hottiedeafboi

You missing the point. Ruler of Israel has not yet to come. At first about Jesus was born thru virgin to die because of our sins, now God gave us Grace, that preparation for the future of His returning and the ruler of Israel will be in Millenium which is not yet happen.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

hottiedeafboi

Read again, you overlooked the other word. God didn't promise that He will not destroy the world again. Let me type capitalize word you will see what you overlooked, God said the He promised that He wil not destoryed the world again by FLOOD.

Teresh

Not in the minority of the population. Maybe in the minority of those who are outspoken, but not of the overall population.

And yet, you read from a Christian perspective, not a Jewish perspective. That distinction is enough to make it a fact that you don't know what you're talking about with regards to the Jewish perspective.

That might not be a bad thing.

I didn't say the Prophets were not divinely inspired. In fact, I explicitly said that they were! You, once again, ignored what I said in favor of what you would have wanted me to say. I said the K'tuvim, the "Writings" were not divinely inspired.

A. Egypt? Who are you talking about?
B. Another possible interpretation (not the one I hold, but one that some people believe) is that the verse states that the Messiah will be a descendant of David, who was from Bethlehem.

Do you even know what the words Tanakh and Torah *mean*? Tanakh is an acronym if you didn't know.

The K'tuvim do not claim to be the Word of God. And the Book of Jeremiah is in the Nevi'im, not the K'tuvim.

Link?

Jesus was not born of a virgin, but you believe that and I've no way to convince you otherwise. Still, it's circular logic.

I'm speaking from consensus, not from my own beliefs. I know what the consensus is. That doesn't mean I agree with it. I am fully capable to represent an opinion that I do not myself hold.

Maybe you just haven't asked them if they think Job or Lamentations were prophetic books.

But in this case, the issue is that you keep trying to change what I'm saying because what I am saying is inconvenient for you. But if you alter what I say, maybe I won't pick up on it. And if I don't pick up on it, you may have been dishonest, but you have an argument made.

Sorry, but I'm a bit too smart for that. Changing what I say is dishonest and isn't winning you any points here.

No, you just don't understand the relatively simple concept that some books can be divinely inspired and others aren't. Micah is a prophetic book.

I'm sorry, but that has to be one of the most inane paragraphs I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

There's nothing illegal about them building the temple on their own property. The issue is that the Temple would have less legitimacy if it was not on the Temple Mount, and the government is not going to budge on letting them build it there.

...Actually, they could make animal sacrifices illegal (indeed they may already be so), in which case the Temple would be ineffectual and its purposes nul.

Christians have expected the rapture to begin at least a dozen or so times now. Hasn't happened yet. Jews are no more immune to that sort of eschatological stupidity than Christians are.

Because the Messiah hasn't come yet, which is the same reason why most Jews oppose rebuilding the temple now.

sculleywr

Ok, I am not going to keep debating with multi-page reports flying everywhere. Pick a topic and stick to it. Don't red herring me. Otherwise, I won't dignify the posts with a response. To the crowd: Anyone want to have an actual debate?

Maria

Yep, I do. Do not silent Jesus Christ for witnessin'/gospelin' others. Speak for Him.

Teresh

Considering you kept changing the subject when confronted with contrary evidence, I'm wondering if you're even capable of having a real debate.

hottiedeafboi

There you go again. Lets have a cup of coffee or milk and cookies and shared each others beliefs instead claiming and blaming. I don't even see of his changing bec you put so much in one time and that's how thing got out of hand. He didn't call you stupid or "I know everything more than you do" or or other timidating remarks like you done not just him also at me, at others. You lok for win lose conversations, we don't. Sometimes its not good time if been in escalating moment, look, I know you said what I believe and what you believe, but the way some of us see it didn't seems so. We don't hate you as much you do us by your abusive remarks at us. We stand firm in our faith whom we believe and yes, from time to time been seeing by saying how ignorant and stupid we are. Come on, have a cup of coffee or milk with cookies. So if you don't like it, but I say we do care about you and that's the truth.

