Definitional Niceties

[PatsFanInVa]

Since the Jewish faith and adherents thereto seem to be of great interest to many Christians (the majority religious group in the U.S.,) I think it is worthwhile to take a moment to define some terms relating to discussions of Judaism and Christianity vis a vis one another.

As mentioned elsewhere, Judaism's definitions of "who is a Jew" includes a hereditary definition. If one's mother is Jewish, one is a Jew, regardless of one's own belief. This is true whether one's mother was "born Jewish" or not. If your mother was Jewish when you were born, you are a Jew. The stand of all branches of Judaism is "once a Jew, always a Jew."

Within Judaism, then, there is a special case for the "apostate," or one who abandons the religion, despite his Jewish heredity. (http://www.answers.com/topic/jews-in-apostasy) Regardless of the broad negative regard in which apostasy is held, apostates are nonetheless Jewish.

In that Christianity is a historically and theologically distinct religion from Judaism, one can not call Christianity Judaism any more than one can call Buddhism Islam. One certainly can not pass off evangelical protestant theology as Judaism. That is why we have two different words for them.

I've read a great number of opinions here with various degrees of critical or sympathetic outlook. One which is wholly unsupportable is the notion that one is being Jewish by being Christian.

One is being Christian by being Christian. In some Christian re-formulations, one is being a good exemplar of a Christian idea of what a Jew should be, by being Christian. But believing in or practicing Christianity is not identical to believing in or practicing Judaism.

The historical record and scholarly record are so extensive and undisputed on this point, from the late first century C.E. onward, that I will not deign to debate it. It's a matter of constitutive definition.

Of the various frauds perpetrated in the name of proselytic zeal, this is perhaps the most pernicious: the attempt to denude another religion of its distinct identity, while simultaneously pursuing that religion's extinction (in this particular case, the hoped-for extinction would be of the idea of Judaism, at least in theory. Historically, that has not been the limit of the actions religious zealots have taken to remove the theologically inconvenient people who happen to actually practice or believe in Judaism.)

A Jewish convert (or apostate) to Christianity is just that. He is Jewish by heredity, and Christian by faith. This neither makes him right nor wrong; that is for God to decide, if indeed He splits hairs about such matters as we debate endlessly here.

But it does make the doctrine espoused by the convert Christianity, not Judaism -- whichever you adhere to.

Thanks for your time,

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Since the Jewish faith and adherents thereto seem to be of great interest to many Christians (the majority religious group in the U.S.,) I think it is worthwhile to take a moment to define some terms relating to discussions of Judaism and Christianity vis a vis one another.

As mentioned elsewhere, Judaism's definitions of "who is a Jew" includes a hereditary definition. If one's mother is Jewish, one is a Jew, regardless of one's own belief. This is true whether one's mother was "born Jewish" or not. If your mother was Jewish when you were born, you are a Jew. The stand of all branches of Judaism is "once a Jew, always a Jew."

Within Judaism, then, there is a special case for the "apostate," or one who abandons the religion, despite his Jewish heredity. (http://www.answers.com/topic/jews-in-apostasy) Regardless of the broad negative regard in which apostasy is held, apostates are nonetheless Jewish.

In that Christianity is a historically and theologically distinct religion from Judaism, one can not call Christianity Judaism any more than one can call Buddhism Islam. One certainly can not pass off evangelical protestant theology as Judaism. That is why we have two different words for them.

I've read a great number of opinions here with various degrees of critical or sympathetic outlook. One which is wholly unsupportable is the notion that one is being Jewish by being Christian.

One is being Christian by being Christian. In some Christian re-formulations, one is being a good exemplar of a Christian idea of what a Jew should be, by being Christian. But believing in or practicing Christianity is not identical to believing in or practicing Judaism.

The historical record and scholarly record are so extensive and undisputed on this point, from the late first century C.E. onward, that I will not deign to debate it. It's a matter of constitutive definition.

Of the various frauds perpetrated in the name of proselytic zeal, this is perhaps the most pernicious: the attempt to denude another religion of its distinct identity, while simultaneously pursuing that religion's extinction (in this particular case, the hoped-for extinction would be of the idea of Judaism, at least in theory. Historically, that has not been the limit of the actions religious zealots have taken to remove the theologically inconvenient people who happen to actually practice or believe in Judaism.)

A Jewish convert (or apostate) to Christianity is just that. He is Jewish by heredity, and Christian by faith. This neither makes him right nor wrong; that is for God to decide, if indeed He splits hairs about such matters as we debate endlessly here.

But it does make the doctrine espoused by the convert Christianity, not Judaism -- whichever you adhere to.

Thanks for your time,

PFnV

As defined by PFIV, not the Old Testament. No thanks.

I direct Jews to the Old Testament for relevant definitions of Judaism. A belief in God and respect for the Hebrew scripture might be a good place to begin.

I direct Christians to the New Testament for why Judaism is such a key part of belief in Jesus Christ.

As far as Jewish identity, I dont believe that "identity" includes questioning the Hebrew Scripture and the power of God, which the author of this thread has done on a number of occassions, including defending people who started threads here openly mocking and ridiculing the God of the Torah.

I happen to believe in the Torah, the Old Testament, and the prophesies contained in them. Did Abraham, David, and Moses believe a Messiah was coming? Do you believe they were correct? When was Judaism defined, before Christ or after Christ? Judaism was here long before you or anybody else decided Jesus Christ wasnt the Messiah.

But before the question of whether Jesus Christ was that Messiah or not, which is the one great dividing line between fully practiced Judaism and Christianity, another question must be proposed.

Do you believe in Judaism? If you do, that would mean a belief in God and his far reaching power, and a belief that the Old Testament is true.

If you dont believe in those 2 things, it is you who is commiting the fraud of what Judaisms identity is.

And if you do believe in those 2 things, what the Old Testament has to say about the Messiah is a relevant, worthy, and fair topic for believing Jews to be discussing, free from empty accusations.

[PatsFanInVa]

It would seem that to address the concerns of 3 to be 4, I would have to go permanently off ignore, and descend once again into the muck pit -- not that I'm above that, although I've been trying to resist it, boredom be damned.

Suffice it to say, one can walk into any synagog or temple in the world, and explain one's attitudes toward God from PatsFanInVa's perspective, as PFnV has actually done from time to time, in conversation with both laymen and clergy, and be within the mainstream of Jewish thought. Many steadfast Jews who did not change their religion in a way that matched the surrounding Christian culture, tend to enjoy such exchanges. I'll not get personal about when and how often PFinV goes to shul, etc. I will however attest that PFinV is squarely within the norm of Jewish religious belief and observance.

Anyone claiming to be a Jew, who takes these opinions -- about Jesus' messiahship, etc., -- to a real shul, with regularity, may be tolerated for a little while, but eventually will be asked to leave (since the purpose of Judaism and gatherings of Jews, is not to proselytize for protestant fundamentalism.)

The options are known and available: Judaism, Christianity, other.

If you are a Christian, be a Christian. If it is a satisfying enough faith for you, in and of itself, one would think it would suffice that you practice Christianity, rather than attempt to proselytize to Jews.

But if you belong to one of the Christian sects which insists that the inherently disrespectful practice of proselytizing is a requirement of your religion, at least have the decency to say what you are.

It's a common enough phenomenon. You were born to Jewish parents, but converted to Christianity.

Steadfast Jews don't have any real need to discuss how we'll all have to change the definition of Judaism to match an Evangelical Protestant reading of the Torah, Neviim, and Ketubim -- or in the Christian formulation, the "Old Testament."

This is the crux (no pun intneded) of the matter.

Furthermore, for a believing Jew, whether to question God (the very word Yisrael means "struggles with God,") is not some sort of evil demonic issue. It's a matter of course. It is part of Judaism.

I realize there are those who read the scriptures the way that 3 to b 4 reads them.

They are called Evangelical Protestants.

One may always return to the Jewish faith, having strayed philosophically or for reasons of emotional outburst; the belief of most Jews is that God does not slam the door.

What one can not do is trivialize Judaism into nonexistence, to fit the definitional mold convenient to Evangelical Protestantism.

