Over yonder at the premier audio apologetics, debate, contra-atheism and bit of everything blog, Apologetics 315, an interview with Anthony Horvath has been posted.
He is the director of Athanatos - Academy of Apologetics which I mentioned previously.
The only thing that has changed is that my “Studies in Atheism” class has been rescheduled to begin on November 16, 2009 AD and my “Jesus according to…” class beginning November 30, 2009 AD.
You can hear the audio here and see Apo315’s post post here.
Continue reading Athanatos On the Air...
Continue reading Athanatos On the Air...
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?
This summary of scriptures relevant to the biblical statements as to which member of the Trinity is omnipotent will be followed by the actual quotations:
Matthew 19:26 & Mark 10:27 “But Jesus looked at them and said to them, ‘With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’”
Mark 4:39-40 “He [Jesus] got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, ‘Quiet! Be still!’ Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.”
Mark 11:13-14, 20-21 “Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, ‘May no one ever eat fruit from you again.’ And his disciples heard him say it. In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!’”
John 1:3-5 “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.”
John 2:19-21 “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.’ The Jews replied, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?’ But the temple he had spoken of was his body.”
John 11:25 “Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.’”
Romans 15:19 “In mighty sings and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.”
Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.”
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Matthew 19:26 & Mark 10:27; Mark 4:39-40; Mark 11:13-14 & 20-21; John 1:3-5, 2:19-21, 11:25; Romans 15:19; Hebrews 1:3
Matthew 19:26 & Mark 10:27 “But Jesus looked at them and said to them, ‘With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’”
Mark 4:39-40 “He [Jesus] got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, ‘Quiet! Be still!’ Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.”
Mark 11:13-14, 20-21 “Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, ‘May no one ever eat fruit from you again.’ And his disciples heard him say it. In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!’”
John 1:3-5 “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.”
John 2:19-21 “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.’ The Jews replied, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?’ But the temple he had spoken of was his body.”
John 11:25 “Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.’”
Romans 15:19 “In mighty sings and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.”
Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.”
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Monday, November 09, 2009
“Darwin Was Wrong” - Upcoming Webcasted Conference
This weekend, November 13-14, 2009 AD, a conference will take place at Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa (Santa Ana, California, USA) admission is free.
Entitled “Darwin Was Wrong,” the conference will be webcast at this link.
Details are found at this link.
Continue reading “Darwin Was Wrong” - Upcoming Webcasted Conference...
Continue reading “Darwin Was Wrong” - Upcoming Webcasted Conference...
Entitled “Darwin Was Wrong,” the conference will be webcast at this link.
Details are found at this link.
Continue reading “Darwin Was Wrong” - Upcoming Webcasted Conference...
Continue reading “Darwin Was Wrong” - Upcoming Webcasted Conference...
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 4 of 4
We now conclude considering that Christians are not attempting to get Jews to forsake Judaism and convert to another religion. Rather, Christianity is the New Covenant phase of Judaism. Therefore it is Gentiles who are converting to Judaism in order to become Christians. Judaism phase two, if you will, is Judaism according to the New Covenant according to the Messiah’s Torah.
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Back to the freedom and tolerance which the Jewish doctrine of salvation seems to afford those outside its own fold: on a surface level we are indeed told by Judaism that it does not claim salvation exclusively to those within its religion. However, Judaism does not, in reality, hold to such an open door salvation doctrine. Judaism claims that, as discussed above, salvation is gained through moral and ethical living. Judaism defines the morals and ethics that merit salvation according to its own scriptures. When it comes to the salvation of Gentiles Judaism believes that they may be saved not according to a Gentiles definition of morals and ethics but rather, by keeping what is known as the Seven Noahide Laws which God commanded Noah after the flood. These laws are:
As we have been discussing; Judaism teaches that it does not require conversion to its religion in order to gain salvation. However, it does require the keeping of laws that are contained within its own scriptures. Therefore, we see that their position regarding salvation is not as all embracing as it appears on the surface.
The common Jewish concept of salvation is defined as moral and ethical living and that the Noahchide Laws define these morals and ethics. One of these laws states that one must not engage in idolatry. Jewish opinion generally states that the doctrine of the Trinity equals idolatry, therefore it follows that no Christian will have a place in the world to come. And what of the Hindus, Buddhists, etc.?
Also, the question arises again: how is one to find forgiveness when one breaks these laws? Apparently, one would again have to resort to Jewish scripture. Thus, Judaism might not require conversion to its religion but it does require obedience to its own scriptures and rituals, what the difference is between “converting to” and “living according to” its beliefs seems to be semantic.
Below is a rather lengthy quote with which we conclude and which we included here because it shows how one law leads to another in legalistic style. The organization quoted below explains that the 7 Noachide Laws are really 66 commandments and these are apparently a mere framework for further accretions.
Some of these are described in the quote and some more are said to be constantly concocted. They state that additional commandments are technically not required but that it seemed important to see the snow ball effect of 7 to 66 to the innumerable.
Moreover, the same organization actually puts forth the idea of 66 Noahide commandments, as per Dr. Aaron Lichtenstein, which are based on Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (aka Maimonides or the Rambam) as well as a concept of 30 Noahide commandments based on Rav Shmuel ben Hophni Gaon.
The title of the article is “The Law Is Only a Minimum”:
Thus, not only are Gentiles being placed under increasingly weighty laws but these include anti-Christian sentiments.
[1] Jews & Hasidic Gentiles - United to Save America, “The Law Is Only a Minimum,” [Copyright 1998 by Bryan J. Ellison]
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 4 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 4 of 4...
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Back to the freedom and tolerance which the Jewish doctrine of salvation seems to afford those outside its own fold: on a surface level we are indeed told by Judaism that it does not claim salvation exclusively to those within its religion. However, Judaism does not, in reality, hold to such an open door salvation doctrine. Judaism claims that, as discussed above, salvation is gained through moral and ethical living. Judaism defines the morals and ethics that merit salvation according to its own scriptures. When it comes to the salvation of Gentiles Judaism believes that they may be saved not according to a Gentiles definition of morals and ethics but rather, by keeping what is known as the Seven Noahide Laws which God commanded Noah after the flood. These laws are:
1-To believe in the one God.
2-Not to blaspheme.
3-Not to kill.
4-Not to steal.
5-Not to be sexually immoral.
6-To set up courts of law.
7-Not to eat the flesh of an animal that was cut from it while it was still alive.
As we have been discussing; Judaism teaches that it does not require conversion to its religion in order to gain salvation. However, it does require the keeping of laws that are contained within its own scriptures. Therefore, we see that their position regarding salvation is not as all embracing as it appears on the surface.
The common Jewish concept of salvation is defined as moral and ethical living and that the Noahchide Laws define these morals and ethics. One of these laws states that one must not engage in idolatry. Jewish opinion generally states that the doctrine of the Trinity equals idolatry, therefore it follows that no Christian will have a place in the world to come. And what of the Hindus, Buddhists, etc.?
Also, the question arises again: how is one to find forgiveness when one breaks these laws? Apparently, one would again have to resort to Jewish scripture. Thus, Judaism might not require conversion to its religion but it does require obedience to its own scriptures and rituals, what the difference is between “converting to” and “living according to” its beliefs seems to be semantic.
Below is a rather lengthy quote with which we conclude and which we included here because it shows how one law leads to another in legalistic style. The organization quoted below explains that the 7 Noachide Laws are really 66 commandments and these are apparently a mere framework for further accretions.
Some of these are described in the quote and some more are said to be constantly concocted. They state that additional commandments are technically not required but that it seemed important to see the snow ball effect of 7 to 66 to the innumerable.
Moreover, the same organization actually puts forth the idea of 66 Noahide commandments, as per Dr. Aaron Lichtenstein, which are based on Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (aka Maimonides or the Rambam) as well as a concept of 30 Noahide commandments based on Rav Shmuel ben Hophni Gaon.
The title of the article is “The Law Is Only a Minimum”:
“The Law contains two parallel (but separate) paths for the world: 613 commandments for the Jews, and 66 commandments (contained in the 7 Noachide Laws) for gentiles. Once a Noachide is committed to keeping the 66 mitzvos, he may (and really should) take on the responsibility for additional mitzvos…
But many or most of the 613 mitzvos can be observed by Noachides for spiritual benefit. Indeed, some of these additional commandments are important (though technically not required) for gentiles to observe, while other commandments would also be a good idea…a number of orthodox Jewish activists and rabbis to begin organizing Noachide activities and to investigate the Torah rules for how Noachides carry out additional mitzvos [commandments].
The following list is therefore only a short summary, not a complete explanation, of additional mitzvos that should be adopted as quickly as possible by Noachides everywhere:
1. Noachides should pray, at least once every day. There are specific rules how prayer should be done, rules that are routinely violated (out of sheer ignorance) by Christians. There is a proper way to pray, and a wrong way.
2. Noachides should observe a variety of Torah rules for modesty in dress and behavior, especially between men and women. There are both similarities and differences in how these rules apply to men and women.
3. Noachides may not observe any religious holidays outside the rabbinical traditions of Torah -- most especially including such Christian holidays as X-mas, Easter, Halloween, All Saint's Day, Good Friday, Ash Wednesday, and probably even the "new year" (January 1st). Alien religious holidays are forbidden even under the minimum of the Noachide code; these are violations of the commandment against idolatry.
Instead, Noachides should commemorate at least the following holidays: Rosh Hashanah, Sukkos, the 19th of Kislev (the chasidic "new year"), Chanukah, Purim, Shavuos -- and each person's birthday on the Hebrew calendar. However, Noachide participation in these holidays is different in various ways from the manner of Jewish observance. Each holiday must be observed according to precise rules.
4. Noachides, generally speaking, should not limit the number of children they have. Moreover, a proper Torah education for their children is absolutely essential. Ultimately, such a Torah-learning program will be similar to the programs for Jewish children, but with many important differences. Right now, a supplemental daily home-schooling Torah program is being developed and used to teach Noachide children. All parents must rapidly get involved, teaching their children at least one hour per day (after school, for example) according to this program. As the number of participating families grows, it will soon be possible to organize full-time Noachide chedarim (day schools for grade-school children) in many communities.
This approach to education, based on the three-thousand-year-old Jewish yeshiva system, drastically minimizes secular studies (math, science, history, English, social studies, computers & other technical studies) in favor of total immersion in Torah, the Word of G-d. This includes written Torah, oral Torah, halacha (religious law), Hebrew language, etc.; this philosophy of education is fundamentally opposite the one used in public and private schools and in standard home-schooling programs.
5. Noachides should give tzedaka (charity) for genuinely poor people, interest-free loans to others who are not as poor, and support for Torah education. We can easily identify numerous people who need genuine charitable assistance of one type or another: The elderly, unwed mothers & pregnant teens (who might otherwise have abortions), inner-city children, etc.
The assistance is not just through money; in many cases, people need organized programs and activities to help them get involved in positive community affairs, rather than becoming isolated and lonely.
Again, there are a number of exact rules as to how to give such money, time, etc.
It would also be good to give contributions to the Israeli settlers in the West Bank, whose communities are now becoming endangered by the growing PLO occupation forces and terrorist actions. These brave families and yeshivos need much support from Americans.
6. The Noachide commandment of "justice" primarily means teaching one's neighbors, friends, associates, etc., the details of the Noachide code, and that G-d sees and hears everything, rewarding every good deed and punishing every sin. This means outreach.
Noachides must turn Christians away from their idolatry and their disregard of G-d's Law, and must bring all gentiles to a full acceptance of G-d's Law, including the oral Torah and the complete authority of the orthodox rabbis. This will quickly revolutionize our society, restoring morality, respect for authority, and the fear of G-d throughout the land. Similar efforts, of course, must also be extended to foreign countries.
Certain materials, including fliers and books, are already available for this outreach, and audiotape lectures are being developed.
7. We learn from the prophet Isaiah that Noachides will play a very important role in bringing non-observant Jews back to their 613 commandments. As part of the outreach effort to other gentiles, Noachides must further direct their energies toward teaching Jews the important of Jewish law.
Noachides must also aggressively combat the schemes of Christian missionaries, who are stealing Jewish — and gentile — souls away from eternal life under G-d's Law to the evil of Christian idolatry.
8. To prepare the way for establishing proper Noachide courts of law, Noachides must make a special effort — beyond all other Torah studies — to learn, in detail, the exact requirements of every part of the Noachide code. This is a difficult, long-term task, because the details of the Noachide laws apply to every possible situation in life.
But a thorough learning of the Noachide halachos will open the door for selecting G-d-fearing Noachide judges for the future courts. This project can begin immediately with the study of the existing books on the Noachide laws, and will later be followed up with rabbinically-supervised yeshiva programs that still need to be organized.
9. A number of other programs must be organized by Noachide communities, including making kosher meat available as a substitute for the improper meat in the stores (this is particularly needed in parts of the country remote from Jewish communities); helping arrange proper Noachide marriages, and creating family support networks for childbirth, death, etc.; financially assisting the building and expansion of orthodox Jewish synagogues to have additional rooms for Noachide meetings; teaching other gentiles how to attain financial discipline and pay off outstanding debts (especially credit card debts); and so forth.
All the above recommendations will accelerate the revelation of Moshiach (the Messiah), so there is no time to waste. Let's get to work!”[1] [emphasis mine]
Thus, not only are Gentiles being placed under increasingly weighty laws but these include anti-Christian sentiments.
[1] Jews & Hasidic Gentiles - United to Save America, “The Law Is Only a Minimum,” [Copyright 1998 by Bryan J. Ellison]
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 4 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 4 of 4...
Friday, November 06, 2009
Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?
This summary of scriptures relevant to the biblical statements that each person of the Trinity is omnipotent will be followed by the actual quotations:
1st Kings 8:27 ““But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You. How much less this temple which I have built!”
Jeremiah 23:24 “‘Can anyone hide himself in secret places, so I shall not see him?’ says the LORD; ‘Do I not fill heaven and earth?’ says the LORD.”
Psalm 139:7-10 “Where can I go from your Spirit? Or where can I flee from your presence? If I ascend into heaven, you are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, you are there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me.”
Matthew 18:20 “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there in the midst of them.”
Matthew 28:20 “‘observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ Amen.”
John 1:47-48 “When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, ‘Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.’ ‘How do you know me?’ Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, ‘I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.’”
John 3:13 “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
1st Kings 8:27; Jeremiah 23:24; Psalm 139:7-10; Matthew 18:20, 28:20; John 1:47-48, 3:13
1st Kings 8:27 ““But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You. How much less this temple which I have built!”
Jeremiah 23:24 “‘Can anyone hide himself in secret places, so I shall not see him?’ says the LORD; ‘Do I not fill heaven and earth?’ says the LORD.”
Psalm 139:7-10 “Where can I go from your Spirit? Or where can I flee from your presence? If I ascend into heaven, you are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, you are there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me.”
Matthew 18:20 “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there in the midst of them.”
Matthew 28:20 “‘observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ Amen.”
John 1:47-48 “When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, ‘Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.’ ‘How do you know me?’ Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, ‘I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.’”
John 3:13 “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Continue reading Trinity : Which Member of the Trinity is Omnipotent?...
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 3 of 4
We now continue considering that Christians are not attempting to get Jews to forsake Judaism and convert to another religion. Rather, Christianity is the New Covenant phase of Judaism. Therefore it is Gentiles who are converting to Judaism in order to become Christians. Judaism phase two, if you will, is Judaism according to the New Covenant according to the Messiah’s Torah.
