Discussion in 'Religion and Lighthearted Discussion' started by 3 to be 4, May 22, 2007.
bumping over the spam
leapfrogging over the garbage
There was a legit question posed in the political forum recently, how can a Jew believe in Jesus?
This link that starts the thread lays it out why a Jewish person, like myself, who believes in what is written in the Old Testament, would accept Jesus as the Messiah. There are many Jews who have. Including Mary, Joseph, the 12 Disciples, Paul etc...
Never forget the New Testament was written by Jews.
by the way, post # 2 and # 3 were written before the days of our Moderator, when this forum was filled with porn links and other garbage.
many thanks for the cleanup!!!
Wow! Disgruntled really took over this place. In case nobody has looked into this over the last year or so.
They need help with their Hebrew.
I would also very much question the idea that the NT, or more accurately Greek Testament, was written by Jews.
There certainly very early on seems to have been a split between Jews and Christians, in terms of forming distinct communities. It's sort of a unique quibble to talk about being a "Jewish Christian" in the modern era, generated by the dual ethnic/religious definitions of Judaism/Jewry/Jewishness. Ironically a reform or conservative Jew would not call you a Jew, and an Orthodox Jew would. Not one he liked, of course, but - particularly if he were a Lubavitcher - one he would very much like to talk to. While Jews don't proselytize outside the Jewish community, the Lubavitchers are big fans of proselytizing within it.
As to your belief set, it's pretty clear by your use of "old testament" and "new testament" that your natural audience is the gentiles, and a fine mission it is. As one English-language printing of the bible puts it, "Go, and sin on more."
Nicolai, to you, I can only say, 2 Samuel 12:7 (emphasis on the first sentence.)
New testament=anti-semite crap.
All religion= bad
It impedes scientific progress w/ bogus morals and the best excuse
"We as humans cannot play god"
What a crock......
If god put us here on earth he gave us the ability to advance in the scientific world. Religion especially Christianity and Catholicism have impeded scientific progress. I am a reformed Catholic who sees the light. Religion is destructive.
Both testaments imo are bogus.:bricks:
Not true. A lot of religions embrace science. Just not the big three of Christianity, Judaism, and Islamic which all came out of the same source. There's man faiths such as Kemetic, Alchemy (Yes it's a religion), etc that view man and god as co-creators of the universe and believe that god uses science just like we do and that these mysteries are here to challenge us. These religions don't put limitations on people like the big three. They challenge people to be responsible for their own mind, body and spirit and not worry about everybody else and their beliefs or morals.
What a better place if the big three followed suit.
You DO realize that Jews and Muslims were responsible for most of the scientific achievements that brought about the Renaissance, right? Jews tend to be among the world leaders in science, winning more Nobel Prizes per capita than any other group, by a long shot. I think you know a fair amount about Christianity, but you're using that to project onto other faiths. It's academically lazy.
All those old testament writers were stoned ... screw them I say.
The link below is not safe for work (edited by moderator)
And how many of those Jews are staunch in the faith and attended the synagogue every week? Einstein? No. Oppenheimer? Nope. Freud? Still no.
Just because you're born into a religion it doesn't mean you practice or believe in it. Also just because people achieve greatness in a field it doesn't mean their religion is supportive of their findings.
While I certainly know more about Christianity than the other religions, minus some of the pagan or earth based religions, because I was raised in it it that doesn't mean I'm academically lazy or that I don't know a fair amount about those as well.
Watch Bill Maher's Religulous.
Nor are they vilified by even most Orthodox Jews.
Do you know that Judaism is not supportive of the scientific establishment?
I think you're out of your lane when commenting on Judaism. This is not a slam against you, because most people are very much uneducated about Jews and Judaism. Most Christians and Westerners think it's Christianity, and all its silly superstitions and anti-educational bias, minus Jesus. That is simply not so. You'd be surprised how different they are from what the world and Christianity says they are. At the very least, given the history of the last several centuries, it shouldn't surprise you that Jews are misunderstood.
I think much the same can be said about Islam as well. Say "Islam" and most people think of Bin Laden, public beheadings, veils, hordes of olive-skinned people, and bombs in some order.
I've seen it. What's so great about it? It certainly doesn't really educate anyone, nor was it really intended to do that. I guess on its face it's entertaining, or valuable to some people as validation for the religious choices they've made.
Doctrinally, in Judaism there is simply no tabu against understanding the natural world. Culturally, that may contribute to the disproportionate success of Jews in the sciences. And also within Judaism, literalism was dispensed with fairly early, with a variety of interpretations argued among scholars, all of whom would probably be considered "heretics" if doctrine were to be held to as closesly as in the Christianity of the time (or even of the modern era, in some quarters.)
The talmud - the fruits of Judaism from the destruction of the second temple to the modern era - is composed like a message board, albeit one that the rabble did not participate in. It is all interpretation, counter-interpretation, quotes from the "OP" (in this case, the Torah,) quotes from other interpretations, etc. You were supposed to know who the high priest was and who the temporal authority was when you commented on any given "OP". You know why? Because in Judaism - and this is orthodox Judaism, by the way - it is taken as a given that context matters. There is no tradition in Judaism that says "there it is in black and white, stop arguing about it." We start out saying "SOMEBODY wrote this down, and they wrote it down during a given time in a given context." Like I said, and that's among the orthodox.