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

It would seem that to address the concerns of 3 to be 4, I would have to go permanently off ignore, and descend once again into the muck pit -- not that I'm above that, although I've been trying to resist it, boredom be damned.

Suffice it to say, one can walk into any synagog or temple in the world, and explain one's attitudes toward God from PatsFanInVa's perspective, as PFnV has actually done from time to time, in conversation with both laymen and clergy, and be within the mainstream of Jewish thought. Many steadfast Jews who did not change their religion in a way that matched the surrounding Christian culture, tend to enjoy such exchanges. I'll not get personal about when and how often PFinV goes to shul, etc. I will however attest that PFinV is squarely within the norm of Jewish religious belief and observance.

Anyone claiming to be a Jew, who takes these opinions -- about Jesus' messiahship, etc., -- to a real shul, with regularity, may be tolerated for a little while, but eventually will be asked to leave (since the purpose of Judaism and gatherings of Jews, is not to proselytize for protestant fundamentalism.)

The options are known and available: Judaism, Christianity, other.

If you are a Christian, be a Christian. If it is a satisfying enough faith for you, in and of itself, one would think it would suffice that you practice Christianity, rather than attempt to proselytize to Jews.

But if you belong to one of the Christian sects which insists that the inherently disrespectful practice of proselytizing is a requirement of your religion, at least have the decency to say what you are.

It's a common enough phenomenon. You were born to Jewish parents, but converted to Christianity.

Steadfast Jews don't have any real need to discuss how we'll all have to change the definition of Judaism to match an Evangelical Protestant reading of the Torah, Neviim, and Ketubim -- or in the Christian formulation, the "Old Testament."

This is the crux (no pun intneded) of the matter.

Furthermore, for a believing Jew, whether to question God (the very word Yisrael means "struggles with God,") is not some sort of evil demonic issue. It's a matter of course. It is part of Judaism.

I realize there are those who read the scriptures the way that 3 to b 4 reads them.

They are called Evangelical Protestants.

One may always return to the Jewish faith, having strayed philosophically or for reasons of emotional outburst; the belief of most Jews is that God does not slam the door.

What one can not do is trivialize Judaism into nonexistence, to fit the definitional mold convenient to Evangelical Protestantism.

PFnV

It is you and whatever "mainstream" Synagogue you are going to that trivializes Judaism by spending more time "questioning" God than in worshipping God. Judiasm was never meant to be about meeting religiously, "struggling" with God, and ignoring or downplaying scripture.

It may be the norm, it doesnt make it correct. I have the greatest respect for Orthodox Jews because they, at least, respect the God of Abraham, and honor the Torah. I may disagree with their interpretations ( and they, mine) but at least they believe in something, they dont show up in order to punch a religious timeclock and it isnt the cornerstone of their faith to "question" God or scripture.

Whether a person like me is accepted in Synagogues doesnt matter. Jesus wasnt either. As I said, the norm isnt always correct.

But you are not sinister for disagreeing with me any more than I am for disagreeing with you. The fact that you feel you must always resort to that shows an underlying insecurity in the rock you are standing on.

That I speak of it isnt about any insecurity on my end. In fact, its just the opposite. You see Im so sure its correct that I risk others scorn in order to be obediant to the great commission, to spead the good news of Jesus Christ.
And to make sure other Jews know what their scripture says about their Messiah. Because it is their Salvation that is at stake.
That trumps the "norm", or the worlds wish for quiet on the subject.

You wish to stay in the burning building go right ahead, that doesnt make me a bad guy for telling people the way out.

And you can stop with buzzwords "targeting Jews". I only used one thread on that subject, and, as im speaking to the people of my heritage, it makes perfect sense I would have an interest in spreading Gospel that was written by Jews to other Jews in the first place.
Hello!!! Who do you think wrote the Bible? Jews. Who were they first speaking to? Jews. It was the Gentiles who were reached out to afterwards. Who was Jesus but the Jewish King, and the people he will first come back for are His chosen ones.

Praise the Lord.

[PatsFanInVa]

Regardless of one's own preferred "brand" of Jew, the fact remains: no branch of Judaism or Jewish theology, Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, etc., equates itself with Evangelical Christianity.

You may make the claim, based on an Evangelical Christian reading, that Christians are the "real" Jews.

Not surprisingly, however, this is not a premise accepted among steadfast Jews. It is, however, a premise accepted, in one guise or another, among some Christians. This does somewhat clarify the character of the dilemma we see: you embrace Christianity, but that makes you Christian, not Jewish, by faith. You support your Christianity through Evangelical readings of Jewish texts. These readings would be alien to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as well as Moses, Aaron, David and the Prophets. They only fall so melodiously on the ears of other Christians; Christian readings of the Jewish bible are of course convincing to the biblically ignorant, the confused, and the weak-minded, who are the current trolling pool for proselytizers in the West, now that a baptism is not a "ticket to acceptance" into the larger culture, as it was in Europe for centuries.

But I digress. What is important is to clarify in the objective record, what the objective case is: Christianity, though it may be a wonderful, fulfilling religion, is not Judaism. Christian theologies, whatever their virtues, are not Jewish theology.

Doing violence to the language does not in any way move such a discussion forward. It merely reduces steadfast Jews to an inconvenience in a proselytizing Christian's world, one which will hopefully be eradicated.

A little history: Christians have referred to themselves as such for nearly two millenia now, specifically because 1) Christianity was never the dominant faith among those born to Judaism; and 2) Judaism and Christianity became ideologically and socially distinct very early in Christianity's history.

Your evangelical Christianity has its own identity, which is separate and distinct from Judaism's. Whatever you tell yourself to get you through the night is one thing, but what one spews into the public arena is another.

Your Christian worship is just that, and long may you entertain tents or churches full of fellow worshippers (to say nothing of good old fashioned bar-b-ques, or pig-pickins, as they're sometimes referred to south of the Mason-Dixon).

But don't fool yourself that you're practicing Judaism.

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Regardless of one's own preferred "brand" of Jew, the fact remains: no branch of Judaism or Jewish theology, Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, etc., equates itself with Evangelical Christianity.

You may make the claim, based on an Evangelical Christian reading, that Christians are the "real" Jews.

Not surprisingly, however, this is not a premise accepted among steadfast Jews. It is, however, a premise accepted, in one guise or another, among some Christians. This does somewhat clarify the character of the dilemma we see: you embrace Christianity, but that makes you Christian, not Jewish, by faith. You support your Christianity through Evangelical readings of Jewish texts. These readings would be alien to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as well as Moses, Aaron, David and the Prophets. They only fall so melodiously on the ears of other Christians; Christian readings of the Jewish bible are of course convincing to the biblically ignorant, the confused, and the weak-minded, who are the current trolling pool for proselytizers in the West, now that a baptism is not a "ticket to acceptance" into the larger culture, as it was in Europe for centuries.

But I digress. What is important is to clarify in the objective record, what the objective case is: Christianity, though it may be a wonderful, fulfilling religion, is not Judaism. Christian theologies, whatever their virtues, are not Jewish theology.

Doing violence to the language does not in any way move such a discussion forward. It merely reduces steadfast Jews to an inconvenience in a proselytizing Christian's world, one which will hopefully be eradicated.

A little history: Christians have referred to themselves as such for nearly two millenia now, specifically because 1) Christianity was never the dominant faith among those born to Judaism; and 2) Judaism and Christianity became ideologically and socially distinct very early in Christianity's history.

Your evangelical Christianity has its own identity, which is separate and distinct from Judaism's. Whatever you tell yourself to get you through the night is one thing, but what one spews into the public arena is another.

Your Christian worship is just that, and long may you entertain tents or churches full of fellow worshippers (to say nothing of good old fashioned bar-b-ques, or pig-pickins, as they're sometimes referred to south of the Mason-Dixon).

But don't fool yourself that you're practicing Judaism.

PFnV

Your first point is entirely false as the number of Jews around the world who have accepted Jesus Christ is growing every day.
http://www.mjaa.org/engine.cfm?i=2&sl=12
http://www.jewishvoice.org/

But again, popular doesnt make correct. So I needn't get into a debate about the numbers.