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
No matter what ethics, ideals, standards, philosophy, or religion we follow we will at some point act against that which we believe, and what is to happen when we do this immoral unethical behavior, or politically incorrect but honestly speaking, what should our payment be for our evil doing; for sin? God is so Holy and righteous that He cannot look upon sin (see Habakkuk 1:13). The thing that a “saved” person has going for them is the assurance of forgiveness.
Christians honestly believe that they are going to heaven; not due to their own goodness but through the salvation that God offers through the sacrifice of the Messiah Jesus. They honestly believe that they are going to heaven and they are not content to go there alone. This is also why Christians proselytize.
Forgiveness is no excuse for sin. Being saved does not mean since one is forgiven they may therefore live life as immoral and unethically as one pleases. This is a terrible cheapening of God’s grace. Rabbi Saul of Tarsus aka the Apostle Paul wrote,
One core and unchanging traditional Jewish belief is that of monotheism. How can a Jew believe to the death, that there is only one God while at the same time allowing or urging others to worship gods that the monotheistic God of the Bible refers to as abominable false gods? When there is only one there is no possible choice between two or more. Another core and unchanging traditional Jewish belief is that this one God gave us His law by which we may know morals / ethics and forgiveness / salvation. How then can a Jew believe this to the death, while at the same time allowing or urging others to live their own way, according to a false god’s laws?
The generalized Jewish answer is that the one true God of their Scripture has given them a specific law which no Gentile—non-Jew—is bound to follow. Yet, over and over again in the Jewish Scripture God warns His people not to follow the practices of the Gentiles. However, this could be answered by stating that it was precisely because God had given His people a particular Law (the Torah). But it goes further than this because God sometimes sent His people to overthrow nations because their practices (ethical and religious) went against God’s will.
It was because the wickedness of the Gentiles that God was driving them out from before the Jews. God also constantly did things, performed miracles for instance, in order to get the Gentile’s attentions. God condemned those cultures and religions to which we might answer that it was because they were not following God’s ethos.
The Jewish people received certain particular laws for their place and time (a theocratic Israeli nation) yet there is also an overreaching ethos involved. Thus, we are back to asking how Gentiles were supposed to know proper ethical behavior and we are back at answering that the Jews were to teach them by both deed and word.
Was it moral, ethical, right, good and the obedient thing to do for those nations in the days of old to entrust their children to the fiery embrace of Moloch; sacrificing their live children by fire to a false god? Likewise, with idolatry, incest, etc. God did tell the Israelites that the other nations are good people and they can do as they wish and still please God? Not at all. If all could reach God in their own way God could have just said, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” which is the conclusion reached by Alister Crowley, one of the most infamous black magician of all time.
Another generalized Jewish position is to state that it is not necessary to convert to Judaism in order to be “saved.” This is often done in order to contrast the Christian concept that expresses that there is no salvation without Jesus Christ.
Here is an example from The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia,
An important insert in this discussion is the need to define terms. Many times non-Christians mis-define the Christian concept to be, “There is no salvation outside the church.” It is incorrect to assume this to mean that there is no salvation outside of particular church organization. Although, it must be pointed out that sadly some aberrant “Christian” groups actually teach such false doctrines.
In order to properly understand this concept we need to properly define the word “church.” The church is not a building or a hierarchical organization. The word church means “called out,” meaning that people are the church, people who have been called out, or away from, the secular world and into the kingdom of God. The Christian concept of “no salvation outside the church,” is a statement about where a person places their eternal destiny not which particular organization they join.
[1] H. Revel, Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (N.Y., 1939-43), Vol. VIII, pp.227-228
[2] Alfred J. Kolatch, The Second Jewish Book of Why (Jonathan David Publishing, Inc. New York, 1985), from footnote 2:11, p. 342
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 3 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 3 of 4...
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
No matter what ethics, ideals, standards, philosophy, or religion we follow we will at some point act against that which we believe, and what is to happen when we do this immoral unethical behavior, or politically incorrect but honestly speaking, what should our payment be for our evil doing; for sin? God is so Holy and righteous that He cannot look upon sin (see Habakkuk 1:13). The thing that a “saved” person has going for them is the assurance of forgiveness.
Christians honestly believe that they are going to heaven; not due to their own goodness but through the salvation that God offers through the sacrifice of the Messiah Jesus. They honestly believe that they are going to heaven and they are not content to go there alone. This is also why Christians proselytize.
Forgiveness is no excuse for sin. Being saved does not mean since one is forgiven they may therefore live life as immoral and unethically as one pleases. This is a terrible cheapening of God’s grace. Rabbi Saul of Tarsus aka the Apostle Paul wrote,
“brothers, you were called to be free. Only do not let that freedom become an excuse for allowing you old nature to have its way. Instead, serve one another in love” (Galatians 5:13).
One core and unchanging traditional Jewish belief is that of monotheism. How can a Jew believe to the death, that there is only one God while at the same time allowing or urging others to worship gods that the monotheistic God of the Bible refers to as abominable false gods? When there is only one there is no possible choice between two or more. Another core and unchanging traditional Jewish belief is that this one God gave us His law by which we may know morals / ethics and forgiveness / salvation. How then can a Jew believe this to the death, while at the same time allowing or urging others to live their own way, according to a false god’s laws?
The generalized Jewish answer is that the one true God of their Scripture has given them a specific law which no Gentile—non-Jew—is bound to follow. Yet, over and over again in the Jewish Scripture God warns His people not to follow the practices of the Gentiles. However, this could be answered by stating that it was precisely because God had given His people a particular Law (the Torah). But it goes further than this because God sometimes sent His people to overthrow nations because their practices (ethical and religious) went against God’s will.
It was because the wickedness of the Gentiles that God was driving them out from before the Jews. God also constantly did things, performed miracles for instance, in order to get the Gentile’s attentions. God condemned those cultures and religions to which we might answer that it was because they were not following God’s ethos.
The Jewish people received certain particular laws for their place and time (a theocratic Israeli nation) yet there is also an overreaching ethos involved. Thus, we are back to asking how Gentiles were supposed to know proper ethical behavior and we are back at answering that the Jews were to teach them by both deed and word.
Was it moral, ethical, right, good and the obedient thing to do for those nations in the days of old to entrust their children to the fiery embrace of Moloch; sacrificing their live children by fire to a false god? Likewise, with idolatry, incest, etc. God did tell the Israelites that the other nations are good people and they can do as they wish and still please God? Not at all. If all could reach God in their own way God could have just said, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” which is the conclusion reached by Alister Crowley, one of the most infamous black magician of all time.
Another generalized Jewish position is to state that it is not necessary to convert to Judaism in order to be “saved.” This is often done in order to contrast the Christian concept that expresses that there is no salvation without Jesus Christ.
Here is an example from The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia,
“Unlike Christianity, Judaism does not deny salvation to those outside its fold. According to Jewish law, all non-Jews who observe the Noahide laws will participate in salvation and in the rewards of the world to come.”[1]
Also,
“In his talmudic commentary on Sanhedrin 63b and Bechorot 2b, Rabbenu Tam maintains that…Christians…are bound only by the Seven Noahide Laws.”[2]
An important insert in this discussion is the need to define terms. Many times non-Christians mis-define the Christian concept to be, “There is no salvation outside the church.” It is incorrect to assume this to mean that there is no salvation outside of particular church organization. Although, it must be pointed out that sadly some aberrant “Christian” groups actually teach such false doctrines.
In order to properly understand this concept we need to properly define the word “church.” The church is not a building or a hierarchical organization. The word church means “called out,” meaning that people are the church, people who have been called out, or away from, the secular world and into the kingdom of God. The Christian concept of “no salvation outside the church,” is a statement about where a person places their eternal destiny not which particular organization they join.
[1] H. Revel, Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (N.Y., 1939-43), Vol. VIII, pp.227-228
[2] Alfred J. Kolatch, The Second Jewish Book of Why (Jonathan David Publishing, Inc. New York, 1985), from footnote 2:11, p. 342
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 3 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 3 of 4...
Monday, November 02, 2009
Trinity : Is the Holy Spirit Identified as God?
This summary of scriptures relevant to the biblical statements that the Holy Spirit is God will be followed by the actual quotations:
Job 33:4 “The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”
Acts 5:3-4 “…‘Ananias, why has satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price for yourself?…You have not lied to men but to God’”
Acts 13:2-4 “As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away. So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus.”
Hebrews 3:7 “Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says: ‘Today if you will hear His voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, in the day of trial in the wilderness where you fathers tested me, tried me, and saw my works forty years.’”
1st Corinthians 6:11 “And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”
2nd Corinthians 3:17 “the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”
Note that Jesus is the Son of God and was conceived by the Holy Spirit therefore, the Holy Spirit is God.
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Holy Spirit Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Holy Spirit Identified as God?...
Job 33:4; Acts 5:3-4, 13:2-4; Hebrews 3:7; 1st Corinthians 6:11; 2nd Corinthians 3:17
Job 33:4 “The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”
Acts 5:3-4 “…‘Ananias, why has satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price for yourself?…You have not lied to men but to God’”
Acts 13:2-4 “As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away. So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus.”
Hebrews 3:7 “Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says: ‘Today if you will hear His voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, in the day of trial in the wilderness where you fathers tested me, tried me, and saw my works forty years.’”
1st Corinthians 6:11 “And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”
2nd Corinthians 3:17 “the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”
Note that Jesus is the Son of God and was conceived by the Holy Spirit therefore, the Holy Spirit is God.
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Holy Spirit Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Holy Spirit Identified as God?...
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy on Atheism and Christianity
Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy is just about to begin its new semester check them out at: Athanatos.
Following is the class topics…the course descriptions and other info is found here.
Some courses are free and the others cost less than most people spend on coffee any given week:
I will be teaching Studies in Atheism
I will also teach Jesus According to...
Other courses are as follows:
Joe Keysor, Hitler and Christianity:
I reviewed Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible here.
Josh Davis, Christ Promised in the Old Testament:
Anthony Horvath, Reliability of the New Testament Documents:
Anthony Horvath and Terry Hollifield, Study in Alleged Bible Contradictions:
Anthony Horvath, The Death of Christianity:
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 1
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 2
Terry Hollifield, Origins: A Survey:
Continue reading Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy on Atheism and Christianity...
Continue reading Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy on Atheism and Christianity...
Following is the class topics…the course descriptions and other info is found here.
Some courses are free and the others cost less than most people spend on coffee any given week:
I will be teaching Studies in Atheism
4 weeks. Begins Nov 4th.
Before there were the 'New Atheists' there were the old ones. This investigation into the atheism of Dawkins, Harris, etc, looks into the foundations of modern day atheism and its pervasive hostility to theism and Christianity. This course ends before Christmas. (Just in case the FFRF had any ideas...)
I will also teach Jesus According to...
3 Weeks. Begins Nov 30th.
How do different cultures, cults, and world religions view Jesus? How are these similar and different to the Christian view, which is rooted in the New Testament? Why does it matter?
Other courses are as follows:
Joe Keysor, Hitler and Christianity:
3 weeks. Begins Nov 23.
A free, three week course exploring the charge that Christianity is to blame for the Nazis and the Holocaust. This course is taught by Joe Keysor, the author of Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible. This book is strongly recommended if you are taking the course but not absolutely required.
I reviewed Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible here.
Josh Davis, Christ Promised in the Old Testament:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 16th. Strongly Suggested Materials: The Bible.
Could you demonstrate that Jesus was the Christ from the Old Testament alone as the apostles did? (Acts 17:11, 18:28, 1 Cor 15:3). This survey of major OT evidences for Jesus as the Christ will help you see how Christianity and Judaism were related why Jews found it compelling at the time. This is an introduction that will help in personal growth and evangelism efforts.
Anthony Horvath, Reliability of the New Testament Documents:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 2nd. Strongly Suggested Materials: The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable by F.F. Bruce.
This class surveys the development of the New Testament documents and the formation of the canon in a basic, introductory fashion.
Anthony Horvath and Terry Hollifield, Study in Alleged Bible Contradictions:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 30th. Strongly Suggested Materials: The Bible.
Principles for resolving alleged contradictions in the Bible are introduced and applied to a small set of famous 'contradictions.'
Anthony Horvath, The Death of Christianity:
3 weeks. Begins Nov 9th. FREE. Suggested Materials: Internet readings, guided tour.
Christianity is demonstrably on the decline in America. This course documents that decline, probes the causes, and suggests solutions. Based on the content found at http://www.deathofchristianity.com/, this course is centered heavily on discussion between the participants.
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 1
3 weeks. Begins Nov 2nd. Strongly Suggested (but not required) Materials: Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found.
Learn the Greek alphabet, how to sound out Greek words, how to identify nouns, verbs, definite articles, and how to use such information to use resources like a Bible interlinear or lexicon.
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 2
3 weeks. Begins Nov 30th. Strongly Suggested (but not required) Materials: Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found.
Building on Part 1, the student will learn more vocabulary as well as parts of speech such as the definite article, etc.
Terry Hollifield, Origins: A Survey:
4 Weeks. Begins Nov 2nd.
Is evolutionary theory true? What does the Bible say? What does the science say? Is there scientific evidence for a young earth creation? Or is it just something the Bible says? In this survey of the issues, the participant will explore the critical issues involved in the Creation-Evolution-Intelligent Design Debate so they can make their own, informed, decisions. This course lays important groundwork for future study.
Continue reading Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy on Atheism and Christianity...
Continue reading Athanatos Online Apologetics Academy on Atheism and Christianity...
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 2 of 4
We now continue considering that Christians are not attempting to get Jews to forsake Judaism and convert to another religion. Rather, Christianity is the New Covenant phase of Judaism. Therefore it is Gentiles who are converting to Judaism in order to become Christians. Judaism phase two, if you will, is Judaism according to the New Covenant according to the Messiah’s Torah.
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Let us consider some relevant biblical texts:
1st Chronicles 16:23-24, 31
Exodus 7:6, 14:4, 14:18
Exodus 34:10
Ezekiel 20:41
Malachi 1:11
Do All Roads Lead to God?
Lawrence J. Epstein, author of “Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism,” wrote the following:
To the question, “do Jews try to convert Christians”? Lawrence Epstein answers,
The above quotes, as odd as it may sound, were taken from one single chapter of one single book written by one single author and are found within a page or two from one another. All this to say that the author seems to be going in various directions at once.
We learn that people of all generations, all humans, are children of God. Next only those (Christians in this case) who act morally can find God through their own religion. Finally, only adherents of the monotheistic religions can reach God.
Also, note that children of God, finding God and reaching God is based on “morals” and “ethics” or, as some may state it, being a “good” person. However, morals and ethics are relative terms, it is the standards by which we judge that determines what morals and ethics are. When we judge our morals and ethics according to the standards of the world it is easy to label ourselves as moral and ethical,
Morality is concerned with principles of right or wrong conduct. Ethics is a body of moral principle or values. More specifically: morals describe the behaviors that are—what is—while ethics refers to the ethos; the overarching guide the prescription—what ought to be. Who is it that defines ethics? God does. In that case, has God communicated proper morals and ethics? Yes. How and where has He communicated these things to us? In the Bible specifically and in our hearts, our consciences, in general.
