything at face value is out of the question. That isn't what faith is about. It's about knowing it in your heart, mind, and soul. It just so happens that my heart, mind, and soul is a little muddled about this topic right now. I do my best to follow the teachings of Jesus, but not because they are the teachings of Jesus, in fact it's got nothing to do with him, but rather because that is how I think people should live and treat each other.

God is my God. Regardless. At all times. I wholeheartedly believe in the teachings of the Old Testament, which I refer to as the Old Testament only because that's how I was raised.

I do not worry about doing the wrong thing on Sunday. I do not worry about eating pork.

I will not touch or go near a dead person. I won't even near a casket at a funeral or showing.

I believe that the world will end one day at the Hand of God, but not so much in The Rapture.

I feel stuck in the middle. What do I do?

[RBerman]

I feel stuck in the middle. What do I do?

I encourage you to meet with a pastor that you trust. If you're having trouble finding such a man, PM me your location and I'll see if I can make a suggestion.

[OneSizeFit]

OneSizeFit... how so? Please explain your comment. Anything that could lead me toward further enlightenment is definitely more than welcome.

You said it in your post, Jesus told his listeners, love God, love your neighbor. Do likewise.

Christian doctrine is more complicated than Christianity. The New Testament is to the point if you read it free of theological presuppositions.

[religi-ninja]

You said it in your post, Jesus told his listeners, love God, love your neighbor. Do likewise.

Christian doctrine is more complicated than Christianity. The New Testament is to the point if you read it free of theological presuppositions.

How? Okay, let me put it this way. In the Old Testament, or Tanakh, God lays down some pretty simple rules that state how we should live with one another, there's the Ten Commandments, and the other rules like not eating unclean foods, not touching dead people, etc. Then in the New Testament, the teachings of Jesus kind of expand on some of the teachings of God, while completely obliterating others. An eye for an eye became turn the other cheek, and so on. Now, I feel as if the teachings of Jesus DO represent how people should live with each other, and there, at least to me, is no disputing he was a real individual, and as such, a man who was at least very close to God. I just don't know that he is/was God's Son. Jesus says to worship God, not him, but later says the only way to the Kingdom of the Father is through him.

I have literally read different versions of the Bible several times, cover to cover, as you would read a normal book. The NT contradicts many teachings and laws found in the OT, and then, as just mentioned, contradicts itself. Neither God nor Jesus ever mention a Trinity, and nowhere in the Bible is this found. Jeuss says the focus should be on God, but then after his crucifixion, his students teach everyone that Jesus should be worshipped.

This is where I get confused.

There should NEVER be anyone placed in front of GOD in our hearts.
God commands it, and Jesus says so. Then Jesus says I am THE WAY.

Did Jesus start out saying that God should come first, and then change his mind, or is he referring to his example as a person being THE WAY rather than he himself?

Did his Disciples/Apostles morph what he was trying to do/set forth be immolating him into the status of a God?

What if Jesus referred to himself as a son of God only in the sense that we are God's children, and his Disciples never really grasped what he was trying to teach?

These are all questions that the New Testament makes me ask. There are none that it answers. If you have an answer, let me know. I'm open up to any interpretation.

[religi-ninja]

That isn't what the church I was raised in taught. They taught that God is God and that is that. However, they also taught that God had a son here on Earth who came to die for our sins. The Messiah . Christianity and Judaism acknowledge the same God. The biggest difference is whether or not Jesus is the Messiah, but that's a different argument because I don't know the answer to that.

NORM, I' confused by what you have said. You suggest that just because I wasn't raised in Judaism, I should just follow Christianity? What kind of silliness is this?

Additionally, who is "obligated" to follow any faith or obey any specific book, regardless of what name that book goes by?

And, lastly, the teachings of Paul. You kind of hit the nail on the head there, except for one thing. It's called Christianity not Paulianity, and thats another problem I have with diving in head first, because it would seem that Paul's teachings are more important to the Christian church than Jesus' teachings were.