Secondly, Judaism and Christianity became distinct over the question of whether Jesus was the Messiah. Before Jesus, Judaism was already established, and in Judiasm, there was a God to be worshipped and scripture to be followed. If those 2 things arent happening, Judaism the faith is not being practiced ,although Judaism the culture and heritage may be thriving.

I do agree with you to this point: As people in Synogogues are not believers of Jesus Christ, I identify and practice Christianity and worship in a Christian church. But by believing in Jesus and worshipping Him with other Christians, I am practicing the faith that I believe Jews were called on to first, before the Gentiles, but for the most part rejected.

It would be my observation that Jews who have a problem with those proclaiming Jesus as Lord, have a problem with their own scripture and their own King. And just as important, Christians who have ever had issues with Jews had better understand they are thinking ill of the authors of their own faith and of THEIR own King.

The key again is what Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:11-22, from the NIV.
11Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

[PatsFanInVa]

Despite the judgment of an apostate to Evangelical Protestantism, Judaism is, and was, being practiced, by steadfast Jews. Not many among them believe that it is the job of an Evangelical Protestant to determine whether they are practicing their faith by the bible, as Evangelical Protestants read it.

I think it was Wild who once said "Christianity's a wonderful religion. Someone should try it some time." Evidently, 3 to b 4 holds a similarly dim view of Judaism and its adherents. But the key here is that it does not matter. Judaism is not simply an irrelevant phenomenon to be claimed as a springboard for Evangelical Protestantism.

The only question is, whether this negative assessment of Jews and Judaism developed prior to or after his conversion to Christianity. This may shed some light on the psychology of apostasy, for future generations to examine.

Fascinating as that question is, the fact remains:

There is a Jewish religion. There is a Christian religion. One can also be "Jewish by birth," but an apostate to Christianity.

What one can not do, is claim Christianity to be "your" Judaism.

As I said, if you are a Christian, be a Christian. Enjoy. But the fact of a birth to Jewish parents, does not make your Christianity the "real" Judaism, just as your birth to Hindu parents would not make your version of Christianity the "real" Hinduism.

There's nothing mysterious here. You've just embraced Christianity.

Enjoy,

PFnV

[NYCPatsFan]

There is a Jewish religion.

PFnV

Question: can you call yourself a Jew but not practice/follow Judaism?

Trying to figure out if the word "Jews" is used to denote a particular race as opposed to people following Judaism. Thanks,

[3 to be 4]

Question: can you call yourself a Jew but not practice/follow Judaism?

Trying to figure out if the word "Jews" is used to denote a particular race as opposed to people following Judaism. Thanks,

But theres the interesting question. What defines "practicing Judaism"?

to some, it simply is about NOT believing in Jesus. To others its about believing that God was and is who He says He is, believing in Him and His power, and believing that Hebrew Scripture is true.

too many modern Jews, its about Religion, going to Temple, questioning God, not knowing Scripture, and not believing in Jesus.
Secular Judaism. Which is actually FARTHER from Judaism than believing in God, believing in Scripture, and based on that scripture believing that Jesus is the Messiah.

One that believes in God and the Old Testament but has a different interpretation of who the Messiah is, is a lot closer to Orthodox Judaism than someone who practices Secular or Reform Judaism, the practice of calling oneself a Jew by birth, showing up to Temple, and questioning God and Scripture.

Just for the record, I was never the one who started this "Who is a real Jew" discussion. Long ago, and continuing here, I have been told many times how im not really practicing my faith.

some people dish it out quite well and then when challenged hide behind the wail of "anti-semitism".

[NYCPatsFan]

[QUOTE=3 to be 4;370944]

too many modern Jews, its about Religion, going to Temple, questioning God, not knowing Scripture, and not believing in Jesus.
Secular Judaism. Which is actually FARTHER from Judaism than believing in God, believing in Scripture, and based on that scripture believing that Jesus is the Messiah.

QUOTE]

That means no chance of an atheist Jew - meaning, to represent oneself as Jew, he/she must follow some religion?

[3 to be 4]

[QUOTE=3 to be 4;370944]

too many modern Jews, its about Religion, going to Temple, questioning God, not knowing Scripture, and not believing in Jesus.
Secular Judaism. Which is actually FARTHER from Judaism than believing in God, believing in Scripture, and based on that scripture believing that Jesus is the Messiah.

QUOTE]

That means no chance of an atheist Jew - meaning, to represent oneself as Jew, he/she must follow some religion?

if you are defining being a Jew as simply being a race of people, then no, you can certainly be an athiest. Such a person can certainly claim to being Jewish.
Judaism, as in practicing faith, is a different story. Being an athiest is not, in any way, practicing Judaism.

[NYCPatsFan]

[QUOTE=NYCPatsFan;371315]

if you are defining being a Jew as simply being a race of people, then no, you can certainly be an athiest. Such a person can certainly claim to being Jewish.
Judaism, as in practicing faith, is a different story. Being an athiest is not, in any way, practicing Judaism.

Nope, I didn't say or suggest that being an atheist = practicing Judaism.

I am trying to figure out what people assume when they use the term "Jew". If you see my original question, I inquired if the term is used to denote a particular race or used to identify people following Judaism.

[PatsFanInVa]

NYC, even the "national" definition of Judaism is not of a race per se. For one thing, you can not convert to a race. "Hereditary" Judaism is not, in fact, a very strict "race" definition.

Within Judaism, however, there is this "national" definition; there is a notion of "the Jewish people," which has nothing to do with how one worships. For example, a Jewish apostate to Evangelical Christianity is, in fact, within his rights to say he is a Jew. He is not, however, practicing Judaism.

Being a Jew is something like citizenship. The rabbinical maxim is "once a Jew, always a Jew." So even our convert to Christianity qualifies. So yes, just as an Evangelical Christian can say he is a Jew, if born to Jewish parents, so can an Atheist. But the Atheist can not say he has no belief in God, and no intention of ever informing his own life by a Jewish ethos, and claim that his Atheism is in fact Judaism. The same goes for an Evangelical Christian. While there are a broad spectrum of beliefs and practices that are considered "mainstream" to Judaism, the belief in a God in human form, or the belief that God does not exist, are pretty much non-starters in the Jewish mainstream.

Since Jewry is determined in part by parentage, but Judaism involves a belief system, it can be a pretty perplexing notion that, for example, an Evangelical Christian can claim to be a Jew. It's pretty much a historical oddity, born of a time when the Jewish people inhabited Judah, then Judea; the people of that land were called Jews, and their religion Judaism (among other epithets, such as b'nai Yisra'el, the House of Israel, for the people.) So if a Christian or Atheists says, "Ah, but you see, I am a Jew," what he actually has the right to say, is that he is from this national group. He certainly is not speaking as the determinant of ethical or moral teachings of a religion he has himself abandoned, regardless of what he may have convinced himself of.

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

NYC, even the "national" definition of Judaism is not of a race per se. For one thing, you can not convert to a race. "Hereditary" Judaism is not, in fact, a very strict "race" definition.

Within Judaism, however, there is this "national" definition; there is a notion of "the Jewish people," which has nothing to do with how one worships. For example, a Jewish apostate to Evangelical Christianity is, in fact, within his rights to say he is a Jew. He is not, however, practicing Judaism.

Being a Jew is something like citizenship. The rabbinical maxim is "once a Jew, always a Jew." So even our convert to Christianity qualifies. So yes, just as an Evangelical Christian can say he is a Jew, if born to Jewish parents, so can an Atheist. But the Atheist can not say he has no belief in God, and no intention of ever informing his own life by a Jewish ethos, and claim that his Atheism is in fact Judaism. The same goes for an Evangelical Christian. While there are a broad spectrum of beliefs and practices that are considered "mainstream" to Judaism, the belief in a God in human form, or the belief that God does not exist, are pretty much non-starters in the Jewish mainstream.

Since Jewry is determined in part by parentage, but Judaism involves a belief system, it can be a pretty perplexing notion that, for example, an Evangelical Christian can claim to be a Jew. It's pretty much a historical oddity, born of a time when the Jewish people inhabited Judah, then Judea; the people of that land were called Jews, and their religion Judaism (among other epithets, such as b'nai Yisra'el, the House of Israel, for the people.) So if a Christian or Atheists says, "Ah, but you see, I am a Jew," what he actually has the right to say, is that he is from this national group. He certainly is not speaking as the determinant of ethical or moral teachings of a religion he has himself abandoned, regardless of what he may have convinced himself of.