The idea behind becoming children of God, finding God, reaching God (salvation itself) based on morals and ethics is misguided. This is because we must ask how one is to know this morality and ethic which leads to salvation? Obviously, drawing Lawrence Epstein’s comments to their logical conclusion; one must be taught, learn and study the Jewish scripture.
I suppose that one might happen upon proper moral and ethical behaviors by accident but I, for one, could not live with such spiritual paranoia of having my salvation hanging on the balance of maybe having the right morals and ethics and maybe not. Moreover, if I did happen upon proper moral and ethical behaviors by chance, what then happens when I, due to being merely human, fail to constantly and perfectly live up to those saving morals and ethics? I would be lacking the proper scriptural manner by which to find forgiveness.
If a Jewish person truly believes that becoming children of God, finding God, reaching God (which is to say, finding salvation) is based on morals and ethics then they, by definition, would be acting in an immoral or unethical manner if they did not embark on a worldwide mission to proselytize. Or perhaps, at the very least, to embark on a worldwide mission to spread Jewish teaching as far and wide as possible.
Now we begin to understand why Christians proselytize. That every person on the face of the earth will know proper moral and ethical behavior, that they may know how to have a personal relationship with God and that they may know how to find forgiveness when they, being mere humans, fail.
[1] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), pp. 56-57
[2] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), p. 60
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 2 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 2 of 4...
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Let us consider some relevant biblical texts:
1st Chronicles 16:23-24, 31
“Sing to the LORD, all the earth; Proclaim the good news of His salvation from day to day. Declare His glory among the nations, His wonders among all peoples… Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be glad; And let them say among the nations, ‘The LORD reigns.’”
Exodus 7:6, 14:4, 14:18
“And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt and bring out the children of Israel from among them…I will gain honor over Pharaoh and over all his army, that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD…Then the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD”
Exodus 34:10
“And He said: "Behold, I make a covenant. Before all your people I will do marvels such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation; and all the people among whom you are shall see the work of the LORD. For it is an awesome thing that I will do with you”
Ezekiel 20:41
“I will accept you as a sweet aroma when I bring you out from the peoples and gather you out of the countries where you have been scattered; and I will be hallowed in you before the Gentiles”
Malachi 1:11
“‘For from the rising of the sun, even to its going down, My name shall be great among the Gentiles; In every place incense shall be offered to My name, And a pure offering; For My name shall be great among the nations,’ Says the LORD of hosts”
Do All Roads Lead to God?
Lawrence J. Epstein, author of “Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism,” wrote the following:
“…it is useful to repeat Judaism’s central belief that the people of all generations are children of God, and therefore equal before God. All people have God’s love, mercy, and help.
In particular, Judaism does not require that a person convert to Judaism in order to achieve salvation. The only requirement for that, as understood by Jews, is to be ethical…To Jews…all humans are children of God.”[1] [emphasis added]
To the question, “do Jews try to convert Christians”? Lawrence Epstein answers,
“No. Jews accept that believing Christians who act morally can find God through their own religion…It is not uncommon for a rabbi to try to convince a potential convert to examine his or her birth religion as a pathway to God…Jews believe that all adherents of the monotheistic religions can reach God.”[2] [emphasis added]
The above quotes, as odd as it may sound, were taken from one single chapter of one single book written by one single author and are found within a page or two from one another. All this to say that the author seems to be going in various directions at once.
We learn that people of all generations, all humans, are children of God. Next only those (Christians in this case) who act morally can find God through their own religion. Finally, only adherents of the monotheistic religions can reach God.
Also, note that children of God, finding God and reaching God is based on “morals” and “ethics” or, as some may state it, being a “good” person. However, morals and ethics are relative terms, it is the standards by which we judge that determines what morals and ethics are. When we judge our morals and ethics according to the standards of the world it is easy to label ourselves as moral and ethical,
“All a man’s ways are pure in his own view, but the LORD weighs the spirit” (Proverbs 16:2).
Morality is concerned with principles of right or wrong conduct. Ethics is a body of moral principle or values. More specifically: morals describe the behaviors that are—what is—while ethics refers to the ethos; the overarching guide the prescription—what ought to be. Who is it that defines ethics? God does. In that case, has God communicated proper morals and ethics? Yes. How and where has He communicated these things to us? In the Bible specifically and in our hearts, our consciences, in general.
The idea behind becoming children of God, finding God, reaching God (salvation itself) based on morals and ethics is misguided. This is because we must ask how one is to know this morality and ethic which leads to salvation? Obviously, drawing Lawrence Epstein’s comments to their logical conclusion; one must be taught, learn and study the Jewish scripture.
I suppose that one might happen upon proper moral and ethical behaviors by accident but I, for one, could not live with such spiritual paranoia of having my salvation hanging on the balance of maybe having the right morals and ethics and maybe not. Moreover, if I did happen upon proper moral and ethical behaviors by chance, what then happens when I, due to being merely human, fail to constantly and perfectly live up to those saving morals and ethics? I would be lacking the proper scriptural manner by which to find forgiveness.
If a Jewish person truly believes that becoming children of God, finding God, reaching God (which is to say, finding salvation) is based on morals and ethics then they, by definition, would be acting in an immoral or unethical manner if they did not embark on a worldwide mission to proselytize. Or perhaps, at the very least, to embark on a worldwide mission to spread Jewish teaching as far and wide as possible.
Now we begin to understand why Christians proselytize. That every person on the face of the earth will know proper moral and ethical behavior, that they may know how to have a personal relationship with God and that they may know how to find forgiveness when they, being mere humans, fail.
[1] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), pp. 56-57
[2] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), p. 60
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 2 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 2 of 4...
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?
This summary of scriptures relevant to the biblical statements that Jesus is God will be followed by the actual quotations:
Isaiah 7:14 quoted in Matthew 1:23 “‘The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel’—which means, ‘God with us’”
Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Matthew 9:2-3 “Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.’ At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, ‘This fellow is blaspheming!’”
Matthew 9:6 & Mark 2:10 & Luke 5:24 “But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins....’ Then he said to the paralytic, ‘Get up, take your mat and go home.’”
Matthew 28:18 “And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.’”
Mark 2:7 & Luke 5:21 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
Mark 14:61-64 “the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, ‘Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?’ But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, ‘Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?’ Jesus said, ‘I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’ Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, ‘What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?’ And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death.”
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”
John 1:4 “In him [Jesus] was life, and that life was the light of men.”
John 1:18 “No one has ever seen God, but God the only(1) Son(2) who is at the Fathers side, has made Him known.”
NIV Footnote: (1) “or: but God the only begotten.” (2) “some manuscripts: but the only Son (or: but the only begotten Son).”
John 1:14-15 “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, ‘This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
John 1:30 “This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
John 2:24-25 “But Jesus did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men, and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man.”
John 3:31 “The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.”
John 5:18 “For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”
John 5:21-22 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.”
John 5:26-29 “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.
Sovereign. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. ‘Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.’”
It may be of interest to note a statement from the Encyclopedia Judaica 15:160:
John 8:58-59 “Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’ Then they took up stones to throw at Him…”
John 10:32-33 “Jesus answered them, ‘Many good works I have shown you from my Father. For which of those works do you stone me?’ The Jews answered Him, saying, ‘For a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself God.’”
John 17:5 “And now, O Father, glorify me together with yourself, with the glory which I had with you before the world was.”
John 20:28-29 “Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’”
Romans 9:5 “Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen [NIV]” “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [KJV]” “whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [1901 ASV]” “whose are the fathers; and of whom, as according to flesh, is the Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [1890 Darby Bible]”
1st Timothy 2:3 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our savior.”
Philippians 2:6 “Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.”
Colossians 1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”
Colossians 1:19 “Fr it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell.”
Colossians 2:9 “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”
Titus 2:13 “we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ”
Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.”
Hebrews 1:5 & 8 “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’?…about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom’”
1st John 1:1 “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.”
1st John 5:20 “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.”
Revelation 1:8 “‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end,’ says the Lord, ‘who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.’”
Revelation 21:6 “He said to me: ‘It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life.’”
For the sake of historical context it may be of interest to note that in 112 AD, while he was Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, Pliny the Younger (Plinius Secundus) wrote to Emperor Tarjan in Epistles 10.96,
Also, in 170 AD Lucian of Samosata wrote the following in, The Death of Peregrine 11-13,
Continue reading Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?...
Isaiah 7:14 quoted in Matthew 1:23; Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 9:2-3, 6, 28:18; Mark 2:7, 10, 14:61-64; Luke 5:21, 24; John 1:1, 4, 14-15, 18, 30, 2:24-25, 3:31, 5:18, 21-22, 26-29, 8:58-59, 10:32-33, 17:5, 20:28-29; Romans 9:5; 1st Timothy 2:3; Philippians 2:6; Colossians 1:15, 19, 2:9; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:3, 5, 8; 1st John 1:1, 5:20; Revelation 1:8, 1:6
Isaiah 7:14 quoted in Matthew 1:23 “‘The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel’—which means, ‘God with us’”
Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Matthew 9:2-3 “Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.’ At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, ‘This fellow is blaspheming!’”
Matthew 9:6 & Mark 2:10 & Luke 5:24 “But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins....’ Then he said to the paralytic, ‘Get up, take your mat and go home.’”
Matthew 28:18 “And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.’”
Mark 2:7 & Luke 5:21 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
Mark 14:61-64 “the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, ‘Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?’ But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, ‘Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?’ Jesus said, ‘I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’ Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, ‘What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?’ And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death.”
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”
John 1:4 “In him [Jesus] was life, and that life was the light of men.”
John 1:18 “No one has ever seen God, but God the only(1) Son(2) who is at the Fathers side, has made Him known.”
NIV Footnote: (1) “or: but God the only begotten.” (2) “some manuscripts: but the only Son (or: but the only begotten Son).”
John 1:14-15 “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, ‘This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
John 1:30 “This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
John 2:24-25 “But Jesus did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men, and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man.”
John 3:31 “The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.”
John 5:18 “For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”
John 5:21-22 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.”
John 5:26-29 “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.
Sovereign. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. ‘Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.’”
It may be of interest to note a statement from the Encyclopedia Judaica 15:160:
The son of man has a superhuman, heavenly sublimity. He is the cosmic judge at the end of time; seated upon the throne of God, he will judge the whole human race with the aid of the heavenly hosts, consigning the just to blessedness and sinner to the pit of hell; and he will execute the sentence he passes. Frequently he is identified with the Messiah.
John 8:58-59 “Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’ Then they took up stones to throw at Him…”
John 10:32-33 “Jesus answered them, ‘Many good works I have shown you from my Father. For which of those works do you stone me?’ The Jews answered Him, saying, ‘For a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself God.’”
John 17:5 “And now, O Father, glorify me together with yourself, with the glory which I had with you before the world was.”
John 20:28-29 “Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’”
Romans 9:5 “Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen [NIV]” “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [KJV]” “whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [1901 ASV]” “whose are the fathers; and of whom, as according to flesh, is the Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen [1890 Darby Bible]”
1st Timothy 2:3 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our savior.”
Philippians 2:6 “Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.”
Colossians 1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”
Colossians 1:19 “Fr it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell.”
Colossians 2:9 “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”
Titus 2:13 “we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ”
Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.”
Hebrews 1:5 & 8 “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’?…about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom’”
1st John 1:1 “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.”
1st John 5:20 “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.”
Revelation 1:8 “‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end,’ says the Lord, ‘who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.’”
Revelation 21:6 “He said to me: ‘It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life.’”
For the sake of historical context it may be of interest to note that in 112 AD, while he was Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, Pliny the Younger (Plinius Secundus) wrote to Emperor Tarjan in Epistles 10.96,
the method I observe towards those who have been denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogate them whether they were in fact Christians; if they confess it, I repeat the question twice, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed…they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a God.
Also, in 170 AD Lucian of Samosata wrote the following in, The Death of Peregrine 11-13,
The Christians, you know, worship a man…deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage.
Continue reading Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?...
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 1 of 4
Christians are not attempting to get Jews to forsake Judaism and convert to another religion. Rather, Christianity is the New Covenant phase of Judaism. Therefore it is Gentiles who are converting to Judaism in order to become Christians. Judaism phase two, if you will, is Judaism according to the New Covenant according to the Messiah’s Torah (see the essay Will the Messiah Institute New Commandments?).
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
According to the New Covenant Christians are commanded to preach the gospel and make “disciples” (notice that they are not commanded to make “converts”). How odd it is to say to Christians that they should not do so? Who would ever dream of telling a Jew that they should not keep kosher? Or tell a Muslim that they should not make a pilgrimage to Mecca? Or tell a Buddhist not to meditate?
Yet, when it comes to Christians obeying the commandments that were given to them many feel free to suppress them or call them intolerant. Of course, it is not difficult to understand why this is. After all, keeping kosher, making a pilgrimage and meditating do not necessarily interfere with the lives of others. Yet, regardless of this; the fact is that whether Christian proselytizers call your lifestyle into question, make you feel guilty about the way you are living or just annoy you, they are none the less being faithful to their calling.
Some Jews say that Jewish-Christians should not proselytize because Jews do not proselytize. This appears to be a double edged sword since on the one hand Jews seem to be saying, “Since you are Jewish you should act Jewish and not proselytize.” Yet, on the other hand they want to say, “You are no longer Jewish, you are Christian.” What then is the problem with them proselytizing?
The real question is, “Why would anyone not proselytize?” The point being that if a person honestly believe that their worldview, philosophy, ideal, theology or religion is really the way to go, that it is enriching their lives and getting them right with God, why then would they not tell others about it? Can such a person truly be thought of as “good”? How could they find such a treasure, be so satisfied with it, and go on to keep it a secret?
In this context; Alexander Cruden defined “Proselyte” thusly:
The Encyclopedia Judaica makes the following observation (13:1182-1183):
Rabbi Solomon Luria (1510-1573) wrote,
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin,
John Bowker,
The Talmud-Pesachim 87b states
[i] Alexander Cruden, A. M., Cruden’s Complete Concordance (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1975), p. 518
[ii] Rabbi Solomon Luria (1510-1573), commentary to Talmud-Yevamot 49a
[iii] Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Wisdom (William Morrow and Co., inc. New York, 1994), pp. 379-380
[iv] John Bowker, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature, An Introduction to Jewish Interpretations of Scripture (London: Cambridge University Press, 1969), p. 210
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 1 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 1 of 4...
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
According to the New Covenant Christians are commanded to preach the gospel and make “disciples” (notice that they are not commanded to make “converts”). How odd it is to say to Christians that they should not do so? Who would ever dream of telling a Jew that they should not keep kosher? Or tell a Muslim that they should not make a pilgrimage to Mecca? Or tell a Buddhist not to meditate?
Yet, when it comes to Christians obeying the commandments that were given to them many feel free to suppress them or call them intolerant. Of course, it is not difficult to understand why this is. After all, keeping kosher, making a pilgrimage and meditating do not necessarily interfere with the lives of others. Yet, regardless of this; the fact is that whether Christian proselytizers call your lifestyle into question, make you feel guilty about the way you are living or just annoy you, they are none the less being faithful to their calling.
Some Jews say that Jewish-Christians should not proselytize because Jews do not proselytize. This appears to be a double edged sword since on the one hand Jews seem to be saying, “Since you are Jewish you should act Jewish and not proselytize.” Yet, on the other hand they want to say, “You are no longer Jewish, you are Christian.” What then is the problem with them proselytizing?