sculleywr

Well, having spent two and a half years debating, I have learned that the first rule is to not blast off multiple pages of info. I have debated long enough to have learned that you stick with what you say. You have contradicted yourself several times. Saying that the tanakh is not inspired, but claiming that its books have prophecies in them (Remember saying that one about Jesus not bringing the kingdom. prophecy found in Micah, part of the Tanakh.). You do not claim to represent a group of which you are not a part of. You are not a Jew, so do not claim to represent the Jews. You refuse to acknowledge the truth when it is set clearly in front of you (when you said multiple times that there was no preparation for a temple to be built.). Simple logic doesn't have you near the board for debate. Secondly, you show all your points of argument over time. I have yet to contradict myself. THat is because I have revealed a new facet of my argument each time. It is tiring arguing on something that is off-topic anyways. This debate is not Judaism vs Christianity. It is about the public having the wrong perspective of Christianity. Now. Goodbye

Teresh

He posted so many inaccuracies every time he hit reply that it'd be sinful to not pick apart every single one.

I never said that I know everything nor did I say he was stupid. Like him, you're putting words in my mouth. Stop lying to yourself and to everyone else because it's unbecoming. Stop pretending that I said things that I didn't.

I look for intelligent discussion. sculleywr was unable to supply that as he neglected to cite sources and then when he did cite sources, and they were found to conflict with his story, he abruptly changed the subject, fabricated yet more lies, and put words in my mouth.

I don't hate you at all. However, if you're going to discuss anything with me, you not only should but must know what you are talking about, something so far you and a number of other people do not understand. You cantnot discuss anything intelligently if you are not knowledgable about it. Several people, in this case, sculleywr, have attempted to bluff a semblance of knowledge about a subject they know little or nothing about. Confronted by someone that understands the subject better (in this case, me), their only recourse is to employ dishonest conversational manuevers in order to deflect attention from the fact that they do not know the subject they are discussing.

I, however, am not so forgiving. If you wish to discuss something with me, you MUST understand it or be willing to learn. An opinion is logically illegitimate if it has no basis in fact. I hope, in the course of long discussion spanning several days, that sculleywr was able to learn that.

I care about you also, but I also won't let you be content in your ignorance. That is essentially the only reason I post on threads like this. I really don't care what you believe in so long as you do not think erroneously that your beliefs are held by all.

hottiedeafboi

That's not the way I see it and not only that, we didn't put the word in your mouth. We seeing you twisting it also, it may causing so much info all at one time. But you didn't cal us stupid or stuff like directively, but by saying what christian did as of they but as I see you are implying about us. Yes I do agree and no I don't see anything to make it twisting and stuff. Let it put it this way, like prophetic and not prophetic, what we believe and you said no its not and etc then you came up with N' something and K' something, which is hasn't say any of that particular. Then when he said about particular like genisis, psalms and etc, is prophetic, then you said you twisting it, I said N' is prophetic and not K' something. That hasn't discuss particular. That's for an example, that is not put word in your mouth. That's more expansion to discuss instead flat out thinking that's what he did. We have no anger, even of your remarks, but yes, hurt us and don't say we hurt ourselves, really you are hurting yourself by the remarks. But yes, forgive me for all those misunderstanding with all of this but the way I see it it is a misunderstanding. I thought about it when I watched little house, when almanzo ran up to hill and say this will be our home. Those are the time they have the dispute. Ok as if online, when you say this will be our home during our dispute, and I ask our home, OUR HOME, OUR HOME? What's my attitude? Angry or happy? We didn't ask for it. This is like what has happening here. You may think that how sculley or us act or say or etc. Bec all came at one time with different issue which make it all confusion plus like I was shocked you took netrox post and put it me by claiming I said you are a jews. That's what's been happening, like his final say isn't mean he change, its he's getting the point what's been happening. Yes, like I said, forgive me with all of this, doesn't want to keep it that way like that, its no use for that.

Teresh

I didn't say tht the Tanakh was not inspired, I said that the K'tuvim aren't. They don't even start with the same letter--How hard is it to see that they're different words?

I will give a voice to that which is silent to oppose the boisterous voice of the arrogant Christian.

Considering you haven't presented a single piece of evidence suggesting the Temple is actually being rebuilt besides your own flagrant extrapolations and assumptions on current events, you really haven't made a case here.