PFnV

My goodness, I think PFIV is telling other people who a "real" Jew is.
What nerve! :)

Does a "real" Jew have to worship God and believe the Torah to be true?

[PatsFanInVa]

Hello, 3, noticed your slander from high orbit, and thought I would respond.

First of all, the definitions I have discussed have to do with Christianity on the one hand, as well as Judaism, and the position of the apostate. Far be it from me to decide what a "real" Jew is; the question of "who is a Jew" has occupied far brighter lights for quite some time now, not to mention some dimmer ones, outside of the Jewish community. As I've mentioned, the definition of "Jew" has a hereditary aspect as well as a religious aspect. That does not mean that one can not determine what apostasy is in a mainstream Jewish context.

We can discuss mainstream Judaism, as well as sectarian movements, some of which may not be considered Judaism, and may not consider themselves Judaism, but are nonetheless far closer to Judaism than is evangelical Christianity. I would be capable of doing so regardless of my own religion or beliefs; take me to be an artificial intelligence, if you like, generated by Patsfans.com to keep you interested. It is not germane to our subject, which is that of Christianity being a separate offshoot of Judaism.

Most importantly, I am able to discern the historical fact of Christianity as a separate religion, whose tenets are not, in fact, wholly contained within Judaism. Again, that is why there is a Christian religion.

As to my own personal beliefs, not only do you not know them, I do not think you capable of understanding them. As I've said, we differ not only in creed, but also in complexity, and I would suspect we differ in age as well. This may or may not also apply to your parents' observance of Judaism (and certainly to their ages, relative to your own.) It is, in fact, possible that your dissatisfaction with Judaism has as much to do with what was there which you missed, as with what was "lacking." This is not important to me.

What is important is that any assertion that evangelical Christianity is Judaism not go unchallenged. On the one hand, in the best case, God and man are partners in making Religion. And, unless we have constructed a limited "miniGod," He is in each of us, and so to make further division is to harbor illusion.

On the other hand, I find myself confronted with a distortion of historical fact, and in this corporeal realm, I find that the historical and empirical fact of division is less false, than a historical and empirical invalidation of the Jewish people, based on an evangelical Christian reading declaring Christians the "real" Jews. This reading declares quite clearly that we'll all be just fine as soon as we get with the program and become Christians (at which point, of course, we'll be "real" Jews.) This tenet is divisive at its core.

To claim Christianity is the "real" Judaism is simply patently false, and to claim Christian worship to be Jewish worship is chutzpah at the very least, and just plain derogatory when thought through to its logical conclusion.

This is not to say Christian worship is "wrong" or "bad." It is very good for expressing the Christian religion. It simply is not Judaism.

Thanks for dropping by,

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Hello, 3, noticed your slander from high orbit, and thought I would respond.

First of all, the definitions I have discussed have to do with Christianity on the one hand, as well as Judaism, and the position of the apostate. Far be it from me to decide what a "real" Jew is; the question of "who is a Jew" has occupied far brighter lights for quite some time now, not to mention some dimmer ones, outside of the Jewish community. As I've mentioned, the definition of "Jew" has a hereditary aspect as well as a religious aspect. That does not mean that one can not determine what apostasy is in a mainstream Jewish context.

We can discuss mainstream Judaism, as well as sectarian movements, some of which may not be considered Judaism, and may not consider themselves Judaism, but are nonetheless far closer to Judaism than is evangelical Christianity. I would be capable of doing so regardless of my own religion or beliefs; take me to be an artificial intelligence, if you like, generated by Patsfans.com to keep you interested. It is not germane to our subject, which is that of Christianity being a separate offshoot of Judaism.

Most importantly, I am able to discern the historical fact of Christianity as a separate religion, whose tenets are not, in fact, wholly contained within Judaism. Again, that is why there is a Christian religion.

As to my own personal beliefs, not only do you not know them, I do not think you capable of understanding them. As I've said, we differ not only in creed, but also in complexity, and I would suspect we differ in age as well. This may or may not also apply to your parents' observance of Judaism (and certainly to their ages, relative to your own.) It is, in fact, possible that your dissatisfaction with Judaism has as much to do with what was there which you missed, as with what was "lacking." This is not important to me.

What is important is that any assertion that evangelical Christianity is Judaism not go unchallenged. On the one hand, in the best case, God and man are partners in making Religion. And, unless we have constructed a limited "miniGod," He is in each of us, and so to make further division is to harbor illusion.

On the other hand, I find myself confronted with a distortion of historical fact, and in this corporeal realm, I find that the historical and empirical fact of division is less false, than a historical and empirical invalidation of the Jewish people, based on an evangelical Christian reading declaring Christians the "real" Jews. This reading declares quite clearly that we'll all be just fine as soon as we get with the program and become Christians (at which point, of course, we'll be "real" Jews.) This tenet is divisive at its core.

To claim Christianity is the "real" Judaism is simply patently false, and to claim Christian worship to be Jewish worship is chutzpah at the very least, and just plain derogatory when thought through to its logical conclusion.

This is not to say Christian worship is "wrong" or "bad." It is very good for expressing the Christian religion. It simply is not Judaism.

Thanks for dropping by,

PFnV

let me rephrase the question then. Is it necessary in the practice of Judiasm to worship God and to believe the Torah to be true?

[PatsFanInVa]

Hi there, 3. Define your terms. What do you mean by "true" and "God"?

PFnVius Pilate

[3 to be 4]

Hi there, 3. Define your terms. What do you mean by "true" and "God"?

PFnVius Pilate

Is this Bill Clinton?:confused:

how about, you know, the God that Jews believe in?? true, as in, um, its true? Hello??:rolleyes:

I dont think its too much to ask a Jewish person to know what the term God means, or to be able to answer a straightforward question such as, are the words in the Torah true, or to be more precise, the truth.

[PatsFanInVa]

Nooooo, 3, I'm a bit less gullible than that. You have to tell me exactly what you mean by God, and exactly what you mean by Truth. What do you believe is God? Is it the same as anybody else's belief in God? What do you define as Truth? Must every word be literal? Etcetera.

While you ponder the terms, I'll provide the following link, not with the intent of hijacking my own thread, but to give us another example of what does not qualify as an expression of any of the branches of Judaism I'm aware of (and to lighten everything up for a moment, and because I honestly miss Mojo Nixon).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gopc3fgnXDw&mode=related&search=

Thanks,

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Nooooo, 3, I'm a bit less gullible than that. You have to tell me exactly what you mean by God, and exactly what you mean by Truth. What do you believe is God? Is it the same as anybody else's belief in God? What do you define as Truth? Must every word be literal? Etcetera.

While you ponder the terms, I'll provide the following link, not with the intent of hijacking my own thread, but to give us another example of what does not qualify as an expression of any of the branches of Judaism I'm aware of (and to lighten everything up for a moment, and because I honestly miss Mojo Nixon).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gopc3fgnXDw&mode=related&search=

Thanks,

PFnV

man, Clinton has got nothing on you. You cant even answer if Jews worship God or believe the Torah to be true.
It wasnt a tough question, and it kind of tells me I've been wasting my time talking faith with you.
Sometimes less is more, PFIV. You can write intellectually impressive essays ABOUT faith but you cant answer the most basic of questions.

the heart of Judaism is a belief in God. And that the Scripture is truth. Its not about showing up, performing religious ritual, and eating coffee cake.

You have a decent arguement that as a Jew, who believes that Jesus Christ is the Messiah prophesied about in the Old Testament, I am a Jew by birth and only a Christian by faith. I feel I have a decent arguement that believing what I do is simply fulfilling what Judaism was telling us.

But without God, and without scripture, what you consistantly have put out there, while common amongst Jewish people ( especially Secular American Jews), is farther from Judaism than anything I practice.

What many non-Christians fail to grasp about Christians is that while we believe in Jesus the Son, He is but part of a trinity, and that He is the way to the Father, the same God the Jews worship. So there is no way for a Christian not to believe in the God of Abraham, of David, of Moses and to believe in the Torah, the first 5 books of the Old Testament, and to also believe in the writings, the Jewish writings, which make up the rest of the Old Testament. Christians who dont grasp their Jewish roots are missing the point of who Jesus Christ, not to mention Mary, Joseph, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, to just name a few, were.