The real question is, “Why would anyone not proselytize?” The point being that if a person honestly believe that their worldview, philosophy, ideal, theology or religion is really the way to go, that it is enriching their lives and getting them right with God, why then would they not tell others about it? Can such a person truly be thought of as “good”? How could they find such a treasure, be so satisfied with it, and go on to keep it a secret?
In this context; Alexander Cruden defined “Proselyte” thusly:
“This term comes from the Greek word, Proselytos, which signifies a stranger, one that comes from abroad, or from another place. The Hebrew word Ger or Necher, has the same signification. It means a convert to Judaism from among the Gentiles.
The Talmud distinguishes between Proselytes of the Gate, and Proselytes of Righteousness. The first are those who dwelt in the land of Israel and were not bound by circumcision. The tern is derived from the expression the stranger that is within thy gates, Ex 20:10, etc.”[i]
The Encyclopedia Judaica makes the following observation (13:1182-1183):
“There is ample evidence of a widespread conversion to Judaism during the period of the Second Temple, especially the latter part of the period…Unique, as the only case of forced conversion in Judaism, was the mass conversion of the Edomites by John Hyrcanus. In addition to these outstanding figures, however, it is obvious that proselytism was widespread among the ordinary people…
The near pride which the rabbis took in the claim that some of their greatest figures were descended from proselytes…points to an openhanded policy toward their acceptance.”
Rabbi Solomon Luria (1510-1573) wrote,
“Under the present conditions, when we live in a country that is not ours, like slaves under the rod of a master, if a Jew encourages someone to convert to Judaism he becomes a rebel against the government, subject to the death penalty….
Therefore, I caution anyone against being a party to such activity when the law of the state forbids it, for he thereby forfeits his life.”[ii]
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin,
“Why has the Jewish reluctance to seek converts persisted in America’s far more tolerant climate? One reason may well be inertia. A millennium-long attitude is not easily broken. A second, perhaps more important reason is that many, if not most, American Jews are more secular and ethnic than religious; they hardly are prone to encourage conversion to a religion which they themselves seldom practice.”[iii]
John Bowker,
“Abraham’s reception of the angels became the basis for one of his most famous characteristics, his hospitality: ‘By opening a generous door to travelers you have opened to proselytes’ [Ber. R. xlviii. 8].”[iv]
The Talmud-Pesachim 87b states
“Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat taught: The Holy One, Blessed be He, exiled Israel among the nations only for the purpose of gaining converts.”
[i] Alexander Cruden, A. M., Cruden’s Complete Concordance (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1975), p. 518
[ii] Rabbi Solomon Luria (1510-1573), commentary to Talmud-Yevamot 49a
[iii] Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Wisdom (William Morrow and Co., inc. New York, 1994), pp. 379-380
[iv] John Bowker, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature, An Introduction to Jewish Interpretations of Scripture (London: Cambridge University Press, 1969), p. 210
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 1 of 4...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Proselytism, part 1 of 4...
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Trinity : Is the Father Identified as God?
This summary of scriptures relevant to the biblical statements which identify the Father as God will be followed by the actual quotations:
Deuteronomy 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!”
Deuteronomy 32:36-39 “For the LORD will judge His people And have compassion on His servants, When He sees that their power is gone, And there is no one remaining, bond or free. He will say: ‘Where are their gods, The rock in which they sought refuge? Who ate the fat of their sacrifices, And drank the wine of their drink offering? Let them rise and help you, And be your refuge. Now see that I, even I, am He, And there is no God besides Me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; Nor is there any who can deliver from My hand.’”
2nd Samuel 7:22 “You are great, O Lord GOD. For there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”
Isaiah 40:25 “‘To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?’ says the Holy One.”
Isaiah 40:28 “Have you not known? Have you not heard? The everlasting God, the LORD, The Creator of the ends of the earth neither faints nor is weary. His understanding is unsearchable.”
Isaiah 42:5 “Thus says God the LORD, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it, Who gives breath to the people on it, And spirit to those who walk on it”
Isaiah 42:8 “I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.”
Isaiah 43:10-13 “‘You are My witnesses,’ says the LORD, ‘And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the LORD, And besides Me there is no savior. I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, And there was no foreign god among you; Therefore you are My witnesses,’ Says the LORD, ‘that I am God. Indeed before the day was, I am He; And there is no one who can deliver out of My hand; I work, and who will reverse it?’”
Isaiah 44:6-8 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.’”
Isaiah 44:24 “Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, And He who formed you from the womb: ‘I am the LORD, who makes all things, Who stretches out the heavens all alone, Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself.’”
Isaiah 45:21-23 “Tell and bring forth your case; Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from ancient time? Who has told it from that time? Have not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, A just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me. Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself; The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, And shall not return, That to Me every knee shall bow, Every tongue shall take an oath.”
Isaiah 46:9 “Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me.”
Isaiah 48:12-13 “Listen to Me, O Jacob, And Israel, My called: I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last. Indeed My hand has laid the foundation of the earth, And My right hand has stretched out the heavens; When I call to them, They stand up together.”
Isaiah 63:16 “But you are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israel acknowledge us; you, O LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name.”
Isaiah 64:8 “But now, O LORD, You are our Father; We are the clay, and You our potter; And all we are the work of Your hand.”
Psalm 86:8-10 “Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; Nor are there any works like Your works. All nations whom You have made Shall come and worship before You, O Lord, And shall glorify Your name. For You are great, and do wondrous things; You alone are God.”
Psalm 102:24-27 “I said, ‘O my God, Do not take me away in the midst of my days; Your years are throughout all generations. Of old You laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You will endure; Yes, they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will change them, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will have no end.’”
Hosea 13:4 “Yet I am the LORD your God Ever since the land of Egypt, And you shall know no God but Me; For there is no Savior besides Me.”
Philippians 1:2 “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Philippians 2:11 “And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
2nd Peter 1:17 “For He received from God the Father…”
James 3:9 “With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God.”
1st Peter 1:2 “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.”
Revelation 1:6 “And has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.”
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Father Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Father Identified as God?...
Deuteronomy 6:4, 32:36-39; 2nd Samuel 7:22; Isaiah 40:25, 40:28, 42:5, 8, 43:10-13, 44:6-8, 24, 45:21-23, 46:9, 48:12-13, 63:16, 64:8; Psalm 86:8-10, 102:24-27; Hosea 13:4; Philippians 1:2, 2:11; 2nd Peter 1:17; James 3:9; 1st Peter 1:2; Revelation 1:6
Deuteronomy 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!”
Deuteronomy 32:36-39 “For the LORD will judge His people And have compassion on His servants, When He sees that their power is gone, And there is no one remaining, bond or free. He will say: ‘Where are their gods, The rock in which they sought refuge? Who ate the fat of their sacrifices, And drank the wine of their drink offering? Let them rise and help you, And be your refuge. Now see that I, even I, am He, And there is no God besides Me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; Nor is there any who can deliver from My hand.’”
2nd Samuel 7:22 “You are great, O Lord GOD. For there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”
Isaiah 40:25 “‘To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?’ says the Holy One.”
Isaiah 40:28 “Have you not known? Have you not heard? The everlasting God, the LORD, The Creator of the ends of the earth neither faints nor is weary. His understanding is unsearchable.”
Isaiah 42:5 “Thus says God the LORD, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it, Who gives breath to the people on it, And spirit to those who walk on it”
Isaiah 42:8 “I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.”
Isaiah 43:10-13 “‘You are My witnesses,’ says the LORD, ‘And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the LORD, And besides Me there is no savior. I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, And there was no foreign god among you; Therefore you are My witnesses,’ Says the LORD, ‘that I am God. Indeed before the day was, I am He; And there is no one who can deliver out of My hand; I work, and who will reverse it?’”
Isaiah 44:6-8 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.’”
Isaiah 44:24 “Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, And He who formed you from the womb: ‘I am the LORD, who makes all things, Who stretches out the heavens all alone, Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself.’”
Isaiah 45:21-23 “Tell and bring forth your case; Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from ancient time? Who has told it from that time? Have not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, A just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me. Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself; The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, And shall not return, That to Me every knee shall bow, Every tongue shall take an oath.”
Isaiah 46:9 “Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me.”
Isaiah 48:12-13 “Listen to Me, O Jacob, And Israel, My called: I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last. Indeed My hand has laid the foundation of the earth, And My right hand has stretched out the heavens; When I call to them, They stand up together.”
Isaiah 63:16 “But you are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israel acknowledge us; you, O LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name.”
Isaiah 64:8 “But now, O LORD, You are our Father; We are the clay, and You our potter; And all we are the work of Your hand.”
Psalm 86:8-10 “Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; Nor are there any works like Your works. All nations whom You have made Shall come and worship before You, O Lord, And shall glorify Your name. For You are great, and do wondrous things; You alone are God.”
Psalm 102:24-27 “I said, ‘O my God, Do not take me away in the midst of my days; Your years are throughout all generations. Of old You laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You will endure; Yes, they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will change them, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will have no end.’”
Hosea 13:4 “Yet I am the LORD your God Ever since the land of Egypt, And you shall know no God but Me; For there is no Savior besides Me.”
Philippians 1:2 “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Philippians 2:11 “And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
2nd Peter 1:17 “For He received from God the Father…”
James 3:9 “With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God.”
1st Peter 1:2 “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.”
Revelation 1:6 “And has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.”
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Father Identified as God?...
Continue reading Trinity : Is the Father Identified as God?...
Friday, October 23, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : “Let us reason together”
Some years ago I was very troubled, yet not surprised, by two articles published by the Jewish Bulletin of North California. One article is entitled, “Messianics use survivors in latest ads, enraging Jews” (4-27-01) the other, “Meditation deepens Judaism for Makor Or participants” (6-8-01). These two articles are a perfect (perfectly sad) example of the manner in which some Jews are being encouraged to tackle issues, a manner that is being adopted by many people and thus becoming all too common in our relativistic / syncretistic society.
The first article is a disapproving report on a video entitled Survivor Stories that the organization Jews for Jesus has produced. The video features seven Jewish holocaust survivors telling their stories about how they came to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. The other article praises a combination of Zen Buddhist meditation and Jewish worship.
On The One Hand:
Generally speaking, it is common to find an attitude within Judaism which states that a Jewish person (born to a Jewish mother, or properly converted) can be Jewish even without practicing Judaism. A person can be completely secular and still be Jewish. A person can be agnostic and still be Jewish. And yes, a person can be an atheist and still be Jewish. But if a Jewish person believes that Jesus is the Messiah, that person is in no way shape or form any longer Jewish. They have been trapped by a cult and out of ignorance have renounced Judaism. The two articles are a perfect example of this sort of two-sided viewpoint (these points were evidenced in my essay: Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?).
No Jew in their right mind would confront a Jewish holocaust survivor and attack them with the usual arsenal of arguments such as “You’re not a real Jew. You are ignorant of Judaism. You are betraying your people!” Forgoing the wise saying, “Don’t kill the messenger if you don’t like the message,” the article states, “Plenty in the Jewish community are fuming—not at the message but at its source: Jews for Jesus.”
Jewish holocaust survivors deserve our utmost respect and therefore, generally Jewish organizations would personally criticize them. Rather, they will state that the survivors have a right to say what they wish while the Jewish organizations have the right to censor the forum of their message. The article is also peppered with affirmations of the First Amendment, the politically correct mantra, and so Jews for Jesus is besmirched for giving the survivors the ability to have their message heard.
Holocaust survivor Marion Parkhurst who survived Bergen-Belsen[1] states,
My people, the Jews, are so very articulate and intelligent and have always considered illiteracy a sin, lest one not be able to study the Torah. What is extremely sad is that these same people are now being encouraged by publications such as the Jewish Bulletin to respond to extremely important issues out of pure irrational emotionalism.
The article is peppered with emotionally charged statements such as, “fuming,” “cheap shot,” “tasteless and offensive,” “a new low,” “shameful and disgusting,” “very low,” “falling prey,” “very vulnerable,” “this depressed me so much,” “Just when you think they’ve gone too far…they pull something out of their hats that’s even worse.” The few arguments that attempt to go beyond emotionalism fall far short of being reasonable.
Rabbi Doug Kahn (executive director, Jewish Community Relations Council) stated,
This is very logical on the surface and only on the surface. It must be understood that Rabbinic Judaism means that interpretations and emphasis have a potential of changing from generation to generation as the Rabbis determine Judaism’s doctrines. Maybe we cannot logically be Christians and follow the doctrines of modern Rabbinic Judaism. But we know that the religion of God as prescribed in the Tanakh points to the Messiah Jesus.
Jews for Jesus does not distort the assumed impossibility that one can be both a Jew and a Christian at the same time. Let us consider what Jewish religious law has to say on this issue. The Encyclopedia Judaica 3:211 states,
Such sentiments were evidenced in my aforementioned essay Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?
I have no problem being called a sinner by the Jewish community yet, as we saw here, Jewish religious law has no problem calling me a Jew even if individual Jews choose to act and speak against their own Jewish law which they claim to uphold and admit is still binding.
One holocaust survivor who has not accepted Jesus states,
A narrow qualification for acceptability is offered and since the requirement is not met the true stories are rejected. Why is it acceptable for scared, suffering children to convert while it is not acceptable for a grown person to convert “after many years of soul searching and study.” This gentleman did pass judgment by discrediting the very life stories of seven survivors merely because they did not meet his subjective criteria for authenticity.
While the article admits, “The video is like many documentaries that feature survivors” it is considered a scandalous video because the survivors cannot be discredited. Rabbi H. David Teitelbaum (executive director, Board of Rabbis of Northern California) stated, “They have every right to publicize their organization but to use Holocaust survivors is a cheap shot.” Why then is it acceptable to use the Holocaust to publicize the Jewish spirit, survival, hope and strength? And why then is it acceptable to use the Holocaust to raise money for Jewish organizations and synagogues?
One person stated, “Religion ought to reach towards people’s hopes and aspirations, not their doubts and fears.” What could be more positive, hopeful and inspiring than the stories of people who were hunted down like animals by a cruel, well numbered, well armed predator, and yet survive and have a belief in God which is sure and firm, the same God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The life verse of the Jewish-Christian may just be,
On The Other Hand:
The article on Zen Buddhist meditation and Judaism is the exact opposite of the one about Jews for Jesus. It tells of Makor Or, a Jewish meditation center of San Francisco’s Congregation Beth Sholom.
One of the two leaders of the center was the former abbot of the San Francisco Zen Center. The Makor Or project was funded by a grant from The Nathan Cummings Foundation which is “rooted in the Jewish tradition.”[2]
Rabbi Alan Lew, the other leader, who had been a practitioner of Zen before he became a Rabbi states,
The first article employs the often-leveled charge that organization such as Jews for Jesus are “opportunists of Jewish ignorance.” We are told that Jews who do not have much knowledge of Judaism are falling prey to such evangelistic organizations. However, in the second article we find tolerance and encouragement of exploiting this very same ignorance.
The article proudly tells of the ignorance of some of the participant in this Zen / Judaism concoction. One person “drifted away from Judaism for about two decades and said that he was even more of a novice at Jewish prayer than he was at meditation.” Another person’s practice of Judaism was reduced to “I just paid the check and went to the High Holy Day services.” Others “have prior experience with Zen meditation.” One proudly states, “I’m passionately indifferent to the question of what precedent there is in Judaism for meditation.”