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to follow any certain faith. If you follow faith out of obligation, you are not a follower, you are a fake.

[OneSizeFit]

I believe in dispentionalism, I also believe it is self evident in Scripture, that God can only work through mankind, in a way there are limitations he setup by creating the laws of the universe, that He himself cannot break - so when God gave dominion over the Earth to Adam (mankind), that in effect became Law. Now, through His angels, God gave specific laws to Moses, those Laws were specifically for the Israelites, given to ensure Jesus would be born to fulfill the promise given to Abraham. We could also say, the Laws given to the Israelites are corporate, and the Laws given by Jesus are individual. Obviously, a nation cant turn the other cheek when invaded by an army, but if your neighbor starts trouble with you, it would be better to turn the other cheek, make sense?

And when Jesus says, I am the Way, what does that mean to you? Couple of interpretations.

1. The earliest Christians were either called Nazarenes, or followers of the Way. Way indicates a path, a path indicates a life long road to a goal. Jesus revealed the way. Hence receiving Jesus as Messiah, and as the Son of God, is embracing the path to God, you are adopted as a Son of God through Jesus' victory. (Jesus was a man view anointed by God).

2. Jesus is God, the same God of the Old Testament, hence there is no discrepancy. (Orthodox view).

3. The Gospel of John, was written by a separate community with a different Christology than the Synoptic Gospels. (Liberal view)

[NormATive]

How? Okay, let me put it this way. In the Old Testament, or Tanakh, God lays down some pretty simple rules that state how we should live with one another, there's the Ten Commandments, and the other rules like not eating unclean foods, not touching dead people, etc. Then in the New Testament, the teachings of Jesus kind of expand on some of the teachings of God, while completely obliterating others. An eye for an eye became turn the other cheek, and so on. Now, I feel as if the teachings of Jesus DO represent how people should live with each other, and there, at least to me, is no disputing he was a real individual, and as such, a man who was at least very close to God. I just don't know that he is/was God's Son. Jesus says to worship God, not him, but later says the only way to the Kingdom of the Father is through him.

I have literally read different versions of the Bible several times, cover to cover, as you would read a normal book. The NT contradicts many teachings and laws found in the OT, and then, as just mentioned, contradicts itself. Neither God nor Jesus ever mention a Trinity, and nowhere in the Bible is this found. Jeuss says the focus should be on God, but then after his crucifixion, his students teach everyone that Jesus should be worshipped.

This is where I get confused.

There should NEVER be anyone placed in front of GOD in our hearts.
God commands it, and Jesus says so. Then Jesus says I am THE WAY.

Did Jesus start out saying that God should come first, and then change his mind, or is he referring to his example as a person being THE WAY rather than he himself?

Did his Disciples/Apostles morph what he was trying to do/set forth be immolating him into the status of a God?

What if Jesus referred to himself as a son of God only in the sense that we are God's children, and his Disciples never really grasped what he was trying to teach?

These are all questions that the New Testament makes me ask. There are none that it answers. If you have an answer, let me know. I'm open up to any interpretation.

Has it ever occured to you that, in an attempt to portray Jesus as, well; more Christian, the compilers of the New Testament inserted those things that seem to you to contradict the Tanakh?

I mean, I KNOW what Judaism teaches and I KNOW what Christianity teaches. The two religions could not be further apart in philosophy, cosmonology or even in regards the redemption of the soul. I don't think it's possible to really KNOW who Jesus was. There just isn't enough information.

NORM

[NormATive]

Christianity and Judaism acknowledge the same God.

I don't agree.

The G-d of the Tanakh is one god. The G-d of the Tanakh does not have a body, but is spirit. The G-d of the Tanakh abhors human sacrifice.

The biggest difference is whether or not Jesus is the Messiah, but that's a different argument because I don't know the answer to that.

Actually, this is the easiest part. The Jews all agree that Jesus did not fulfill the most important prophecy; bringing peace on earth and a reestablishment of the Temple in Jerusalem. Christians believe that Jesus actually IS the G-d of the Tanakh and they interpret the prophecies as referring to him and that the peace on earth thing is "spiritual" not actual.