So for Jews who dont worship that God or look to the Scripture as truth ( or cant simply answer that question when posed) to talk for Judaism is very questionable.

You may speak as a Jew, but if you cant proudly claim that God is your Sovereign Lord, then dont speak to me of Judaism.

[PatsFanInVa]

man, Clinton has got nothing on you. You cant even answer if Jews worship God or believe the Torah to be true.
It wasnt a tough question, and it kind of tells me I've been wasting my time talking faith with you.
Sometimes less is more, PFIV. You can write intellectually impressive essays ABOUT faith but you cant answer the most basic of questions.

the heart of Judaism is a belief in God. And that the Scripture is truth. Its not about showing up, performing religious ritual, and eating coffee cake.

You have a decent arguement that as a Jew, who believes that Jesus Christ is the Messiah prophesied about in the Old Testament, I am a Jew by birth and only a Christian by faith. I feel I have a decent arguement that believing what I do is simply fulfilling what Judaism was telling us.

But without God, and without scripture, what you consistantly have put out there, while common amongst Jewish people ( especially Secular American Jews), is farther from Judaism than anything I practice.

What many non-Christians fail to grasp about Christians is that while we believe in Jesus the Son, He is but part of a trinity, and that He is the way to the Father, the same God the Jews worship. So there is no way for a Christian not to believe in the God of Abraham, of David, of Moses and to believe in the Torah, the first 5 books of the Old Testament, and to also believe in the writings, the Jewish writings, which make up the rest of the Old Testament. Christians who dont grasp their Jewish roots are missing the point of who Jesus Christ, not to mention Mary, Joseph, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, to just name a few, were.

So for Jews who dont worship that God or look to the Scripture as truth ( or cant simply answer that question when posed) to talk for Judaism is very questionable.

You may speak as a Jew, but if you cant proudly claim that God is your Sovereign Lord, then dont speak to me of Judaism.

Quite the vitriolic response, 3.

I note your inability to define your terms.

If you can not define your terms, you quite literally do not know what you are talking about.

By the way, your view of me, while entertaining light reading, is just that. I mention it not because I care about the content of your habit of ad hominem argument and slander, but because there are those here who may actually be interested in the title topic of the thread, prior to your attempt to reformulate it as a referendum on the poster, and what you imagine to be his personal views.

If you are concerned about my views of Judaism, Christianity, and Apostasy, and are willing and able to speak in terms that yield a discussion beyond "everyone knows," you are welcome to contribute in that vein.

If, on the other hand, you would rather take the cowardly route, declare me "worse than Clinton," and depart -- for the sin of insisting on defined terms in a philosophical/theological discussion -- I do believe you are incapable of discussing your faith, regardless of how loudly you trumpet its rightness.

This inarticulate howl of yours may be quite impressive to the weak-minded, my friend, but to me - again - it looks like you literally do not know what you are talking about.

Now here's the trick - none of us do. But with some self-discipline and some attention to the enterprise of inquiry, we can get closer.

Define "God." Define "Truth." If you admit you can not do so, say that is the case. It may not "make you stupid" to admit this, but it does introduce some questions we must pay attention to.

I'm waiting, brother by birth, "other" by faith, adversary by argument. :)

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Quite the vitriolic response, 3.

I note your inability to define your terms.

If you can not define your terms, you quite literally do not know what you are talking about.

By the way, your view of me, while entertaining light reading, is just that. I mention it not because I care about the content of your habit of ad hominem argument and slander, but because there are those here who may actually be interested in the title topic of the thread, prior to your attempt to reformulate it as a referendum on the poster, and what you imagine to be his personal views.

If you are concerned about my views of Judaism, Christianity, and Apostasy, and are willing and able to speak in terms that yield a discussion beyond "everyone knows," you are welcome to contribute in that vein.

If, on the other hand, you would rather take the cowardly route, declare me "worse than Clinton," and depart -- for the sin of insisting on defined terms in a philosophical/theological discussion -- I do believe you are incapable of discussing your faith, regardless of how loudly you trumpet its rightness.

This inarticulate howl of yours may be quite impressive to the weak-minded, my friend, but to me - again - it looks like you literally do not know what you are talking about.

Now here's the trick - none of us do. But with some self-discipline and some attention to the enterprise of inquiry, we can get closer.

Define "God." Define "Truth." If you admit you can not do so, say that is the case. It may not "make you stupid" to admit this, but it does introduce some questions we must pay attention to.

I'm waiting, brother by birth, "other" by faith, adversary by argument. :)

PFnV

No, im afraid im not going to get sucked into your next "intellectual" hole. It is you who could not answer a simple question. Go ask your Rabbi what God means. Go find a college class to do your head games that lead to nowhere.

[PatsFanInVa]

So I take it you can not give definitions of either "God" or "Truth."

I do apologize that my approach is informed more by intellect than by enthusiasm, but substituting the latter for the former is no way to come to any sort of conclusion that's useful to someone who believes differently from you. Ironically, by one definition at least, it's also a lousy way to get to the "Truth."

By the way, 3, I think God and I are fine, and that's the truth.

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

So I take it you can not give definitions of either "God" or "Truth."

I do apologize that my approach is informed more by intellect than by enthusiasm, but substituting the latter for the former is no way to come to any sort of conclusion that's useful to someone who believes differently from you. Ironically, by one definition at least, it's also a lousy way to get to the "Truth."

By the way, 3, I think God and I are fine, and that's the truth.

PFnV

my goodness, thats the closet ive ever heard you to come to a good old praising on the Lord. Careful, you might give the impression you actually believe in something greater than yourself.

Its really ok to have faith in God and still practice Judaism. Ive asked around.:)

Define God? He's the perfect, omnipotent, creator. Ruler of the Universe, maker of all things, The great "I am". The whole ball of wax. You know, the Father. The guy you guys worship in Temple, remember?

Truth? I know in this day and age its popular to say we all define our truth.
So if theres a pizza and I say there is a pizza its ok for you to say, no, its my truth that there is no pizza, and so to not offend you, I must back off and say, oh, ok, i dont want to push my truth on you by saying there is a pizza so lets just say, for me, I believe there is a pizza, but thats just me.

thats really a lot of garbage. Belief means you know it to be true, otherwise you are just blowing around in the wind, which most people do, btw.

Truth means its real, its the truth. God is who He says He is. The Torah is true, the rest of the Old Testament is true. The New Testament is true.

Now, someone who practices Judaism should have no problem not only claiming there is a God, but because it says so in the Torah, there should be no problem in the concept of worshipping that God, and speaking of that God.

Intellect is fine, but dont mistake Faith for simple enthusiasm. I have given you reasoning, scripturally based ( written by Jews before Christ was born) that I have used to support my faith. So I have both.

You have expressed only attempts at the intellect, which without the Faith, is self reliant and not in tune with the practice of Judaism.

Before you act like a victim and cry slander, this all started with a link giving reasons why a Jewish person could believe in Jesus Christ. I never singled YOU out but you reacted like I did and started calling me an anti-semitic and telling me in no certain terms I was in no way practicing any kind of Judaism.

So ive just pointed out the other side. fair enough I think.

[PatsFanInVa]

my goodness, thats the closet ive ever heard you to come to a good old praising on the Lord. Careful, you might give the impression you actually believe in something greater than yourself.

Its really ok to have faith in God and still practice Judaism. Ive asked around.:)

My point here is that we have a thread about Christians claiming that Christianity is in fact Judaism, and that Judaism, therefore, really does not exist, except in the sense of an "error." To believe the latter is a regrettably common point of view within Christianity; to believe the former, however, seems to be nothing more or less than willful ignorance of the historical development of the two creeds.

Define God? He's the perfect, omnipotent, creator. Ruler of the Universe, maker of all things, The great "I am". The whole ball of wax. You know, the Father. The guy you guys worship in Temple, remember?