Are these people seen as manipulated victims of a cult? By no means. This is because the article claims that the Zen Buddhist meditation is a facilitator of a deeper Jewish worship and a sense of community.
Buddhism is a Gentile-Pagan, and for all practical purposes, atheistic religion. Zen meditation is not the meditation on the Word of God of which the Scriptures do speak. Rather, it is a way in which a person can work herself into an altered state of consciousness. It is a way in which to harmonize one’s karma. Karma is a works based concept of “salvation” that involves believing that the universe is an illusion and the belief in reincarnation into human, animal, mineral or ghostly lives in the next world (conceptual variations exist under the umbrella term “reincarnation”). These are the very things that God prohibited and exposed as false over and over in His Word.
Messianic Jews are Jewish people who believe that the Jewish Messiah has come in the person of the Jewish man Jesus of Nazareth as predicted in the Jewish Scripture. We know with all of our hearts, minds and strength that we are worshipping, living and dying for the one and only God, the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. We have not converted to a gentile-pagan religion rather, we know that we are living the life of a Jew as it is laid out under the New Covenant just as the life of a Jew, before Jesus, was laid out under the Old Covenant—the Tanakh. May God speedily bless my people with the knowledge of the truth.
These issues are far too important to be handled in an emotional manner. Instead, we are to have intelligent opinions and arguments. We are not to let our prejudices cloud the facts nor our ability to reason.
Susan Perlman, executive director of the Survivor Stories video states,
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : “Let us reason together”...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : “Let us reason together”...
The first article is a disapproving report on a video entitled Survivor Stories that the organization Jews for Jesus has produced. The video features seven Jewish holocaust survivors telling their stories about how they came to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. The other article praises a combination of Zen Buddhist meditation and Jewish worship.
On The One Hand:
Generally speaking, it is common to find an attitude within Judaism which states that a Jewish person (born to a Jewish mother, or properly converted) can be Jewish even without practicing Judaism. A person can be completely secular and still be Jewish. A person can be agnostic and still be Jewish. And yes, a person can be an atheist and still be Jewish. But if a Jewish person believes that Jesus is the Messiah, that person is in no way shape or form any longer Jewish. They have been trapped by a cult and out of ignorance have renounced Judaism. The two articles are a perfect example of this sort of two-sided viewpoint (these points were evidenced in my essay: Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?).
No Jew in their right mind would confront a Jewish holocaust survivor and attack them with the usual arsenal of arguments such as “You’re not a real Jew. You are ignorant of Judaism. You are betraying your people!” Forgoing the wise saying, “Don’t kill the messenger if you don’t like the message,” the article states, “Plenty in the Jewish community are fuming—not at the message but at its source: Jews for Jesus.”
Jewish holocaust survivors deserve our utmost respect and therefore, generally Jewish organizations would personally criticize them. Rather, they will state that the survivors have a right to say what they wish while the Jewish organizations have the right to censor the forum of their message. The article is also peppered with affirmations of the First Amendment, the politically correct mantra, and so Jews for Jesus is besmirched for giving the survivors the ability to have their message heard.
Holocaust survivor Marion Parkhurst who survived Bergen-Belsen[1] states,
Before you dismiss my beliefs you should hear my story…My decision to embrace Jesus came only after many years of soul searching and study. All I ask is that you hear my story and those of several other remarkable Jews who have suffered greatly and now truly believe in Jesus.
My people, the Jews, are so very articulate and intelligent and have always considered illiteracy a sin, lest one not be able to study the Torah. What is extremely sad is that these same people are now being encouraged by publications such as the Jewish Bulletin to respond to extremely important issues out of pure irrational emotionalism.
The article is peppered with emotionally charged statements such as, “fuming,” “cheap shot,” “tasteless and offensive,” “a new low,” “shameful and disgusting,” “very low,” “falling prey,” “very vulnerable,” “this depressed me so much,” “Just when you think they’ve gone too far…they pull something out of their hats that’s even worse.” The few arguments that attempt to go beyond emotionalism fall far short of being reasonable.
Rabbi Doug Kahn (executive director, Jewish Community Relations Council) stated,
Logically one cannot believe that the messiah has not yet come, as traditional Jews do, and that he also has come, as Christians believe…One can be a Jew who converted to Christianity…The concern that has always existed is that [Jews for Jesus tries] to distort that fundamental impossibility that one can be both a Jew and a Christian at the same time.
This is very logical on the surface and only on the surface. It must be understood that Rabbinic Judaism means that interpretations and emphasis have a potential of changing from generation to generation as the Rabbis determine Judaism’s doctrines. Maybe we cannot logically be Christians and follow the doctrines of modern Rabbinic Judaism. But we know that the religion of God as prescribed in the Tanakh points to the Messiah Jesus.
Jews for Jesus does not distort the assumed impossibility that one can be both a Jew and a Christian at the same time. Let us consider what Jewish religious law has to say on this issue. The Encyclopedia Judaica 3:211 states,
In Jewish religious law, it is technically impossible for a Jew (born to a Jewish mother or properly converted to Judaism) to change his religion. Even though a Jew undergoes the rites of admission to another religious faith and formally renounces the Jewish religion he remains-as far as the Halakah is concerned-a Jew, albeit a sinner (Sanh. 44a)…For the born Jew, Judaism is not a matter of choice…in the technical halakhic sense, apostasy is impossible.
Such sentiments were evidenced in my aforementioned essay Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?
I have no problem being called a sinner by the Jewish community yet, as we saw here, Jewish religious law has no problem calling me a Jew even if individual Jews choose to act and speak against their own Jewish law which they claim to uphold and admit is still binding.
One holocaust survivor who has not accepted Jesus states,
if Jewish children who spent the war in hiding with Christian families chose to remain the religion of their rescuers, it was not for him to pass judgment. But since that was not the case for any of those in the video, he said, the tactics used by Jews for Jesus in this case were “shameful and disgusting.”
A narrow qualification for acceptability is offered and since the requirement is not met the true stories are rejected. Why is it acceptable for scared, suffering children to convert while it is not acceptable for a grown person to convert “after many years of soul searching and study.” This gentleman did pass judgment by discrediting the very life stories of seven survivors merely because they did not meet his subjective criteria for authenticity.
While the article admits, “The video is like many documentaries that feature survivors” it is considered a scandalous video because the survivors cannot be discredited. Rabbi H. David Teitelbaum (executive director, Board of Rabbis of Northern California) stated, “They have every right to publicize their organization but to use Holocaust survivors is a cheap shot.” Why then is it acceptable to use the Holocaust to publicize the Jewish spirit, survival, hope and strength? And why then is it acceptable to use the Holocaust to raise money for Jewish organizations and synagogues?
One person stated, “Religion ought to reach towards people’s hopes and aspirations, not their doubts and fears.” What could be more positive, hopeful and inspiring than the stories of people who were hunted down like animals by a cruel, well numbered, well armed predator, and yet survive and have a belief in God which is sure and firm, the same God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The life verse of the Jewish-Christian may just be,
you are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israel acknowledge us; you, O LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name (Isaiah 63:16).
On The Other Hand:
The article on Zen Buddhist meditation and Judaism is the exact opposite of the one about Jews for Jesus. It tells of Makor Or, a Jewish meditation center of San Francisco’s Congregation Beth Sholom.
One of the two leaders of the center was the former abbot of the San Francisco Zen Center. The Makor Or project was funded by a grant from The Nathan Cummings Foundation which is “rooted in the Jewish tradition.”[2]
Rabbi Alan Lew, the other leader, who had been a practitioner of Zen before he became a Rabbi states,
At Makor Or, we freely admit the meditation we learn comes from Buddhist teachings. But then, Judaism has always borrowed techniques from other cultures when it served to make Judaism more vital.
The first article employs the often-leveled charge that organization such as Jews for Jesus are “opportunists of Jewish ignorance.” We are told that Jews who do not have much knowledge of Judaism are falling prey to such evangelistic organizations. However, in the second article we find tolerance and encouragement of exploiting this very same ignorance.
The article proudly tells of the ignorance of some of the participant in this Zen / Judaism concoction. One person “drifted away from Judaism for about two decades and said that he was even more of a novice at Jewish prayer than he was at meditation.” Another person’s practice of Judaism was reduced to “I just paid the check and went to the High Holy Day services.” Others “have prior experience with Zen meditation.” One proudly states, “I’m passionately indifferent to the question of what precedent there is in Judaism for meditation.”
Are these people seen as manipulated victims of a cult? By no means. This is because the article claims that the Zen Buddhist meditation is a facilitator of a deeper Jewish worship and a sense of community.
Buddhism is a Gentile-Pagan, and for all practical purposes, atheistic religion. Zen meditation is not the meditation on the Word of God of which the Scriptures do speak. Rather, it is a way in which a person can work herself into an altered state of consciousness. It is a way in which to harmonize one’s karma. Karma is a works based concept of “salvation” that involves believing that the universe is an illusion and the belief in reincarnation into human, animal, mineral or ghostly lives in the next world (conceptual variations exist under the umbrella term “reincarnation”). These are the very things that God prohibited and exposed as false over and over in His Word.
Messianic Jews are Jewish people who believe that the Jewish Messiah has come in the person of the Jewish man Jesus of Nazareth as predicted in the Jewish Scripture. We know with all of our hearts, minds and strength that we are worshipping, living and dying for the one and only God, the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. We have not converted to a gentile-pagan religion rather, we know that we are living the life of a Jew as it is laid out under the New Covenant just as the life of a Jew, before Jesus, was laid out under the Old Covenant—the Tanakh. May God speedily bless my people with the knowledge of the truth.
These issues are far too important to be handled in an emotional manner. Instead, we are to have intelligent opinions and arguments. We are not to let our prejudices cloud the facts nor our ability to reason.
Susan Perlman, executive director of the Survivor Stories video states,
These stories of Holocaust survivors who have come to believe in Jesus is a story that must be told.
“Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD
Isaiah 1:18
[1] “Bergen-Belsen was a concentration camp established in 1943 originally to hold prisoners to be used in political exchanges. Administered by the SS, it included five sub-camps where some 50,000 Jews, political hostages, and other prisoners died of starvation, disease, brutality and sadistic medical practices. It was liberated by the British in 1945.” Museum of Tolerance
[2] Nathan Cummings Foundation Online
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : “Let us reason together”...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : “Let us reason together”...
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Trinity : God’s Nature and Trinitarian Doctrine
This is an announcement pertaining to the new series upon which we shall embark.
In this series I simply present quotations from the Bible with little if any commentary. I categorize it in order to be useful in answering the charges made against Christianity by various religious groups.
These claims are such as that Jesus is not divine, that the Holy Spirit is a force or energy, that God is not Trinune / Trinitatiran, that Jesus is the Archangel Michael, and so on.
At the end of the series I will provide a one post summary of all of the relevant citations by category.
Be aware that without a little background in the study of the doctrine of the Trinity some of the text may seem obscure.
For some background and apologetics with regards to the Trinity you may want to read the following as preparation for the posts which are to come.
How to Understand the Trinity
Mormon Theology vs. The Sh'ma
Mormon Theology – Monotheism or Henotheism?
I designed this illustration of the Trinity and you can purchase this design on a t-shirt or sticker at my online Cafepress shop:
Continue reading Trinity : God’s Nature and Trinitarian Doctrine...
Continue reading Trinity : God’s Nature and Trinitarian Doctrine...
In this series I simply present quotations from the Bible with little if any commentary. I categorize it in order to be useful in answering the charges made against Christianity by various religious groups.
These claims are such as that Jesus is not divine, that the Holy Spirit is a force or energy, that God is not Trinune / Trinitatiran, that Jesus is the Archangel Michael, and so on.
At the end of the series I will provide a one post summary of all of the relevant citations by category.
Be aware that without a little background in the study of the doctrine of the Trinity some of the text may seem obscure.
For some background and apologetics with regards to the Trinity you may want to read the following as preparation for the posts which are to come.
How to Understand the Trinity
Mormon Theology vs. The Sh'ma
Mormon Theology – Monotheism or Henotheism?
I designed this illustration of the Trinity and you can purchase this design on a t-shirt or sticker at my online Cafepress shop:
Continue reading Trinity : God’s Nature and Trinitarian Doctrine...
Continue reading Trinity : God’s Nature and Trinitarian Doctrine...
Monday, October 19, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 5 of 5
Open my eyes, so that I will
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Let us consider why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued):
Otherwise, you also will be cut off. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree! I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.
And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.’ As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.
Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! ‘Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?’ ‘Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him?’ For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen” (Romans 11:1-36).
Risto Santala:
“A certain young student, while supervising the building of a high-tension electricity line on the slopes of Mount Carmel, chanced to find a torn New Testament which had been thrown into the undergrowth. His father was a teacher of the Talmud in a local college and so the son was also well acquainted with the Rabbinic literature.
Straight away on his first reading he realized that Jesus was the Deliverer he had been searching for in the Old Testament and in his father’ writings, and only two weeks later he confessed his faith to his father. The latter then offered him money, a house, and even a wife, if he would only give up his conviction. (In devout Jewish families the parents choose their children’s partners; they do, after all, have more experience in the matter than their offspring!)
Our student had not yet left home at Passover time. After eating the Paschal meal, the seder, it was the custom to sing the Hallel psalms, and when they had sung psalm 118 the youngest member of the family, a boy of 19, asked his father, ‘What is this stone?’ Father went completely silent. ‘Dad, what is the stone which the builders have rejected?’ Once more the head of the family remained silent, even though he always answered the Passover evening questions.
‘Dad, what is the stone which has become the cornerstone?’ the boy asked a third time. At that our believing student requested permission to reply, and his father nodded. The young man’s answer was enigmatic: ‘It is what is between father and son!’ Being accustomed to Qabbalistic riddles the rest of the family understood immediately who he was talking about.
‘Stone’ in Hebrew is even: reading the first part of this (in Hebrew characters) three-letter word gives the word âv, ‘father,’ reading the latter part from the middle gives ben, ‘son.’ Of course everyone knew that Jesus had come between the father and his firstborn son. Before long the student had to leave his family and change his name.
His new Hebrew name meaning ‘independent,’ speaks of the great change which had taken place in him. As an authority on oriental languages and with his knowledge of Greek he was entrusted with the main responsibility for translating the New Testament into modern Hebrew.”[1]
There is a dangerous non-Biblical teaching called replacement theology. It states that God is done with Israel and that He has forever abandoned them because of their rejection of Jesus as Messiah. It goes on to teach that all the promises God made to Israel are now bestowed upon the Christian church. This example of poor scholarship has been unfortunately used by certain Christian denominations in order to, in extreme cases, justify anti-Semitism.
Yet, both the Old and New Testaments make it clear that God will not forsake His chosen people the Jews:
“Thus says the Lord, Who gives the sun for a light by day, The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night, Who disturbs the sea, And its waves roar (The LORD of hosts is His name):
‘If those ordinances depart From before Me, says the Lord, Then the seed of Israel shall also cease From being a nation before Me forever.’ Thus says the Lord: ‘If heaven above can be measured, And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel For all that they have done, says the LORD’” (Jeremiah 31:35-37).
Recall the above quote were Paul emphasizes that God has not cast away His people.
This temporary blindness can end right now when we seek for the Messiah’s truth and put away our notions of the way things ought to work, or have worked, and seeking the LORD our God with all of our heart, mind, soul and strength.