That goes also for me.

If by "revealing a new facet" you mean "changing entirely when you've lost your base", then yes, you have.

If I did that (and I may well have, I was splicing multiple posts together at various points) then I am very sorry. I did not intend to make any such errors. I certainly would not have intentionally misquoted you, that is not my way.

sculleywr

I provided a Seattle Times article that spoke of cornerstones having been furnished.
You ARE changing your argument. You already mentioned that the tanakh was not inspired. And there were multiple authors to the book of psalms. Some were prophets. And I haven't changed my argument yet. My major argument is that Jesus was in fact the Messiah. I have not said that anything was wrong with each argument. Debating in the real world is fluid. It flows from point to point. I bring what I do on the "hot seat," into the forum. There is no point to dwelling too long on minutiae. You repeatedly posted the reason is that the prophecies in Isaiah shouldn't be considered because they were from a bad translation. They are from a translation accepted by scholars across the world. Your translation can't be found anywhere. If this were a hot-seat debate, you would be required to show your credentials in Hebrew linguistics. It would be like being an interpreter for BSL with an ASL certification. It just wouldn't happen. Finally, You believe so much in your own beliefs that you don't even consider that you are among the minority. Even the least outspoken groups have an online website. I did a google, goodsearch, and Ask.com search for the topics of your arguments, and found less than a couple thousand. The Jewish beliefs I base my claim on, a couple million. Unless you are saying that the minority numbers in the millions, you have no leg to stand on.

sculleywr

Now, would someone like to open a debate on the perspectives people take on Christianity? The rights or wrongs of those beliefs, and a reason to hold those beliefs, let us debate. Teresh, I refuse to listen to your posts, so you might just want to open your own thread.

hottiedeafboi

Ok Teresh, I know you think christian is shallow about judiasm, but its not true and even you grew up church, but based who preach, bec some churches does not have the depth of whatever they teach. I been some churches are like that, till found a right church that has a very depth of the Gospel and the purposes. Now, I know Jesus is the Messiah, because there are many many verses prophesied that matched Jesus, but not *all* has been fulfilled. Now, I won't discus further till know why what part doesn't fulfill of Jesus you don't believe He is a Messiah. Will you care to explain?

Teresh

If I went and learned masonry, I could make cornerstones too. Like I said before, a few nutjobs claiming legitimacy does not reflect consensus.

I never said that. Re-read the thread. Not once did I say that the Tanakh itself was not at least partly divinely inspired.

You have, however, made a number of claims that are clearly untrue, such as that the Temple is being rebuilt at this time. You have also on several occassions attempted to change what I said in order to make your case. And when I call you on it, you simply reiterate your false statement of what I said and claim that I'm changing what I said when it was, in fact, you who attempted to doctor my words.

Yes, Christian scholars, not Jewish scholars. The distinction needs to be made because if you think scholars are without bias, regardless of if they are Jews or Christians, you are deluding yourself.

I realise I'm among the minority, but then again, so are you. The majority of the world's Christians are Catholics and the Vatican's official position is that the Jews do not need to be converted.

You base your claim on Christian beliefs, not Jewish beliefs. That said, you erroneously consider them to be the same, a hallmark of Evangelical Christianity.

Your choice. I will still read and respond to yours even if you choose to ignore my responses.

I have no reason to. I'm not out to convert people.

It could be summarised thus:

The Messiah is to rebuild the Temple, reign over Israel, bring about world peace and exonerate all oppressed people from their oppressors. Jesus did none of those things.

He isn't afforded the status of Messiah because he didn't fulfill the important Messianic prophecies. He isn't afforded the status of a prophet because the age of prophecy in Israel ended a few hundred years before his birth. He isn't afforded the status of a great philosopher because he didn't leave us with any treatises or philosophical works.