NORM, I' confused by what you have said. You suggest that just because I wasn't raised in Judaism, I should just follow Christianity? What kind of silliness is this?

No, please re-read what I actually said. I said that you should EITHER choose Judaism or choose Christianity - they are mutally exclusive if practiced by the rules. They are worlds apart in just about every way. The only thing they have in common is a presumed agreement on the G-d of the Tanakh. As I've explained elsewhere in this thread, the description of G-d is quite different between Jews and Christians.

Of course, you can always forge, as I have, your own place before G-d and pick the best parts of both religions. Hell, that's what the first Christians did! And the Jews before them picked the best from all the other religions floating around the Fertile Crescent. There's no law against it. No one has a patent on human imagination when it comes to religious expression. Ask teh descendants of John Smith about it. They'll tell ya!

Additionally, who is "obligated" to follow any faith or obey any specific book, regardless of what name that book goes by?

Well, only if you want bona-fides from either "official" Church are you obligated to worship their book. Otherwise, it's just a book; pick and choose away!

And, lastly, the teachings of Paul. You kind of hit the nail on the head there, except for one thing. It's called Christianity not Paulianity, and thats another problem I have with diving in head first, because it would seem that Paul's teachings are more important to the Christian church than Jesus' teachings were.

Were it not for the book of John, the above statement would be true. If you believe that the New Testament (as compiled in its present configuration) is literally G-d's Holy Word, then you have to deal with the book of John that very clearly spells out - in Jesus' own words, no less - the divinity of Jesus.

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to follow any certain faith. If you follow faith out of obligation, you are not a follower, you are a fake.

I wouldn't go quite as far as calling someone a fake for following faith out of obligation. Sometimes, out of respect for our parents or others we love, we pretend to believe things we don't really. Or, maybe we've made some vow before G-d that we feel obligated to keep.

We put up facades all the time in society - mostly to avoid dissapointing or causing unnecessary strife between yourself and someone else. I don't see any harm in that.

NORM

[Plantasm]

Bernie, what of the Christians who'd say that's a false distinction? The duration of your scary god was thousands of longer than Christ, so relatively speaking, it's probably a draw. Does the OT speak of an unforgiving god? That side is represented. Does the New Testament not introduce the concept of a Gehenna, kill Ananias and Saphira, and tell mothers that the barren will be more fortunate than them at the great dark end?

[religi-ninja]

Were it not for the book of John, the above statement would be true. If you believe that the New Testament (as compiled in its present configuration) is literally G-d's Holy Word, then you have to deal with the book of John that very clearly spells out - in Jesus' own words, no less - the divinity of Jesus.

I got lost here. I have read the Bible several times, and I still am lost on your meaning. The way this is worded, I take it to say that if someone takes the New Testament as God's Holy Word, then the book of John spells out that Jesus Is or Isn't of Divine descent? Could you please clarify that for me? Thank you.

[fm93]

Hello religi-ninja,

My wife and I have a long standing argument. It deeply troubles her, and in turn, that deeply troubles me. See, we have differing viewpoints on religion. She is a staunch Christian believer raised in the Baptist Faith. I was raised in the Christian faith as well, but when I started asking questions, as a youth, that the older people in the church couldn't answer, my faith wavered.

Yeah, this is an unfortunate problem that’s all too common in Western churches today. Too many people assume positions of instruction and leadership without having learned the finer details of the basics of Christianity, and thus are unable to provide help for honest seekers. The results are disastrous. Luckily, though, the advent of the Internet has made scholarly information much more accessible.

Christians say that the only way to God and Heaven is to be be saved and accept Jesus in your heart as the way.

Jesus, in the New Testament Bible (I think its in Matthew but I could be wrong), says himself that it is more important to acknowledge God as the Father than to know Jesus.

In the Old Testament, God warns us to only love him, and to never put another god, person, or image on the pedestal where he belongs.