[1] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. Psalm 118 and the "stone which the builders rejected"
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 5 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 5 of 5...
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Atheism and Christian Apologetics – Athanatos Opens Its Gates
Nice guy extraordinaire and more than capable apologist Anthony Horvath is once again opening the gates of the online apologetics courses he offers at Athanatos.
He has been kind enough to include me as an instructor this time around.
The course descriptions and other info is found here.
Some courses are free and the others cost less than most people spend on coffee any given week:
I will be teaching Studies in Atheism
I will also teach Jesus According to...
Other courses are as follows:
Joe Keysor, Hitler and Christianity:
I reviewed Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible here.
Josh Davis, Christ Promised in the Old Testament:
Anthony Horvath, Reliability of the New Testament Documents:
Anthony Horvath and Terry Hollifield, Study in Alleged Bible Contradictions:
Anthony Horvath, The Death of Christianity:
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 1
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 2
Terry Hollifield, Origins: A Survey:
Continue reading Atheism and Christian Apologetics – Athanatos Opens Its Gates...
Continue reading Atheism and Christian Apologetics – Athanatos Opens Its Gates...
He has been kind enough to include me as an instructor this time around.
The course descriptions and other info is found here.
Some courses are free and the others cost less than most people spend on coffee any given week:
I will be teaching Studies in Atheism
4 weeks. Begins Nov 4th.
Before there were the 'New Atheists' there were the old ones. This investigation into the atheism of Dawkins, Harris, etc, looks into the foundations of modern day atheism and its pervasive hostility to theism and Christianity. This course ends before Christmas. (Just in case the FFRF had any ideas...)
I will also teach Jesus According to...
3 Weeks. Begins Nov 30th.
How do different cultures, cults, and world religions view Jesus? How are these similar and different to the Christian view, which is rooted in the New Testament? Why does it matter?
Other courses are as follows:
Joe Keysor, Hitler and Christianity:
3 weeks. Begins Nov 23.
A free, three week course exploring the charge that Christianity is to blame for the Nazis and the Holocaust. This course is taught by Joe Keysor, the author of Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible. This book is strongly recommended if you are taking the course but not absolutely required.
I reviewed Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible here.
Josh Davis, Christ Promised in the Old Testament:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 16th. Strongly Suggested Materials: The Bible.
Could you demonstrate that Jesus was the Christ from the Old Testament alone as the apostles did? (Acts 17:11, 18:28, 1 Cor 15:3). This survey of major OT evidences for Jesus as the Christ will help you see how Christianity and Judaism were related why Jews found it compelling at the time. This is an introduction that will help in personal growth and evangelism efforts.
Anthony Horvath, Reliability of the New Testament Documents:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 2nd. Strongly Suggested Materials: The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable by F.F. Bruce.
This class surveys the development of the New Testament documents and the formation of the canon in a basic, introductory fashion.
Anthony Horvath and Terry Hollifield, Study in Alleged Bible Contradictions:
2 Weeks. Begins Nov 30th. Strongly Suggested Materials: The Bible.
Principles for resolving alleged contradictions in the Bible are introduced and applied to a small set of famous 'contradictions.'
Anthony Horvath, The Death of Christianity:
3 weeks. Begins Nov 9th. FREE. Suggested Materials: Internet readings, guided tour.
Christianity is demonstrably on the decline in America. This course documents that decline, probes the causes, and suggests solutions. Based on the content found at http://www.deathofchristianity.com/, this course is centered heavily on discussion between the participants.
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 1
3 weeks. Begins Nov 2nd. Strongly Suggested (but not required) Materials: Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found.
Learn the Greek alphabet, how to sound out Greek words, how to identify nouns, verbs, definite articles, and how to use such information to use resources like a Bible interlinear or lexicon.
Glenn Jones, Basic New Testament Greek Part 2
3 weeks. Begins Nov 30th. Strongly Suggested (but not required) Materials: Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found.
Building on Part 1, the student will learn more vocabulary as well as parts of speech such as the definite article, etc.
Terry Hollifield, Origins: A Survey:
4 Weeks. Begins Nov 2nd.
Is evolutionary theory true? What does the Bible say? What does the science say? Is there scientific evidence for a young earth creation? Or is it just something the Bible says? In this survey of the issues, the participant will explore the critical issues involved in the Creation-Evolution-Intelligent Design Debate so they can make their own, informed, decisions. This course lays important groundwork for future study.
Continue reading Atheism and Christian Apologetics – Athanatos Opens Its Gates...
Continue reading Atheism and Christian Apologetics – Athanatos Opens Its Gates...
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Dan Brown and The Lost Symbol
The newest of Dan Brown books has been released; entitled “The Lost Symbol,” it deals with Freemasonry in early America and it is a huge, huge disappointment.
The way the book ends is…
Just kidding—no spoiler here.
I have not read the book (although, I actually do know the way the book ends).
I have not read any reviews of the book.
I barely know that it is about.
This is why knowing virtually nothing about it, I consider it a disappointment:
I was really hoping that after becoming a very, very wealthy celebrity after writing novels that sought to discredit Christianity Dan Brown would continue that trend and go after every religion.
Let him besmirch Islam, put down Buddhism, claim that the main tenets of Hinduism are a fraud, contradict Taoism, tear down Judaism, etc., etc., etc.
But alas, no.
Unless, one were to consider Freemasonry a religion in which case perhaps Dan Brown is continuing his crusade.
However, he appears to be interested in them more in terms of secret societies who communicate via esoteric symbolism and involve themselves in political intrigues.
The Da Vinci Code gained Dan Brown wealth and celebrity while The Satanic Verses gained Salman Rushdie a death sentence.
Meanwhile, the militant activist new atheists besmirch Judaism and Christianity from the safety and comfort of countries premised upon Judeo-Christian principles while all but ignoring radical Islam or any other belief system.
Will no one play fair and present balanced condemnations?
I have provided information about the Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons and The Last Templar including information about the Salman Rushdies affair at these links: here and here.
I recently read a fascinating interview with Dan Brown by James Kaplan—“Exclusive Interview With Dan Brown - Life After 'The Da Vinci Code',” Parade, Sept 13, 2009
James Kaplan noted that Dan Brown, “still seems surprised that his book started such a frenzy.” You have to wonder about such personages as Dan Brown. Is he really thinking, “Come on now, I attempted to discredit Christianity and accuse a real life Roman Catholic organization of murder; what’s the big deal?”
There came a point in Dan Brown’s life when “he decided to write fiction.” But that is just the issue is it not? At least with the Da Vinci Code he claimed to be premising his novel on fact and then simply collected his millions of dollars and sidestepped all historical and factual challenges.
Dan Brown stated,
None of it had any relevance to what he was doing? The only relevance was to what he was doing. He was the one misrepresenting Christianity, history, even artwork and architecture. This is that to which the furor pertained.
He also stated,
Do not forget that just because you are paranoid it does not mean that no one is out to get you.
He also made a statement that is actually very accurate and could/should be very useful to a lot of people who think that atheism is based on “science” or that “science” is the only reliable epistemic system.
Indeed, note the words of Gil Dodgen:
Both were shrugged off and both ended up recognizing that, as with everything, the scientific endeavor is premised upon certain necessarily basic beliefs. Although, what Dan Brown actually believes about God is somewhat obscure.
When asked “Are you a Christian?” he responded:
What of Dan Brown’s real life theology? Here is a taste:
Finally, he also stated, “I think one reason my books have found mainstream success is that they're written from a skeptical point of view.” Or, it could be that he was besmirching Roman Catholicism at a time when the news was saturated with reports of pedophilic priests and the Roman Catholic church’s cover-ups.
Continue reading Dan Brown and The Lost Symbol...
Continue reading Dan Brown and The Lost Symbol...
The way the book ends is…
Just kidding—no spoiler here.
I have not read the book (although, I actually do know the way the book ends).
I have not read any reviews of the book.
I barely know that it is about.
This is why knowing virtually nothing about it, I consider it a disappointment:
I was really hoping that after becoming a very, very wealthy celebrity after writing novels that sought to discredit Christianity Dan Brown would continue that trend and go after every religion.
Let him besmirch Islam, put down Buddhism, claim that the main tenets of Hinduism are a fraud, contradict Taoism, tear down Judaism, etc., etc., etc.
But alas, no.
Unless, one were to consider Freemasonry a religion in which case perhaps Dan Brown is continuing his crusade.
However, he appears to be interested in them more in terms of secret societies who communicate via esoteric symbolism and involve themselves in political intrigues.
The Da Vinci Code gained Dan Brown wealth and celebrity while The Satanic Verses gained Salman Rushdie a death sentence.
Meanwhile, the militant activist new atheists besmirch Judaism and Christianity from the safety and comfort of countries premised upon Judeo-Christian principles while all but ignoring radical Islam or any other belief system.
Will no one play fair and present balanced condemnations?
I have provided information about the Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons and The Last Templar including information about the Salman Rushdies affair at these links: here and here.
I recently read a fascinating interview with Dan Brown by James Kaplan—“Exclusive Interview With Dan Brown - Life After 'The Da Vinci Code',” Parade, Sept 13, 2009
James Kaplan noted that Dan Brown, “still seems surprised that his book started such a frenzy.” You have to wonder about such personages as Dan Brown. Is he really thinking, “Come on now, I attempted to discredit Christianity and accuse a real life Roman Catholic organization of murder; what’s the big deal?”
There came a point in Dan Brown’s life when “he decided to write fiction.” But that is just the issue is it not? At least with the Da Vinci Code he claimed to be premising his novel on fact and then simply collected his millions of dollars and sidestepped all historical and factual challenges.
Dan Brown stated,
The furor died down, and I realized that none of it had any relevance to what I was doing. I'm just a guy who tells a story.
None of it had any relevance to what he was doing? The only relevance was to what he was doing. He was the one misrepresenting Christianity, history, even artwork and architecture. This is that to which the furor pertained.
He also stated,
The power that religion has is that you think nothing is random: If there's a tragedy in my life, that's God testing me or sending me a message. That's what conspiracy theorists do.
Do not forget that just because you are paranoid it does not mean that no one is out to get you.
He also made a statement that is actually very accurate and could/should be very useful to a lot of people who think that atheism is based on “science” or that “science” is the only reliable epistemic system.
I was raised Episcopalian, and I was very religious as a kid. Then, in eighth or ninth grade, I studied astronomy, cosmology, and the origins of the universe. I remember saying to a minister, "I don't get it. I read a book that said there was an explosion known as the Big Bang, but here it says God created heaven and Earth and the animals in seven days. Which is right?"
Unfortunately, the response I got was, "Nice boys don't ask that question." A light went off, and I said, "The Bible doesn't make sense. Science makes much more sense to me." And I just gravitated away from religion. The irony is that I've really come full circle. The more science I studied, the more I saw that physics becomes metaphysics and numbers become imaginary numbers. The farther you go into science, the mushier the ground gets. You start to say, "Oh, there is an order and a spiritual aspect to science."
Indeed, note the words of Gil Dodgen:
I was raised an atheist, and was very devout as a kid. I studied astronomy, cosmology, and the origins of the universe. I remember saying to a scientist, “I don’t get it. I read a book that said there was an explosion known as the Big Bang, and that all the laws of physics were fine-tuned to make life possible. Wouldn’t this require design and purpose?” Unfortunately, the response I got was, “Only mindless, uneducated religious fanatics ask that question. It was all an accident. Stop asking stupid questions.”
But I wasn’t mindless, uneducated, or a religious fanatic. I was an atheist!
A light went off, and I said, “Materialism doesn’t make sense. Design and purpose in the cosmos makes much more sense to me.” And I just gravitated away from atheism.
Both were shrugged off and both ended up recognizing that, as with everything, the scientific endeavor is premised upon certain necessarily basic beliefs. Although, what Dan Brown actually believes about God is somewhat obscure.
When asked “Are you a Christian?” he responded:
Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as absolute historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum…we’re each following our own paths of enlightenment.[1]
What of Dan Brown’s real life theology? Here is a taste:
“We now turn to God for only a handful of questions that science has not yet been able to understand. We still have religion based on “proof from incredulity” (it must be so because there is no other explanation). We still believe in a God of the gaps…
We are unable to conceive of our hopes, dreams, memories, and spirits evaporating into thin air when we die, so therefore we say there must be an afterlife. We can’t imagine it another way…
The biggest challenge to our spiritual being is our brains are evolving…
How do we become solidly minded scientifically, without losing our religion?”[2]
Finally, he also stated, “I think one reason my books have found mainstream success is that they're written from a skeptical point of view.” Or, it could be that he was besmirching Roman Catholicism at a time when the news was saturated with reports of pedophilic priests and the Roman Catholic church’s cover-ups.
[1] Dan Brown from the faqs section of danbrown.com
[2] Father Jonathan Morris for FOX Fan Central, Dan Brown Responds – ‘The Da Vinci Code’ — Part II
Continue reading Dan Brown and The Lost Symbol...
Continue reading Dan Brown and The Lost Symbol...
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 4 of 5
Open my eyes, so that I will
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Let us consider why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent:
Jeremiah wrote:
“This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar—the LORD Almighty is his name: ‘Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,’ declares the LORD, ‘will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me.’
This is what the LORD says: ‘Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done,’ declares the LORD” (Jeremiah 31:35-37).
Paul wrote:
“Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech—unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. But their minds were blinded.
For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord” (2nd Corinthians 3:12-18 referring to Exodus 34:34).
The Bible refers to people “who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them” (2nd Corinthians 4:4).
Please forgive this lengthy quote but it clearly defines the reason for a temporary blindness of Israel, the fact that it is not forever, that is it is in order to give the Gentiles a chance at salvation, etc.
Paul writes:
“I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: ‘Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me’?
And what was God’s answer to him? ‘I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, as it is written: ‘God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day.’
And David says: ‘May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever.’ Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!
I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches. If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.
You will say then, ‘Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.’ Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness.
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 4 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 4 of 5...
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
“Joseph-era” Coins Found in Egypt, the Latest in Biblical Archeology—Well…Maybe
According to The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI, “Leading Egyptian Daily 'Al-Ahram' Reports: Coins from Era of Biblical Joseph Found in Egypt,” September 24, 2009, No. 2561):
On the other hand some references to coinage have been known such as:
Research team head Dr. Sa'id Muhammad Thabet had been looking for “coins used as charms or ornaments” yet, “what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin.” Moreover, “the coins come in different sizes and are made of different materials, including ivory, precious stones, copper, silver, gold, etc.” and some were “scarab-shaped.”
It is also reported that one coin:
Let us dive into to some of the concerns: as of yet it seems that the only report about these coins, particularly the one depicting Joseph, has come from one news source which published a photo of various carved scarabs.
Perhaps these are the “scarab-shaped” coins but none are shown to bear the image of Joseph—why not prominently picture this coin?
Some think that this is all a hoax and some that it is an attempt at an Islamic apologetic as along with reference to the coin of Joseph’s time in Egypt appeals are being made to verses from the Qur'an (Koran) which reference coin usage in Joseph’s day such as a reference to Joseph’s brothers selling him, “And they sold him for a low price, a number of silver coins (Surah 12:20).
Yet, note that since the Qur'an was not written until circa half a millennia after the time of Christ the Qur'an is alluding to the Bible which states, “sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver” (Genesis 37:28).