hottiedeafboi

Exactly, that's what jewish thought what prophets were said. Now did you know that even Judas and all other disciples thought the same, but Jesus is about to be crucified and thought Jesus probably not the Messiah and Jesus knew there thoughts. They thought Jesus is free the jews from Roman's power and thought He will rebuild the temple and etc. They thought its political isues. But during the time of Jesus arrest and religious leaders were furious and questioning how that possible that the Temple will be rebuilt in 3 days. That what religious leader doesn't understand. Jesus point out about resurrection till when Jesus died and buried and religious leader fear if there is resureection and commanded the soldiers to seal the tomb and claiming by fear disciples might steal the body, but not happen, when resurrection did happen which soldiers were terrified and reoprt the religious leaders and they paid the soldiers to keep quiet. Now like in Micah chapter 5, when virgin will have a child, and He is the one will rule the world, that is future event during millenium. Salvation is prest that is prepare for the future, bec His Blood covered our sins which when time come of His return that when our body will be changed. Now, I met a guy who is scholar of Judiasm, who is a christian, saying there are different judiasm, but saying many are inaccurate and contradict, so there are many controversial in this matter.

sculleywr

No, He said he would not destroy all the earth WITH WATER. Read the WHOLE THING.

On to another topic, Hows about we put the topic on the actions of Christians. Any bites?

Rose Immortal

In all seriousness, I have to ask, is "older" always "better"? While there's a lot to be said for tradition, I do think there's also room for people to progress in their understanding of the world. Science goes through such changes as we discover new things (example: going from Newtonian to Einsteinian to quantum physics). I don't see why it's so unnatural for religious understanding to go through growth as well.

It is always possible that something in there is a prophecy--in other cases, I believe we have certain books because they present a "type"...that is, a recurring "theme" or "event" in the way God interacts with this universe. Certain patterns do seem to recur throughout the entire Bible. As for particular books, I would imagine some have quite a bit more or less than others. But, I wouldn't rule it out.

I think the fundamental difference we're starting to get at is, if I'm not mistaken, you regard the Jewish sections of the Bible as if they were three totally different compendiums instead of one coherent anthology (I say "anthology" to recognize that there were multiple earthly authors). The non-literalist Christian regards all of them as having divine inspiration of some sort or another, even if one must place it into the context of its culture and time, whereas judging from your comment elsewhere in this thread you do not consider all of it authoritative or divinely inspired at all. (The literalist sees it all as dictated by God word-for-word and literally meant, and that's a view I can't speak to since I go the "inspired" route instead.)

In your view, then, why should one even bother with anything but the Torah? To suggest no divine inspiration in certain books at all would to my mind give them the same status as the Talmud rather than Scripture. And I'm not sure of my history--but didn't the Samaritans go that very route and dismiss all but the Torah? I have to admit I can kind of see their logic as the ultimate end of the logic you're using.

I don't think that term fits. I think deja vu pertains to feeling like "I've been there before", present reflecting on past--whereas this incident was present reflecting on future (but not being totally clear on the specifics of that event until it occurred). I think "presentiment" is a more correct term.

One might...and for my particular case I don't make claims of divine inspiration though I think for some it could occur. I'm nothing special myself. My personal theory is that (sadly) the sheer loss of life and impact upon the world makes a catastrophe on that magnitude more likely to generate presentiments.

The point itself is valid...I just think what you said THIS time would've been more effective than the sarcasm. Especially in a debate about such closely-held beliefs, it's easy for emotions to run so high that people focus on the emotions and not the issues.

OK, the reason I wanted to clear this up was to get at the root of another disagreement I think you and I have. As I see it, any laws invented by humanity are bound to be flawed, even if they are trying to use Biblical principles. I don't see our attempts at a legal system (heck, ANY of them civilization's ever tried to use) having equal status to God's judgment. I think this is part of why ancient Christianity disavowed what the rabbis were doing with their interpretations of the Law at the time.

Granted some sects of Christianity have gone and done the same thing they accused the Pharisees of doing, in their own ways. But that's a whole other can of worms we probably don't need to get into here.

Not my clearest phrasing ever.

How far back do the Mishnah go in authorship? I ask because I want to know why someone would've used that phrase, how long it's been entrenched in the Jewish culture. If for a very long time, then to me Jesus' use of those words would be very significant.

Yeah, I know...but that both literatures, despite being interpreted by people with such different perspectives, would both deal in such similar concepts makes me suspect there was a mutual understanding at the time that Jesus would've been referring to.