Tell me if I have fairly understood what you mean when you say God:
1. He is perfect
2. He is all-powerful
3. He is the creator
4. He is the ruler of the Universe
5. He is 'the great "I am".'
6. He is a colloquialism for "all things," i.e., The whole ball of wax.
7. Another colloquialism followed by a biblical apellation: "you know, the Father." Used by both Jews and Christians, although Christians use this at least two ways - the traditional Jewish usage, as a father to all (as in Aveinu Malchenu, "Our father, our king" -- but also in a specific Christian way, in which God is the father of one individual, "his 'only begotten son.'"
8. Finally, God is the God Jews worship in temple.

8 is particularly interesting, since you believe that God must be defined as the Jews worship Him. As we see in (7), the Jews worship God in temple without inclusion of Jesus as any sort of messianic or intercessory figure.

While the theology of Jewish worship may be broad by comparison with the later-evolved cosmology/theology of Christianity, it does not include the worship of Jesus.

And so, yes, I find myself particularly in agreement with you on definitional counts 7 and 8. (The other terms, while broad, work well within my own theology. I doubt we agree on what we mean by these terms as well, but that's off-point.)

If you are saying that you do not believe in Jesus' role in the Trinity, or Jesus' role in forgiveness of sins, your definition is an interesting twist. I do not think that is what you mean, but that is the conclusion these terms lead to. Do you mean that to be the case?

Truth? I know in this day and age its popular to say we all define our truth.

What is popular is irrelevant.

So if theres a pizza and I say there is a pizza its ok for you to say, no, its my truth that there is no pizza, and so to not offend you, I must back off and say, oh, ok, i dont want to push my truth on you by saying there is a pizza so lets just say, for me, I believe there is a pizza, but thats just me.

"If" indeed. Although I will note right now I sort of wish there were a pizza, despite the fact that I only want one slice of the pizza because I'm already full anyway. We are such a perverse species.

thats really a lot of garbage. Belief means you know it to be true, otherwise you are just blowing around in the wind, which most people do, btw.

We're back to what most people do and how wrong they are. But you now change the term from "truth" to "belief," making your statement less relevant. Interestingly, in going from "truth" to "belief," you are specifically moving from the objective and absolute "truth," to a subjective, individually defined truth you were just railing against. But you also embrace a circular notion that "Belief means you know it to be true," so you've defined another term entirely by your as yet undefined word, "truth."

But now you drop the preamble:

Truth means its real, its the truth. God is who He says He is. The Torah is true, the rest of the Old Testament is true. The New Testament is true.

You've now actually posited something like a definition, buried in this otherwise logically circular statement. "Truth means it's real" could potentially mean something, if I know what you mean by "real." Let's say it means not illusionary, solid, possessing some ontic reality. Let's furthermore use your aforementioned pizza as an example of something real. After all, we can not have a world where you say there is a pizza and I just close my eyes and wish it away.

In other words, the aforementioned pizza is, at least in the example, real. So the pizza is true. My chair is real, so it is true. God is real, so He is true. The Hebrew and Greek bibles both have ontic existence, so they are true. Similarly, the Quran, the Baghavad Gita, the Tripitika, and Mein Kampf. They are all, by this definition, true.

You add, "God is who He says he is." I take it that this is the case whether we mean the multi-manifest God of Hinduism, Allah, the God of the Jews, or the Trinity of the Christians. I have not said you are wrong, mind you. But now we are stuck guessing as to whether "God is who He says he is" through one tradition of holy scripture, all the traditions, or none of them (that is, God being who He says he is, in the tradition sense of speech.) Or all of the above.

What I believe would be helpful to you is a stricter definition of "Truth" rather than just "thereness", prior to enumerating examples of things you believe to be true, since you have set such a low bar for truth. Unless, of course, your belief is closer to the syncretism of, for example, the Bahai faith.

Now, someone who practices Judaism should have no problem not only claiming there is a God, but because it says so in the Torah, there should be no problem in the concept of worshipping that God, and speaking of that God.

Of course not. That is not my purpose in this thread, however; nor do I like to expose my belief to ridicule on the part of the weak-minded. This is a personal preference, although I will further stipulate that language is a pretty dull instrument to express religion (something I believe you encounter as well.)

My purpose here, rather, is to determine the right or lack thereof of the apostate to evangelical Christianity, to the claim of representing the "real" Judaism.

Intellect is fine, but dont mistake Faith for simple enthusiasm. I have given you reasoning, scripturally based ( written by Jews before Christ was born) that I have used to support my faith. So I have both.

Your earlier thread notwithstanding (I believe we differ in our impressions of the powers of persuasion and reason you displayed there,) your answers here appear, as yet, incomplete at best.

You have expressed only attempts at the intellect, which without the Faith, is self reliant and not in tune with the practice of Judaism.

God save us all from self-reliance! First of all, I have noted my faith in various threads, though I should not have to. So your slander is noted but accepted for what it is, an attempt to discredit a difficult adversary. Secondly, we're not looking to prove or disprove PFnV, but his arguments. Thirdly, your assumption that self-reliance is incompatible with religious expression (particularly Judaism,) is questionable; but it is unimportant, as the statement as applied to me relies on the introductory slander.

Before you act like a victim and cry slander, this all started with a link giving reasons why a Jewish person could believe in Jesus Christ. I never singled YOU out but you reacted like I did and started calling me an anti-semitic and telling me in no certain terms I was in no way practicing any kind of Judaism.

So ive just pointed out the other side. fair enough I think.

Too late for that. You'll have to take precautions against me or others "crying slander." To wit, stop slandering on such a regular basis. It is, after all, one of the ten commandments, the whole bearing false witness thing. Have a good read over what I've said here, 3. Ask yourself whether you are right or wrong in your assessment. And for God's sake, let's just move on, because I don't give a fiddler's fart about it, honestly. It's too transparent. But I don't think you even know you're doing it, though it would be nice if you realized the tendency and monitored it.

I do understand the points you wanted to make, but I think you've been sloppy in making them. Beyond that, I'm not sure we've moved much further along on the thread's title topic.

To wit, I maintain that evangelical Christianity is not, in fact, Judaism or a form thereof, and that this is why the two developed as entirely distinct religious traditions.

I also think it is worthwhile to make the point, since the opposite and erroneous point has been claimed on these threads.

Thanks,

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

"While the theology of Jewish worship may be broad by comparison with the later-evolved cosmology/theology of Christianity, it does not include the worship of Jesus."

But there are Jews that do indeed worship Jesus. Does Judaism teach that when the Messiah comes, we are to worship Him? There are Jews that believe He came, and we worship Him. This is what Jews such as Peter and all the other Disciples did. This is what Paul did.

You have it stated that Judaism that includes Jesus doesnt exist and I have pointed out it has always existed and why. And why it makes more sense than the growing secular Judaism we see in many places today.

I am pleased you are letting slip out that you have a belief in God and if I have been mistaken in that, I apologize. But then again, how was one to know?

And I will concede your point that yes, Judaism and Christianity, as commonly practiced, are 2 distinct religions, although, I look it at it as more 2 distinct demoninations, as the crucial difference in the major points of the 2 religions is over one point, was He or wasnt He the Messiah? Religious ritual aside, when you get down to the core of Scripture, thats the seperation, thats it.

For that reason, I call myself a Christian and worship at the place that honors Jesus Christ. My point was, Judaism was NEVER intended to disappear, the intention was for its followers to accept its own teaching. That its followers, for the most part, dont, doesnt mean its people are not still the apple of Gods eye. Despite the empty claims by many American Christians that somehow this is "Gods Country", the fact remains it is not. Israel is Gods country, and its the Jews God made his covenant with.

Ever wonder why a place the size of New Jersey cant be destroyed when most of the world wants it destroyed? Ever wonder why most of the world wants it destroyed in the first place?

Dont worry about Judaism, it will be fine.

Its about coming together.

Ephesians 2:11-22
11Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

[PatsFanInVa]

I think you understand that if a man is born a Jew, but becomes Moslem, he is an apostate (a convert) to Islam. It makes no sense for a different case to hold for Christianity.

I have refused time and again to discuss the particulars of my own faith here, beyond very broad outlines, because, as I have said on numerous occasions, in this context such a discussion has been taken as an invitation to the denigration of Judaism in all its variety. This is in line with the historical tendency among Jews to avoid discussion of such matters in public forums. The "target of opportunity" denigration of Judaism employed by proselytizers today is no different in that regard from the historical theological anti-semitism of the past.