The “twenty of silver” (the word “shekel” is not in the manuscripts) may be understood as the sliver having been in the form of coinage but could refer to the weight of the silver as “shekels” is a measure of weight which later came to be the name of coins.
Thus, it is advisable to wait and see what is to become of this—what corroboration, information and photos are to follow, if any.
…the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram [September 22, 2009], by Wajih Al-Saqqar, archeologists have discovered ancient Egyptian coins bearing the name and image of the Biblical Joseph…
Its importance lies in the fact that it provides decisive scientific evidence disproving the claim by some historians that the ancient Egyptians were unfamiliar with coins and conducted their trade through barter…
many charms from various eras before and after the period of Joseph, including one that bore his effigy as the minister of the treasury in the Egyptian pharaoh's court…
On the other hand some references to coinage have been known such as:
…texts from the time of the Third Dynasty…states that the Egyptian coin of the time was called a deben…Other texts from the time of the Third Dynasty, the Sixth Dynasty and the Twelfth Dynasty mention a coin named shati or sat…
Research team head Dr. Sa'id Muhammad Thabet had been looking for “coins used as charms or ornaments” yet, “what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin.” Moreover, “the coins come in different sizes and are made of different materials, including ivory, precious stones, copper, silver, gold, etc.” and some were “scarab-shaped.”
It is also reported that one coin:
had an inscription on it, and an image of a cow symbolizing Pharaoh's dream about the seven fat cows and seven lean cows, and the seven green stalks of grain and seven dry stalks of grain…
Joseph's name appears twice on this coin, written in hieroglyphs: once the original name, Joseph, and once his Egyptian name, Saba Sabani, which was given to him by Pharaoh when he became treasurer. There is also an image of Joseph, who was part of the Egyptian administration at the time.
Let us dive into to some of the concerns: as of yet it seems that the only report about these coins, particularly the one depicting Joseph, has come from one news source which published a photo of various carved scarabs.
Perhaps these are the “scarab-shaped” coins but none are shown to bear the image of Joseph—why not prominently picture this coin?
Some think that this is all a hoax and some that it is an attempt at an Islamic apologetic as along with reference to the coin of Joseph’s time in Egypt appeals are being made to verses from the Qur'an (Koran) which reference coin usage in Joseph’s day such as a reference to Joseph’s brothers selling him, “And they sold him for a low price, a number of silver coins (Surah 12:20).
Yet, note that since the Qur'an was not written until circa half a millennia after the time of Christ the Qur'an is alluding to the Bible which states, “sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver” (Genesis 37:28).
The “twenty of silver” (the word “shekel” is not in the manuscripts) may be understood as the sliver having been in the form of coinage but could refer to the weight of the silver as “shekels” is a measure of weight which later came to be the name of coins.
Thus, it is advisable to wait and see what is to become of this—what corroboration, information and photos are to follow, if any.
Continue reading “Joseph-era” Coins Found in Egypt, the Latest in Biblical Archeology—Well…Maybe...
Continue reading “Joseph-era” Coins Found in Egypt, the Latest in Biblical Archeology—Well…Maybe...
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 3 of 5
Open my eyes, so that I will
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Let us consider why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
The New Testament Explains (continued):
Rabbi Shlomo ben Yitzaki aka, Rashi on Isaiah 28:16,
“the Messiah-King who is to be the touchstone of Zion.”
Malbi'm Hebrew commentary, Biûr ha-Inyan on Isaiah 28:16:
“‘Touchstone’ here represents three conditions: 1. firstly it will be a touchstone strong and tested and firmly founded, because it is true stone, neither composed of sand and foreign matter; 2. secondly it is of such a value and form that it will be placed as a cornerstone which is precious like sapphire, as a precious stone, so that it might become a precious cornerstone; and 3.
It must be on a firm foundation because the whole building rests upon it. It will be the foundation of the foundations and will support the whole structure. The analogy means that this king has, on the one hand, been himself tested and found to be wholly righteous, free of error, and clear in his thinking.
The word yahîsh (to be in haste) means that he will later become the cornerstone which will prove to be the precious seed of the house of David and the foundation of the foundations…‘He who believes will not be in haste’ means that this will not happen at once, but there will first be great tribulations.”
Rabbis Jehudah and Shmuel on Psalm 118:20-26,
“The prophets have commanded Israel that on the day of their salvation they are to sing this to their saviour.” [There is a far-ranging discussion of this in eg. Beit Ya'akov in the Sidûr prayerbook, Warsaw 1880, pp520-521]
Metsudat David on Psalm 118:20-26, [the rejected cornerstone]
“will thus be put in the most coveted place of all.”
Targum on the “capstone” of Zechariah 4:7,
“In this way the Messiah will be revealed, for his name is from the most ancient times and he rules all the kingdoms.”
The Metsudat David on Zechariah 10:4,
“king who is exalted by the people, and who is placed as the cornerstone in the building, the most polished…as it is written: ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.’”
Gentile scholar, Risto Santala:
“RaSHI joins the passage in Micah chapter 5, about the ruler who is to be born in Bethlehem, with the ‘cornerstone’ of psalm 118, and also with the ‘shoot’ in psalm 72:17 which was before the sun, moon and course of the stars….Both the Midrash on the Psalms and the Talmud describe how the verses above [Psalm 118:20-26] were customarily sung antiphonally:
The inhabitants of Jerusalem said within the walls, ‘O LORD, hosanna’ (that is, ‘save us’), and the men of Judah on the outside said ‘O LORD, grant us success,’ the inhabitants of Jerusalem, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD’ etc. [See Midrash and Pesahim 119a]…
The Zohar connects the theme of psalm 118 to Israel’s departure from Egypt. Exodus chapter 15 begins with the words ‘Then Moses sang,’ and describes the deliverance of Israel from the Red Sea. The Zohar explains that ‘there is a reference here to the ‘One who is to come’…
Therefore Israel is to sing this to Him who will come.’ And ‘God will once more extend his hand to save the remnant of his people.’ Then they ‘who died through the serpent’s beguiling will arise and they will become the advisors of the Messiah-King.’ [Zohar, the parashâ be-shallah which begins at Gen. 13:17, 216-227].”[1]
Again, Risto Santala who also retells:
“an Arab pastor once explained to me as we went along the Bethlehem road that an unworked, shapeless stone which has not yet been in the hands of the master is always a dead stone, but on being shaped it comes to life. It thus has a form which will ‘support and carry others’ and it ‘fits in to its own place.’
If the building should for some reason collapse or if it is abandoned, these ‘living stones’ which have been fashioned by the mason can be used in another building. In this way a stone which has been rejected can become the capstone of a new building. From the time of Hammurabi, arches in the east have been built in such a way that their walls would burst inward if the keystone were to be taken away.”[2]
[1] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. Psalm 22 as the Interpreter of the Suffering Messiah and ch. Psalm 118 and the "stone which the builders rejected"
[2] Ibid.
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 3 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 3 of 5...
Friday, October 09, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 5 of 5
In this parsed essay we will present some example of the charges of corruption made against Christianity and some examples of the Rabbinic manner of interpretation.
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued):
Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (aka Maimonides or the Rambam),
Midrash Pesikta Rabbati 33:6,
Risto Santala,
These sorts of interpretations are allowed (if Rabbis make them) because of the extreme authority that Rabbinic Judaism allows its Rabbis:
Dr. Harris Brody,
Judah Goldin, Barry L. Eichler and Jeffrey H. Tigay, ed.,
From The Talmudic Anthology ,
Hilchot Talmud Torah 10:5,
Midrash Qoheleth Rabbati 1,
For more examples, see the essay God Took Human Form (before the time of Jesus).
It is of utmost importance to understand that, as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan explains, “The entire scope of Talmudic literature was developed essentially during early post-Christian times.”[6] What this means is that besides the Targunim all the Rabbinic writings that we know of date from the Christian era and come to us with ready made polemics. This means that an anti-Christian slant is potentially already present is just about any and every piece of Rabbinic writing.
[1] Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Mishneh Torah, 14, ch. 11:1 quoted in Isadore Twersky, ed., A Maimonides Reader (New York: Behrman House, Inc., 1972), pp. 222-223
[2] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah in the Psalms
[3] Dr. Harris Brody, An Introduction to the Talmud
[4] Judah Goldin, Barry L. Eichler and Jeffrey H. Tigay, ed., Studies in Midrash and Related Literature—Jewish Publication Society, Scholar of Distinction Series (New York: The Jewish Publication Society, 1988), p. 379 footnote 88
[5] Selected and edited by Louis J. Newman compiler of The Hasidic Anthology in collaboration with Samuel Spitz, The Talmudic Anthology, Tales and Teachings of the Rabbis, a Collection of Parables, Folk Tales, Fables, Aphorism, Epigrams, Sayings, Anecdotes, Proverbs and Exegetical Interpretations (New York: Behram House, Inc. Publishers, 1945), p. 23
[6] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), pp. 37
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 5 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 5 of 5...
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued):
Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (aka Maimonides or the Rambam),
“‘I see him, but now’ (Num. 24:17), this refers to David; ‘I behold him, but not nigh’ (ibid.), this refers to King Messiah. ‘There shall step forth a star out of Jacob’ (ibid.), this refers to David;
‘And a scepter shall rise out of Israel’ (ibid.), this refers to King Messiah. ‘And shall smite through the corners of Moab’ (ibid.), this refers to David, for we are told: ‘And he smote Moab, and measured them with the line’ (II Sam. 8:2);
‘And break down all the sons of Seth’ (Num. 24:17), this refers to King Messiah, as it is written concerning him: ‘And his dominion shall be from sea to sea’ (Zech. 9:10). ‘And Edom shall be a possession’ (Num. 24:18), this refers to David, as it is written:
‘And all the Edomites became servants to David’ (II Sam. 8:14); ‘And Seir shall be a possession’ (Num. 24:18), this refers to (the days of) King Messiah, as it is written: ‘And saviors shall come up on Mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau’ (Obad. 1:21).”[1]
Midrash Pesikta Rabbati 33:6,
“In the beginning God created…Now the Land was waste and desolate; and darkness was upon the face of the abyss; and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters (Gen. 1:1-2). In the word waste there is an intimation of the kingdom of Babylon…
And in the word desolate is an intimation of the kingdom of Media…In the words upon the face of the abyss is an intimation of the abysmally wicked kingdom of Edom….And the spirit of God moved, words which identify the king Messiah, of whom it is said ‘And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him’ (Isa. 11:2).
But when will the spirit of God move [to bring about your redemption, O Israel]? When in contrition you pour out your heart like water—upon the face of the waters—before the Lord. Then I, even I, will comfort you.”
Risto Santala,
“Tradition ascribes 73 of the 150 psalms to King David. In the Rabbinic literature the Messiah is constantly referred to as the ‘Son of David.’ For this reason, everywhere the future blessing of the house of David is described, the Sages saw Messianic material.
Even the bridal mystery of psalm 45 is seen from a Jewish perspective as being an expression of the relation between the Messiah and Israel. When this psalm says ‘I speak of the things which I have made touching the king (AV)’ or ‘the nations will praise you for ever and ever,’ the Rabbis perceive the Messiah.”[2]
These sorts of interpretations are allowed (if Rabbis make them) because of the extreme authority that Rabbinic Judaism allows its Rabbis:
Dr. Harris Brody,
“In the Talmud we read, ‘The sayings of the elders have more weight than those of the prophets’ (Berakoth 1:7)…‘An offense against the saying of the scribes is worse than one against those of Scripture’ (Sanhedrin 11:3).
In the Midrash (commentary on the Scriptures), in the introduction on Lamentations, it is inferred from Jeremiah 9:12,13 that to forsake the Oral Law was worse than idolatry, uncleanness or the shedding of blood.”[3]
Judah Goldin, Barry L. Eichler and Jeffrey H. Tigay, ed.,
“If we carry out the Torah (if we carry out the injunctions of the Torah as the Sages define them), then and only then are we to look forward to Elijah’s coming.”[4]
From The Talmudic Anthology ,
“In the generation of Rabban Gamaliel, do according to the opinions of Rabban Gamaliel; in the generation of Rabbi Jose, do according to the opinions of Rabbi Jose.”[5]
Hilchot Talmud Torah 10:5,
“The fear of a Rabbi is the same as the fear of God….Just as a man is commanded to respect and fear his father, so he must respect and fear his Rabbi more than his father.”
Midrash Qoheleth Rabbati 1,
“…all decisions to be hereafter given by eminent scholars already existed and were communicated as law to Moses from Sinai.”
For more examples, see the essay God Took Human Form (before the time of Jesus).
It is of utmost importance to understand that, as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan explains, “The entire scope of Talmudic literature was developed essentially during early post-Christian times.”[6] What this means is that besides the Targunim all the Rabbinic writings that we know of date from the Christian era and come to us with ready made polemics. This means that an anti-Christian slant is potentially already present is just about any and every piece of Rabbinic writing.
[1] Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Mishneh Torah, 14, ch. 11:1 quoted in Isadore Twersky, ed., A Maimonides Reader (New York: Behrman House, Inc., 1972), pp. 222-223
[2] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah in the Psalms
[3] Dr. Harris Brody, An Introduction to the Talmud
[4] Judah Goldin, Barry L. Eichler and Jeffrey H. Tigay, ed., Studies in Midrash and Related Literature—Jewish Publication Society, Scholar of Distinction Series (New York: The Jewish Publication Society, 1988), p. 379 footnote 88
[5] Selected and edited by Louis J. Newman compiler of The Hasidic Anthology in collaboration with Samuel Spitz, The Talmudic Anthology, Tales and Teachings of the Rabbis, a Collection of Parables, Folk Tales, Fables, Aphorism, Epigrams, Sayings, Anecdotes, Proverbs and Exegetical Interpretations (New York: Behram House, Inc. Publishers, 1945), p. 23
[6] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), pp. 37
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 5 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 5 of 5...
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 2 of 5
Open my eyes, so that I will
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Let us consider why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
The Premise (continued):
Midrash Rabbah-Genesis Vol. 2, XCVIII:2:
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
The Premise (continued):
Midrash Rabbah-Genesis Vol. 2, XCVIII:2:
“THAT WHICH SHALL BEFALL YOU IN THE END OF DAYS…The Rabbis said: He was about to reveal the end [the Messianic redemption] to them, but it was hidden from him. R. Judah said in the name of R. Eleazar b. Abina: To two men was the end revealed, only to be hidden again from them, and they are these: Jacob and Daniel. Daniel: But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book (Dan. XII, 4)[1].
Jacob: THAT WHICH SHALL BEFALL YOU IN THE END OF DAYS…Ruben, thou art my firstborn (Gen. XLIX, 3); this teaches that he was about to reveal the end to them, when it was hidden from him.”
Footnote: [1] Implying that the book—the secret of Messiah’s advent—had hitherto been open to him.