Is that modern Judaism you're thinking of, or the ancient kind? And if ancient Judaism as well as modern, then what was the whole "Chosen People" thing? I'd taken it to mean preferential treatment with regard to salvation.

Teresh

A valid point, but then the question becomes, is it acceptable to throw out tradition entirely?

I'm not ruling out that there could be prophecy or that there couldn't be, I'm just acknowledging the traditional Jewish view. It's worth noting that that is not *my* view, though.

Personally, I'd say most Scripture, for any religion, is probably divinely inspired in some form (even the Vedas, Upanishads, Tao Te Ching, etc.).

That doesn't necessarily mean that they're all prophetic (or that any of them are) but rather that some kind of ascended spiritual state is necessary to write a good religious book.

Well... They are, in the sense that they're three different groups of books. The word "Tanakh" itself is actually an acronym (in Hebrew) for Torah N'viim K'tuvim (Tav, Nun and Kaph, TNK, TaNaKH. Kaf at the end of a word becomes a final Khaf so it has a different sound, but it's still the same letter.)

Indeed, that's pretty much what I said.

The Torah isn't the only religious text out there. It's just one of many. I think studying as many as possible is worthwhile. There's several out there that have less spelling errors, too.

The more one reads, the more knowledge one gains. Why bother with anything other than Torah? Because it makes you more learned.

The Talmud is considered to be, at least in Orthodox Judaism, just as authoritative as the Torah because it's the implementation, according to the Rabbis, of the Torah into one's life. It's worth noting that

Wiki:Samaritan might shed some light. Interesting. I wasn't sure what their religious beliefs were, but now I know.

It's worth stating that Karaite Judaism also rejected the Oral Law, but did so much later. In the last 200 years, Reform Judaism has rejected a lot of the Oral Law as no longer relevant and placed new emphasis on the Torah.

I disagree on the basis that we are a logical species (or can be) and that therefore if we can apply logic to Torah we can develop laws that are logically based on those of the Torah.

I disagree... I believe that if we are made in the image and likeness of God and we ordain that God is merciful but just we can, indeed should, emulate the Divine.

The Mishnah was compiled around 200 CE. How far back some of the traditions go is unknown as prior to the compilation of the Mishnah, the Oral Law was never written down. The discovery of mikvaot on the Temple Mount surrounding the former Second Temple would indicate, though, that the mikvah and the concept of "living waters" are at least as old as the Second Temple, so 500 BCE or earlier.

Possibly. I think an argument could be made that when he said "living waters" he might have been referring to the mikvah in terms of purifying the person wholly.

Both ancient and modern.

The idea of Israel as the chosen people would be described in the sense that they accepted the Torah (the Rabbis interpreted it such that God went to all the nations with the Torah and only the Israelites accepted it) and thus entered into the Covenant with God. That said, the Covenant doesn't afford Israel any preferential treatment--If anything, it makes their lives harder because they are expected to live according to the Torah.

In the scope of Judaism, the gentile, for salvation, is expected to follow the Seven Noachide Laws, simple rules which most decent people would be following anyway. This is why Judaism has typically discouraged conversion (with the exception of the Pharisees actively seeking proselytes during the Second Temple era)--Getting salvation as a Jew is a lot harder than getting salvation as a gentile. Gentiles have to follow 7 rules. Jews have to follow all 613 mitzvot. In the scope of Judaism, it's actually preferable to not be a Jew if salvation is your goal.

Throwstones

Jews have to follow all 613 mitzvot


Once Jew person does commit to sin and broke one of 613 mitzvot then it shut down! Can't functions! How can u tell me if it must be perfect 100% on 613 Mitzvot?

LinuxGold

Please keep this debate geared specifically towards the topic of this thread and create your own thread if you want to continue your own debate.

Thank you,


Scott

Teresh

This is really OT, but I'm willing to answer the question... If you want any clarification, we can take it to a PM.