What is interesting is that, with that explanation in hand from all earlier discussions, and despite my having touched on my own faith in the past, you chose to make erroneous assumptions about my state of mind/soul.

If you think badly of someone, but have no corroboration, you just don't like a person. You had no corroboration about these matters, and so constucted someone in your mind you believed to be a fair model of PFnV.

From there, you proceded to state the personal opinions you would imagine the "bogeyman PFnV" would make, and ascribed them to me.

Now you want to apologize because you "didn't know" that your assumption was in error.

This is why we state assumptions as questions, not as declarative statements, so we do not slander others. It is another precaution you can take. And if someone refuses an answer to your question, you can not therefore assume that the worst of your assumption is right. It means he refuses to answer.

This will be a valuable tool in the campaign to avoid false witness against one's neighbor, something that must be avoided for any rational discourse to occur, at least in the course of that discourse.

Regarding the discussion at hand, you seem to have some "Clintonian" wiggle-room there yourself. You point out that people like Paul, Peter, and yourself were born to Jewish parents, but also concede that Christianity and Judaism are separate religions. I think we're getting closer to the heart of the matter.

There are, within Judaism, teachings about the Messiah. A Jew (by religion) does not accept that Jesus was that Messiah. Christians not only believe Jesus was that Messiah, they believe he was more.

The core doctrines differ; since you are a Christian, your doctrine of a Messiah who is part of a Triune deity is a fine reading, to discuss messiahship with other Christians. It is just not the Jewish belief.

A second point: Christianity was rapidly evolving especially in the first century CE. So if in the year 50 CE you were a Jew who believed Jesus was a sort of "ironic twist" on the traditional Jewish messiah, that was one thing. You could do so, unless he made statements - as a matter of historical record, not a matter of biblical record - that he was in fact part of a triune deity. In other words, scholars are divided as to whether every word spoken in the Greek bible was spoken in history; it seems likely that rather than phrasing himself to be God incarnate, Jesus claimed to be the traditional Jewish messiah, but since he had no army or kingdom, he used a metaphorical rather than literal approach to the prerequisites of that title.

The destruction of the Temple, however, changed this dynamic. While Jews went to their academies and into the diaspora, Christians merely reinterpreted Jesus as the Temple Incarnate. "Oh look!" the Christian of the time says, "Since the cultic center is destroyed, we can substitute Jesus for sacrifice! We were right, we were right!"

Now, you as a Christian believe Jesus made the statements referring to these things during his lifetime. I, as a non-Christian, believe that much evolved in Christianity after Jesus' death. Certainly much happened to the practice of Judaism (the loss of the cultic sacrificial center, whereby prayer and observance were the more emphasized.)

You, as a Christian, can say "look how perfectly these books fit these events!" I, as a Jew, will say "and don't tell me, we take the book's word for it, that the book is true."

You will say "but you know from our pizza example that truth is objective." And I'll answer "you're right, and you've just admitted the God of the Jews is the true God. Nyah nyah nyah, no Jesus!"

But that's just silliness. The point is not what we say on the matter (or preferably do not say,) the point is that you are a Christian (as regards religious belief and practice,) and I am a Jew. Christianity is nothing to be ashamed of, and neither is Judaism. They are just not identical.

Thanks once again,

PFnV

[maverick4]

Basically, 'Jewish' means Israeli. To say you are a Jew based on your bloodlines is basically tracking Israeli heredity and genes.

Judaism on the other hand is a religion. Anyone can be Jewish.

[NYCPatsFan]

Judaism on the other hand is a religion. Anyone can be Jewish.

You mean anyone can practice Judaism, right?

That's what was explained to me by my very good atheist Jewish friend: there are Jews who are not religious but still follow customs and habits of the Jewish race.

[3 to be 4]

You mean anyone can practice Judaism, right?

That's what was explained to me by my very good atheist Jewish friend: there are Jews who are not religious but still follow customs and habits of the Jewish race.

thus the difference between being Jewish and practicing Judiasm.

[PatsFanInVa]

Yeah, only minor nits to pick here, and it's really picky stuff. Mav, "Israeli" indicates citizenship in the modern state of Israel. Jews and non-Jews alike hold Israeli citizenship, but I think you mean "Israelite," which, maddeningly, has some ambiguities as well (ask a Samaritan,) and besides, is a little on the quaint side. But that's a minor nit.

It could also be a source of confusion that one can convert to Judaism, and bingo, he's a Jew -- so it's not a genetic definition. (Not saying anyone here said that, this is just something to get out there, while we're having the discussion.)

So I think the best word for someone who is a Jew, is a Jew.

But I think we've got the basics pretty much down. Heck, I think even 3 and I have come to agree on the point: Judaism refers to a religion with some definite "boundary" lines. Though the dual role of the word "Jew" as a religious and ethnic marker can add lots of confusion, the Jewish people, by and large, practice Judaism (because if they do not, pretty soon their offspring drop from the ethnic definition as well as the religious definition. Just the way it plays out.)

PFnV

[NYCPatsFan]

Heck, I think even 3 and I have come to agree on the point...

PFnV

Wow! Sight to behold! :)

[3 to be 4]

Wow! Sight to behold! :)

never underestimate the miraculous powers of God :)

[PatsFanInVa]

Define your terms ;)

JUST KIDDING this time...

[3 to be 4]

Define your terms ;)

JUST KIDDING this time...

Define "Kidding"

Just kidding;)

[maverick4]

But I think we've got the basics pretty much down. Heck, I think even 3 and I have come to agree on the point: Judaism refers to a religion with some definite "boundary" lines. Though the dual role of the word "Jew" as a religious and ethnic marker can add lots of confusion, the Jewish people, by and large, practice Judaism (because if they do not, pretty soon their offspring drop from the ethnic definition as well as the religious definition. Just the way it plays out.)

PFnV

OK, right, by 'Israeli' I meant the historical group of people who resided in Israel a long time ago. I guess I meant 'Israelite'.

What I am concerned about is that if most Jews really do practice Judaism, then why is it so important for some Jews to keep tract of who is 1/4, 1/8, whatever percentage etc Jewish? Because at that level they are basically keeping track of race for the sake of race, and it comes across as racist to me. I am also very confused by what a Jewish friend told me about the different treatments in Israel depending on whether you are Sephartic or European Jewish.

Please explain, thanks!!!

[PatsFanInVa]

OK, right, by 'Israeli' I meant the historical group of people who resided in Israel a long time ago. I guess I meant 'Israelite'.

What I am concerned about is that if most Jews really do practice Judaism, then why is it so important for some Jews to keep tract of who is 1/4, 1/8, whatever percentage etc Jewish? Because at that level they are basically keeping track of race for the sake of race, and it comes across as racist to me. I am also very confused by what a Jewish friend told me about the different treatments in Israel depending on whether you are Sephartic or European Jewish.

Please explain, thanks!!!

Okay, when you get to "1/4, 1/8," etc., you're getting into how people see themselves ethnically. Now get this - you can say you're 1/2 Jewish, but if your father is Italian Catholic, and your mother is Jewish, that makes you 100% Jewish. Of course, that's not what you say, if you're raised Catholic. Then you (if male) marry a non-Jewish female, and the kid talks about being 1/4 Jewish... but near as I can tell, that's kind of a folk derivation. There's no big Jewish Headquarters Office where they keep track of "octaJews" and "semiJews." (Although, because of the Law of Return, they do track who is and is not a Jew pretty closely in Israel.)

As to Ashkenazi racism toward Sephardim in Israel, I've heard about it as well. But there's no claim that they're not Jews based on their Sephardic heritage (if that's what you're asking.)

PFnV

[maverick4]

Okay, when you get to "1/4, 1/8," etc., you're getting into how people see themselves ethnically. Now get this - you can say you're 1/2 Jewish, but if your father is Italian Catholic, and your mother is Jewish, that makes you 100% Jewish. Of course, that's not what you say, if you're raised Catholic. Then you (if male) marry a non-Jewish female, and the kid talks about being 1/4 Jewish... but near as I can tell, that's kind of a folk derivation. There's no big Jewish Headquarters Office where they keep track of "octaJews" and "semiJews." (Although, because of the Law of Return, they do track who is and is not a Jew pretty closely in Israel.)