In Islam, wisdom is compared to a jewel you just find somewhere - wherever you find it, you pick it up. This probably had a lot to do with the flourishing of Islam in the middle ages while Christendom was studiously anti-scientific. I do not know whether doctrinally there is some impediment within Islam that arrays it against natural sciences. It does not seem to be the case.
Now then, we do have cases of willfull ignorance among all three faiths, just as we have magical thinking among atheists - just not the ones that go into the sciences.
For example, I have met Jews who hold to a type of creationist fundmentalism that seems to mimic the Christian variety. They are far from the majority, and their view - doctrinally speaking - is not "THE" Jewish view. In fact - and this is difficult for many to grasp - there is no "THE" Jewish view. There is no central church to enforce dogmatic homogeneity. A sect can proclaim its little local rules, but nobody else is supposed to have to live by them.
The world of Jewish viewpoints is very different from its Christian counterpart, as Nicolai points out.
Everlong, it strikes me that you would like one size to fit all. Historically, this mirrors a Christian assumption. It is likely that you have personally rebelled from an upbringing within one or another christian denomination - not necessarily a strict one, by any means, but one that carries with it the cultural assumptions of the locally dominant confessional group (in this case, either the globally more numerous Catholic faith, or one of the locally more numerous protestant sects.) I don't pretend to know this, I only say it appears likely from your commentary.
It may interest you to know that among the various rationales for anti-semitism in years past, local Christian authorities proclaimed Judaism not to be a religion at all, specifically because it had no church structure, and could therefore not be properly called a religion.
Sometimes Christians think of Judaism as Christianity 1.0. It's a worldview of "Christianity minus Jesus = Judaism." Although that analysis approximates the relationship from an ex post facto point of view, particularly as regards the central point of Christian doctrine (i.e., the centrality of the figure Jesus,) both religious and cultural traditions have grown in considerably different directions since their point of historical divergence.
The prophet's writings about the Messiah are beautiful. They paint a glorious picture with words of his heart, his mission, his suffering, his power and his destiny. They saw him coming from a great distance in the folds of time. Praise be to our Father in heaven.
The more I read and ruminate upon the Nevi'im (prophets) and Ketuvim (writings) the more colourful, vivid, alive and meaningful they become. They have such depth and potency.
I would love to know whether it was by study over time (of what I would call the Old Testament) that Jesus in his physical form became the embodiment of the "Word", that through revelation in scripture and Spirit in the course of his life he became all that he was. Or whether he always knew it from birth through the Spirit of God that was within him, and he lived the scriptures into being...
Anyway, as I earnestly seek the character, heart, Spirit and strength of my Lord and saviour. I often look to the writings of the Jews, as they saw him before he was born and existed in physical form. And they saw him well.
The Spirit of God is waiting for us, to give us wisdom and revelation, if we choose to love the "Word" of God, and seek Him, doing justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with Him. There is much to find in the Old Testament about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and what sheer beauty it is.
And that is precisely what many writers of the Greek Bible want you to feel, OE. This is not incompatible with your heartfelt commentary, cynical as it may look to you. Men write words, after all. Those we believe we say are inspired by God, and those we do not believe we ascribe to one or another ulterior motive. Historically, one set of facts pertained, and perfect knowledge of the entirety of that set of facts is not available to any of us. Where knowledge is unavailable, belief creates a fabric that nicely fills the gap. Whatever Jesus' level of understanding of those who yearned for the coming of the messiah in Judaism, he brought about a completely different understanding of that role; after the destruction of the second temple, Paul and his followers brought about yet another. To me, to ascribe to Jesus the entirety of this historical transformation of a religious doctrine does not add up. To a believer, whatever transpired during the history of Christianity was prefigured and preordained by personal knowledge on the part of Jesus himself, and whatever came before Jesus was known by him. To a non-believer he was a man with imperfect knowledge, whose actions and words only murkily known after many years and several degrees of separation, prior to the writings that recorded his words and deeds. The writers who recorded them had a vested interest in the appearance of comporting to the preexistent texts of the parent religion.
Similarly, to the literalist, each point of the Exodus story literally happened, and furthermore happened to him, personally, in some spiritual sense, when Israel was delivered from bondage, etc. To the utter non-believer in Judaism, it is a collection of "founding myth" stories, or, as shared by one of our local savants, the result of drugs alone (sort of the college-sophomore version of religious history.)
To the serious student of history, each story grew up from its spiritually driven (or other) purpose, and not necessarily simply the acquisition of the best cut of the sacrificed animals involved.
To the believer, whether allegorical or literal, whether by reflex or after long reflection, the stories are imbued with meaning, with one or another aspect of that connective fabric of faith and belief.
What Islamic contributions are you thinking of?
Off the top of my head (because I'm too lazy/preoccupied to do more right now), here are some of the medieval examples.
- The scientific method for chemistry was developed by Hayan, an eighth century scientist.
- The first windmill was created in Persia.
- The theory of evolution was expressed during the ninth or tenth century by an Islamic scientist
- Significant contributions to algebra
- Very important contributions to astronomy (almucantara, etc.)
- Medical and surgical advances
There are numerous others, and for those, as well as details on what I mentioned above, Google is useful. In the post-medieval world, not a whole hell of a lot came out of the Muslim world; at least compared to before. But the wider point is that scientific advances were definitely a part of the Islamic world, and many of those found their way to Europe through the returning Crusaders.
Separate names with a comma.