The Jew, like the gentile, is given the choice by God of whether or not to follow the rules. Every time the person does follow the rules, it's +1 in the book. Every time the person does not follow the rules, it's -1 in the book. It should be also said that repentance is allowed and that if a sinner honestly repents, God absolves the person of his or her sins.

sculleywr

Ok, now, I open the question as to what your personal perspective is on Christianity.

indie

I really have to agree with you here. I became a christian a few years ago and i have found that i am happier and more at peace now. But thats not to say that other religions cant do the same for you. thats just what i belive

Maria

Yep, you both are correct. God is interestin' in the heart...honesty and humble heart, not the intelligent mind.

Teresh

Well, that's Christianity, basically. Most of the other major religions believe that God is interested in the mind (or both the heart and mind).

Not condemning Christians for that belief, just acknowledging the difference.

hottiedeafboi

True, God knows our hearts and minds. But the intelligence itself will not get you anywhere. God does use us to be intellegence according only by God. As Mikvah as of living water as samaritan woman met Jesus at the Jacob's well. Jesus has described about the living water. Christian's mikvah is Holy Spirit. Jesus talked about Living Water time to time. And the Torah is in our heart, bec of Christ, that is the law written in our heart. When we sin, we broke all the law. Yes, confessing is requirements, just Like King David described, without confession and also hiding sins, make it feel very uncomfortable and that can lead into depravity. There are law about sacrifice for our sins which is once every year. And now, in christian faith, our sacrifice is done. Bec He is our Sacrificial Lamb and Blood shed to cleanse us just like the old law. All the law was nailed and not hold against us. But like Paul quote peoples questions: K since we no longer under the law, can we continue to sin? The answer is God forbids! So what if we sinned? (Also, written by John), we have an advocate between the Father and us, which is Jesus Christ, our High Priest. There are differences regard of sins, its how respond and attitudes of sins, we either get a way with it, which God will chastise His children whom He loves and the reward of God will be lessen or you set goal in ur heart ande eyes focus on Him to keep running with the help of the Holy Spirit and practice godliness. Bec many overlooked and didn't realize, we aren't in glorify body yet, we still live in the flesh and battle will go on till He called us Home.

EagleCherokee63

Amen!

XBGMER

I perfer chose the intelligant over heart. Heart always give you doubt or lust, If you see the beautiful of apple on the tree, your heart make you weakness for lust to eat it as LOOOK WHAT HAPPEND TO EVE became rebel and lust after apple what she ate and ignored adam's require law "no eat apple of tree". she heard her own heart captured by the lust of apple from tree.. well...

like in the eyes of men looking the beautiful lady or hottie chick walk around, because their heart already became weak, filled lust and thought of sex stuffs about beautiful lady / hottie chic men want to have to hump instead of their own wife or girlfriend.. they dont use their judgment.

HEART IS FULLY OF DOUBT, LUST AND HATRED. MIND IS INTELLIGENT, WISDOM, JUDGMENT SIGHT OF WORD ON AND ON.

I admire being the intelligace using through the judgment to prevent something happen to my life from misleads and mistakes.

Anyway I answer yes God was something very interested in intelligace/ knoweldge, I suggest you read scripture again and again till you find what God said already..

For example in during slavey time, white matsers didnt wanted to educate black slaves about God and Jesus.. Now today, whites are very clever to twist black mind by their words after black freed from slaves that Jesus was white man they ought to worship him and dont want to teach God was, and is repersent the person among them since Moses born.

EDUCATE THAT IS KNOWLEDGE/ INTELLIGENT.

EDUCATE IS MOST IMPORTANT TO ME AND TO MY GENERNATIONS!

__________________

hottiedeafboi

Well make this clear, the eyes feed the mind, while in the mind you make a choice either do it or refuse it, that decision set in the heart to act upon. L T D, Lust in the eyes (which the mind tells you), then decide to Touch? Lead Death. Like Kind David with Bathsheba, he stares the naked woman, that feed his mind, but he has concious and heart convict him by indwelling his thoughts and he chose sin and that lead him life destruction and his unconfessed sin and covered up his sins and manipulate his sins lead God to send Nathan to David what God sees. Does that mean David isn't intelleligence? He is a very brilliant and love God with all his heart, but what he saw by allowing in his thoughts destroyed him. Some time we can say what he did is not the smart things to do. You may be intellilgence about the Bible, but not live by it, its still short circuit.