As to Ashkenazi racism toward Sephardim in Israel, I've heard about it as well. But there's no claim that they're not Jews based on their Sephardic heritage (if that's what you're asking.)

PFnV

Interesting. OK, well what if a completely non-Jewish man and his non-Jewish wife convert to the religion of Judaism. Is their child Jewish? Do all these rules about being Jewish based on bloodlines still apply for later generations of this family?

[PatsFanInVa]

Interesting. OK, well what if a completely non-Jewish man and his non-Jewish wife convert to the religion of Judaism. Is their child Jewish? Do all these rules about being Jewish based on bloodlines still apply for later generations of this family?

The rule is if they convert (or even if only she converts,) and then has a baby, the baby is Jewish. If they convert after a baby's born, as I understand it, the baby has to get "converted" too. I'm not sure they convert babies (like a baptism,) but they might. I'm out of my depth on that one. And yes, a Jewish woman (by conversion or otherwise) has 100% kosher kids for all time. Of course, if a male Jewish child, whether for one generation or a hundred generations, marries a non-Jewish woman, the rule is either she converts, or the baby is not Jewish "by birth." The child, of course, can always convert later in life. Probably this happens a fair amount in a mixed marriage, where the husband is deeply religious in every other way, but marries out (which is pretty discouraged in Judaism, in direct proportion to how orthodox one is.)

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

The rule is if they convert (or even if only she converts,) and then has a baby, the baby is Jewish. If they convert after a baby's born, as I understand it, the baby has to get "converted" too. I'm not sure they convert babies (like a baptism,) but they might. I'm out of my depth on that one. And yes, a Jewish woman (by conversion or otherwise) has 100% kosher kids for all time. Of course, if a male Jewish child, whether for one generation or a hundred generations, marries a non-Jewish woman, the rule is either she converts, or the baby is not Jewish "by birth." The child, of course, can always convert later in life. Probably this happens a fair amount in a mixed marriage, where the husband is deeply religious in every other way, but marries out (which is pretty discouraged in Judaism, in direct proportion to how orthodox one is.)

PFnV

But seeing as you arent converting blood, that must mean you are converting beliefs, right?
So if a mother is changing what she believes and is therefore now Jewish, does that make her child believe what she believes? After all, their connection is blood. Biological.
By this logic and religious practice it says to me that according to Judaism what we believe changes what we are, otherwise, why would a mothers change of belief have an effect on the "bloodline" of her child?
Is Faith and belief so powerful that it trumps the physical?
That is quite a testimony to the power of belief. That in itself tells me that Judaism is so driven by Faith that it demonstrates by this example the ability of man to change from the "old man" to the "new man" by coming to know God differently. To be.....Born again?

[PatsFanInVa]

But seeing as you arent converting blood, that must mean you are converting beliefs, right?
So if a mother is changing what she believes and is therefore now Jewish, does that make her child believe what she believes? After all, their connection is blood. Biological.
By this logic and religious practice it says to me that according to Judaism what we believe changes what we are, otherwise, why would a mothers change of belief have an effect on the "bloodline" of her child?
Is Faith and belief so powerful that it trumps the physical?
That is quite a testimony to the power of belief. That in itself tells me that Judaism is so driven by Faith that it demonstrates by this example the ability of man to change from the "old man" to the "new man" by coming to know God differently. To be.....Born again?

Again, the process and laws that relate to acceptance into the Jewish people have their roots in something akin to citizenship. This is always worth bearing in mind. After the original conquest of the land, it is possible your village could simply be overrun by Judah in an expansionary phase. In that circumstance it might behoove you to "serve" the Jewish God than your local pantheon, especially since, well, your local god or pantheon would have just lost. Simpler times.

"Jewry" - the phenomenon of being "born a Jew" - was never about racism. So faith being "stronger than bloodlines", while a correct assessment in very broad strokes, may be wedging the facts into our current molds of thinking. There likely were "good" and "bad" Jews, and Jews of little faith who were every bit as Jewish in the hereditary/citizenship sense, as Jews who worshipped fervently. Since the bible records that certain men and women were close to God or fervent in worship, one must conclude that certain others were less so.

In more modern times, you could leave a trinitarian world-view (for example) and adopt the Jewish world-view, which would more likely happen for reasons more familiar to us -- the intellectual or spiritual conversion, or perhaps conversion for the purpose of marriage (actually, Judaism demands you convert with no ulterior motive, but I suspect marriage is one motive that does not get as much scrutiny as other ulterior motives.) Regardless, the traditional Jewish process is made to weed out snap decisions, deeply felt but short-lived revelations, or conversions for convenience. Judaism traditionally makes it hard to convert for these reasons.

Modern or ancient, however, rabbis have written that we should honor the "Jew by choice" that much more, since he is "called" to Judaism. The convert is not "less of a Jew" or "only sorta Jewish." Andre Tippett is as Jewish as the head rabbi of Jerusalem.

PFnV

[3 to be 4]

Again, the process and laws that relate to acceptance into the Jewish people have their roots in something akin to citizenship. This is always worth bearing in mind. After the original conquest of the land, it is possible your village could simply be overrun by Judah in an expansionary phase. In that circumstance it might behoove you to "serve" the Jewish God than your local pantheon, especially since, well, your local god or pantheon would have just lost. Simpler times.

"Jewry" - the phenomenon of being "born a Jew" - was never about racism. So faith being "stronger than bloodlines", while a correct assessment in very broad strokes, may be wedging the facts into our current molds of thinking. There likely were "good" and "bad" Jews, and Jews of little faith who were every bit as Jewish in the hereditary/citizenship sense, as Jews who worshipped fervently. Since the bible records that certain men and women were close to God or fervent in worship, one must conclude that certain others were less so.

In more modern times, you could leave a trinitarian world-view (for example) and adopt the Jewish world-view, which would more likely happen for reasons more familiar to us -- the intellectual or spiritual conversion, or perhaps conversion for the purpose of marriage (actually, Judaism demands you convert with no ulterior motive, but I suspect marriage is one motive that does not get as much scrutiny as other ulterior motives.) Regardless, the traditional Jewish process is made to weed out snap decisions, deeply felt but short-lived revelations, or conversions for convenience. Judaism traditionally makes it hard to convert for these reasons.

Modern or ancient, however, rabbis have written that we should honor the "Jew by choice" that much more, since he is "called" to Judaism. The convert is not "less of a Jew" or "only sorta Jewish." Andre Tippett is as Jewish as the head rabbi of Jerusalem.

PFnV

Absolutely. In fact, the convert has made a thought out decision, as opposed to just doing what was expected or what he/she was born into.

I ran into that in Christianity in the South. Being a convert, and from the north, no less. In talking with other northerners, or for that matter, any newer "born again", it was apparent that there was a passion there. It wasnt like it was cultural expectation to just go to church on sundays. We found many southern christians to be more "religious" about their duties of Christianity. Conversly, a friend of mine from Atlanta who was Christian and had moved north to Massachusetts often talks about how to be a practicing Christian in Massachusetts was much more passion filled for him and those he worshipped with than what he grew up with. In his words "To be a Born again in Massachusetts, you have to have sincere passionate belief!"

So i agree with that idea that Andre Tippett (who i didnt know had converted, btw) is to be honored.

Faith, and conscience belief, means more, in the practice of any religion, than mere bloodlines. That may seem like a no-brainer, but im always surprised on the focus on race in these matters.

a certain whackjob in Germany being the most notable.

[PatsFanInVa]

I think it's a matter of a very old nationality becoming an ethnic group by dint of common religion and common experience of exile. So you have a basically national/religious citizenship/confessional group (they're the same in any good theocracy,) maintained within Jewry/Judaism. That can lead people who don't dwell on the definitional niceties to conclude there is a Jewish "race."

Well, there is a kinship group, but it's a kinship group you can join at will (although, as we've seen, you can not exactly depart.) The Muslims allow the death penalty for apostasy; Judaism just allows you to still be a Jew. Probably an outgrowth of having low numbers.

PFnV