If I am too love God, as I do, very much, then how is it I should pray to someone other than God himself? Why is it I should worship someone other than God himself?

I think I can show you a simple way of understanding this, but it requires a somewhat long explanation of the Trinity. Basically, the doctrine teaches that there is one God, who has eternally possessed the attribute of wisdom. God generates wisdom, so the wisdom is contingent on God for its existence, but the two are inseparable. It’s like a fire—the fire generates light, so the light depends on the fire for its existence, but the fire cannot exist without giving off light. Likewise, God cannot exist without wisdom. Since God is eternal, wisdom is also eternal. Because wisdom is of God, it is equally divine. But because it is dependent on God, it is functionally subordinate to him. One way to illustrate this is by considering a father and a son (I know—original, right? ). The father and son have are equally human, but the son is subordinate to the father. The unique thing about the relationship between God and wisdom, though, is this—that attribute of wisdom is endowed with consciousness. It thus has the property of PERSONHOOD. We, of course, hold that that personified wisdom is Jesus. Because he is generated by God, he is said to be like a son of God, who is like a father to him. They are both eternal and are equally divine, but because Jesus is subordinate to the Father, he says “The Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)

Now here’s where this gets interesting. John 1:1 says that Jesus is the Word. The Greek word used for “Word” is logos. In Greek thought, the logos was a sort of divine balancing force, and was called “Word” or “Reason.” (Btw, reason refers not to a motive, but to rationality.) So John is saying that Jesus is rationality personified (which, of course, is the same thing as wisdom personified). Rationality is essentially logic, so it is also true and accurate to say that Jesus is LOGIC personified. Logic expresses and reveals truth—it is the WORD of truth. And truth, of course, would be God the Father, who has eternally existed and eternally generated/begotten logic (aka Jesus).

Given this, the answer to your problem becomes clear. The only way to truth is through logic. The only way to God is through Jesus. So it is of utmost importance to love and acknowledge truth, but since truth and logic are inseparably connected, to love truth is to love logic. Likewise, to love and worship the Father is to love and worship the Son. This explains why God can rightly say that only he should be worshipped, yet it is still acceptable and necessary to worship Jesus.

I know many Christians that don't even acknowledge God, but rather solely Jesus.

I’m slightly confused as to what you mean here. Do these people say that the Father SHOULDN’T be worshipped? If so, then not only is this heretical—it’s also nonsensical. If you mean that they don’t simply don’t mention the Father as often as they mention Jesus, then the situation is somewhat different. You worship God the Father THROUGH Jesus, in the same way that you acknowledge truth THROUGH logic. So I don’t think they’re heretical, but they may need to be more explicit about exactly what they’re doing or what they believe, to avoid confusing people.

I guess I'm just very confused, and I was hoping some of you, my new friends and fellow twebbers, could help me out with distinguishing the truth from opinion on this, a very important and debated topic between my wife and I. It's getting to the point where we can no longer discuss religion, as it does nothing but upset her. She is devout in her faith, but knows the scriptures not well, which leads to her repeating herself a lot, and as you can imagine, that furthers the problem.

Encourage her to learn the scriptures further. Remember, the Bible is full of exhortations to immerse one’s self in the word. Also, as your wife, she’s obligated to help you in matters of need (you, of course, are obligated to do the same for her).

However, I MUST emphasize one point—do NOT encourage her to rotely memorize passages. That approach amounts to knowledge that stretches a thousand miles wide, but only one inch deep. Study the scriptures, don’t just read them. I can provide helpful materials for doing so if you’d like.

Thanks for reading all of this....

Thanks for sharing all of this!

[RBerman]

I got lost here. I have read the Bible several times, and I still am lost on your meaning. The way this is worded, I take it to say that if someone takes the New Testament as God's Holy Word, then the book of John spells out that Jesus Is or Isn't of Divine descent? Could you please clarify that for me? Thank you.

John 1:1-16 spells out that Jesus is God.