Rabbi Maimonides,
“The first thing you ought to know is that it impossible for a human being ever to have exact knowledge of the End of Days, as Daniel explained when he said: For the words are secret and sealed [Dan. 12:4].”[1]
Targum Pseudo Jonathan Genesis 49:1 & 10-12:
“1-…The twelve tribes of Israel gathered themselves as one around the golden bed on which he lay: and after the glory of the Shekina of the Lord had been revealed to him, the time when the Messiah, was going to conceal from him…
10-Kings and rulers shall not cease from the house of Judah, nor scribes teaching the law from his seed, until the time when the king, Messiah, shall come…11-How noble is the king, Messiah, who is going to rise from the house of Judah…12-More noble are the eyes of the king, Messiah, like sparkling [or clear] wine…”[2]
As a whole, the nation of Israel has been blinded and yet, we can see beyond the veil and see the truth that the Messiah has come and in the end of days all will know it. In every generation of the past 2,000 years there have been Jews who believe that Jesus is the Messiah; they were, in fact, the first to recognize Him.
The New Testament Explains:
John the Apostle wrote:
“But although He [Jesus] had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: ‘Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?’
Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: ‘He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them’” (John 12:37-40).
Paul wrote:
“we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength” (1st Corinthians 1:23-25).
In the Mishne Torah, Rabbi Maimonides wrote,
“Can there be a greater stumbling block than Christianity?”
No, there is no greater stumbling block and that is the way it is meant to be, for a time.
Jesus said,
“Haven’t you read this scripture: ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?” (Mark 12:10-11 quoting Psalm 118:22-23).
Dr. Harris Brody:
“‘And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem’ (Isaiah 8:14). This verse and its interpretation are given of the Messiah in the Talmud: ‘The son of David cannot appear ere the two ruling houses in Israel shall have come to an end…
And he (Messiah) shall be for a sanctuary, for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offense to both houses of Israel’ (Sanhedrin 38a). In the Soncino edition of the Talmud the footnote refers to Isaiah 8:14 and the reference given for the Son of David is the Messiah. The rabbis agree that as the cornerstone of the Temple is symbolic of the Messiah, it is the Messiah that is to be our foundation of faith. To remove the cornerstone is to remove the Messiah out of our life.
From Isaiah we read: ‘Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation he that believeth shall not make haste’ (Isaiah 28:16). As has been established, this stone, the Messiah of Isaiah, was prophesied to be rejected. Not only do we find this in Isaiah 53 but also in the Psalms: ‘The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner’ (Psalm 118:22).”[3]
[1] Maimonides, Ralph Lerner trans., The Empire of Light, Popular Enlightenment in an Age of Belief (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), p. 118
[2] John Bowker; Fellow of Corpus Christi College and Lecturer in Divinity in the University of Cambridge, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature, An Introduction to Jewish Interpretations of Scripture (London: Cambridge University Press, 1969)
[3] Dr. Harris Brody, An Introduction to the Talmud
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 2 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 2 of 5...
Monday, October 05, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 4 of 5
In this parsed essay we will present some example of the charges of corruption made against Christianity and some examples of the Rabbinic manner of interpretation.
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Fragmentary Targum:
Fragmentary Targum renders Exodus 12:42,
Targum Neofiti:
On Genesis ch. 18
Footnotes: (1) Apparatus, Chapter 18 Nfmg: ‘the Memra of the Lord.’
(2) Nfmg ‘the Memra of the Lord (said): If there be found.’
“And the Memra of the Lord was revealed to Abraham in the plain of the Vision.”[2]
Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation:
A few words on the nature of Rabbinic writings:
Max L. Margolis,
Again, Margolis,
Burton Visotzky, Midrash on Proverbs,
The Library of Biblical Studies, Harry M. Orlinsky, ed.,
We present these quotes in order to show that in Rabbinic writings it is very common to find conclusions that appear to have nothing to do with context:
Martin Buber; Jewish philosopher who authored numerous works on Biblical interpretation, art, education, sociology and philosophy of religion,
William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms,
Footnote: (1) The Messiah of the tribe of Joseph will fall in battle; than the Messiah son of David will be revealed, conquer his adversaries, and receive the tributes of the nations. See JE, 5, 215.
[1] Martin McNamara, M.S.C., trans., The Aramaic Bible Vol. 1A, Targum Neofiti 1: Genesis (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992), pp. 104-105
[2] Ibid., p. 103
[3] Max L. Margolis, The Story of Bible Translations (Philadelphia, The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1917), p. 13
[4] Ibid., pp. 21-22
[5] Burton Visotzky, Midrash on Proverbs (Yale University Press), p. 14
[6] The Library of Biblical Studies, Harry M. Orlinsky, ed., Studies in Targum Jonathan to the Prophets by Leivy Smolar and Moses Aberbach and Targum Jonathan to the Prophets by Pinkhos Churgin (New York and Baltimore: KTAV Publishing House, Inc. and the Baltimore Hebrew College, 1983), p. 306
[7] Martin Buber; Jewish philosopher who authored numerous works on Biblical interpretation, art, education, sociology and philosophy of religion, The Legend of the Baal-Shem (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1955), p. 221
[8] William G. Braude; Rabbi of the Congregation Sons of Israel and David, Providence-Rhode Island, The Midrash on Psalms (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), pp. 293-295
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 4 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 4 of 5...
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Fragmentary Targum:
Fragmentary Targum renders Exodus 12:42,
“The first night, when the ‘Word of YHWH’ was revealed to the world in order to create it, the world was desolate and void, and darkness spread over the face of the abyss and the ‘Word of the Lord’ was bright and illuminating and He called it the first night.”
Targum Neofiti:
On Genesis ch. 18
“And the Lord(1) said to Abraham…And the Lord said through his Memra…the Memra of the Lord may bring upon Abraham what he spoke with him…And the Lord(1) said…And the Lord said(2).”[1]
Footnotes: (1) Apparatus, Chapter 18 Nfmg: ‘the Memra of the Lord.’
(2) Nfmg ‘the Memra of the Lord (said): If there be found.’
“And the Memra of the Lord was revealed to Abraham in the plain of the Vision.”[2]
Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation:
A few words on the nature of Rabbinic writings:
Max L. Margolis,
“The translation frequently assumed the character of free exposition with a view to inculcating the interpretation which the schools placed upon a law or custom and in general to bringing down the scriptural word to the comprehension of the common people. The prophetic lessons naturally lent themselves to amplification…This freedom had its dangers, especially at the time of the rise of the heresies out of which a new religion was born.”[3]
Again, Margolis,
“When Maimonides engaged in warfare upon the notion which ascribed bodily form to the Deity, he was able to point to the authority of the Targums, of Onkelos in particular. The scholars may full-well know that the prophets indulge in similes likening the Creator to the creature and that the scriptural modes of speech are merely accommodations to the human ear; not so the ordinary folk. For their sake the human traits attributed to the Deity are sedulously toned down.
Thus God does not smell the sweet savor of an offering, but accepts it with pleasure; on the Passover night He does not pass over the Israelites, but spares them; He does not go before the people, He leads it; instead of God hearing or seeing, it is said that it was heard or revealed before Him; the hand that covers Moses becomes the protecting Word, just as the wind which He blows is the Word which He speaks; the finger of God is reduced to a blow from before Him, God’s feet are His glorious throne, and God’s staff is the staff wherewith miracles are wrought.
Actions unbecoming God, as when He meets Moses to slay him (Exodus 4. 24), are ascribed to His angel. Just as God must not be humanized, divine appellations may not be used of human beings. Moses is to be Aaron’s master, not a God. The sons of God who took the daughters of man for wives were not even angels, for angels do not go a-wooing, but sons of rulers. There cannot be any comparison between the Lord and the gods.
‘Who is like unto Thee among the gods? who is like Thee, etc.’ (Exodus 15. 11) is made to read: ‘There is none beside Thee, for Thou art God, O Lord; there is none except Thyself.’”[4]
Burton Visotzky, Midrash on Proverbs,
“It is the mark of midrashic literature, however, to take liberalities with the biblical text - to pun on it, to twist its plain sense, and often to modify the meaning of a word by a change in its vowels, all for the sake of homily.”[5]
The Library of Biblical Studies, Harry M. Orlinsky, ed.,
“The general underlying principle in the exegesis of T. [Targum] Jonathan consists in an attempt to render intelligible to the fullest possible degree that which is obscure.”[6]
We present these quotes in order to show that in Rabbinic writings it is very common to find conclusions that appear to have nothing to do with context:
Martin Buber; Jewish philosopher who authored numerous works on Biblical interpretation, art, education, sociology and philosophy of religion,
“According to an ancient interpretation (Bereshit Rabba on Genesis 1:5 and 1:31), God created and rejected many worlds before creating ours. This was thought to be indicated in the verse, ‘And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good.’”[7]
William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms,
“Thou hast given him his heart’s desire (Ps. 21:3) means that Thou, O Lord, in the presence of the king Messiah, didst declare Edom’s guardian angel wrong…
For the leader. A Psalm of David. The king shall joy in Thy strength, O Lord (Ps. 21:1-2). These words are to be read in the light of what Scripture says elsewhere: In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the peoples; unto him shall the nations seek (Isa. 11:10)—that is, seek the king Messiah, David’ son, who will remain hidden until the time of redemption.(1)”[8]
Footnote: (1) The Messiah of the tribe of Joseph will fall in battle; than the Messiah son of David will be revealed, conquer his adversaries, and receive the tributes of the nations. See JE, 5, 215.
[1] Martin McNamara, M.S.C., trans., The Aramaic Bible Vol. 1A, Targum Neofiti 1: Genesis (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992), pp. 104-105
[2] Ibid., p. 103
[3] Max L. Margolis, The Story of Bible Translations (Philadelphia, The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1917), p. 13
[4] Ibid., pp. 21-22
[5] Burton Visotzky, Midrash on Proverbs (Yale University Press), p. 14
[6] The Library of Biblical Studies, Harry M. Orlinsky, ed., Studies in Targum Jonathan to the Prophets by Leivy Smolar and Moses Aberbach and Targum Jonathan to the Prophets by Pinkhos Churgin (New York and Baltimore: KTAV Publishing House, Inc. and the Baltimore Hebrew College, 1983), p. 306
[7] Martin Buber; Jewish philosopher who authored numerous works on Biblical interpretation, art, education, sociology and philosophy of religion, The Legend of the Baal-Shem (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1955), p. 221
[8] William G. Braude; Rabbi of the Congregation Sons of Israel and David, Providence-Rhode Island, The Midrash on Psalms (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), pp. 293-295
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 4 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 4 of 5...
Sunday, October 04, 2009
“Case for Christianity” Conference
Veritas Evangelical Seminary is hosting the “Case for Christianity” conference on Nov. 6-7t 2009 AD, in Diamond Bar, California.
For the frugal price of $65.00 you will be treated to the following:
Ravi Zacharias: The Case for God
Norman Geisler: The Case for the Bible
Lee Strobel: The Case for a Creator
Gary Habermas: The Case for Christ’s Resurrection
Ron Rhodes: The Case for Christ
Ergun Caner: Why I Am a Christian
Ed Hindson: The Case for the Second Coming
Greg Koukl: The Case for Truth
Raul Ries: The Case for Christ’s Love
To register visit this link.
To view the schedule visit this link.
Continue reading “Case for Christianity” Conference...
Continue reading “Case for Christianity” Conference...
For the frugal price of $65.00 you will be treated to the following:
Ravi Zacharias: The Case for God
Norman Geisler: The Case for the Bible
Lee Strobel: The Case for a Creator
Gary Habermas: The Case for Christ’s Resurrection
Ron Rhodes: The Case for Christ
Ergun Caner: Why I Am a Christian
Ed Hindson: The Case for the Second Coming
Greg Koukl: The Case for Truth
Raul Ries: The Case for Christ’s Love
To register visit this link.
To view the schedule visit this link.
Continue reading “Case for Christianity” Conference...
Continue reading “Case for Christianity” Conference...
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 1 of 5
Open my eyes, so that I will
see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Let us consider why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.see wonders from your Torah
—Psalm 119:18
Part 1: The Premise
Part 2: The Premise (continued) and The New Testament Explains
Part 3: The New Testament Explains (continued)
Part 4: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent
Part 5: This Blindness, This Stumbling, This Veil, is Not Permanent (continued and concluded)
A Jewish man once asked me if I, a Jewish-Christian, really thought that the Rabbis who study the Scripture every day had made a mistake and missed the Messiah? Firstly, consider that some of them did accept Jesus as Messiah. Moreover, ever since Jesus’ time those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah have study the Scripture every day; did they make a mistake and choose a false Messiah?
Studying the Scripture every day in and of itself does not answer the question. What about the fact that the Jews have had God’s word for millennia longer than Christianity? No one person has been alive for millennia and so in every generation finite human beings take up the study of the Scripture. There is no knowledge of Scripture by mere birth. Rather, each person has but one lifetime to study; although we stand on the shoulders of giants. Both Jews and Christians stand on the shoulders of those scholarly sages who have come before us.
Also, be very careful to note something about the Rabbis of Jesus’ time, who studied the Scripture every day, they are some of the most well known and respected of Judaism’s sages. These men did not accept Jesus but many of them did accept Shimeon Bar Kochba as Messiah. Would we have been better off having followed their sagely advise?
The question of why the Jewish people, as a whole, have not accepted Jesus as Messiah is not merely answered by appeal to academia, reason or stubbornness; it is ultimately a spiritual issue. I offer the following as an explanation.
The Premise:
The Old and New Testament teach that the Messiah, as an obstacle, will cause the Jewish people to stumble; He would be rejected and the Jews will be temporarily blinded from the truth.
Rabbi Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul the Apostle, wrote:
“Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away” (2nd Corinthians 3:12-16 referring to Exodus 34:34).
Lest the above quote seem like Christian arrogance or ignorance please note some interesting cases in which Rabbis and other Jewish authors also use the term veil and the obvious meaning hidden in describing the writings of the prophets.
Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, aka The Rambam, aka Maimonides:
“Among the sages there are some who say Elijah will come before the Anointed. But concerning these things and others of the same kind, none knows how they will be until they occur. For the prophets veil these things, and the sages have no tradition concerning them, save what they have deduced from the Scripture, and so herein their opinion is divided…The sages said: ‘Let the spirit of those breath its last, who seek to calculate the end’ (Sanhedrin 97b).”[1]
Yehuda Liebes; Jewish Mysticism teacher in the Department of Jewish Thought at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem:
“Zohar II, 68a: ‘But the words of the Master will light up the world until the Messianic king comes, as it is written: ‘And the Earth shall be filled with the knowledge of God…’ [Isaiah 11:9].
Similar passages are found in Zohar III, 23a & III, 236b, the latter referring specifically to the Shema’:
‘A secret which was given only to the sages and must not be revealed. R. Simone fell silent. He laughed and cried, and said: I will say that this is certainly the hour of grace and there is none like this generation until the Messianic king comes.”[2]
[1] Maimonides, The Statutes and Wars of the Messiah-King ch. 11 & 12 quoted in Arthur Hertzberg, Judaism (Washington Square Press, Inc. New York, 1963), p. 219
[2] Yehuda Liebes, Studies in the Zohar (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993), p. 145
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 1 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : The Truth is Veiled – For a Time, part 1 of 5...
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 3 of 5
In this parsed essay we will present some example of the charges of corruption made against Christianity and some examples of the Rabbinic manner of interpretation.
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem:
Genesis 1:27, “And the LORD’s Mimra created man.”
Genesis 22:14, “And Abraham worshipped and prayed in the name of the Word [Memra] of YHWH, and said, ‘You are YHWH who does see, but You cannot be seen.’”
Genesis 16:3, “And Hagar praised and prayed in the name of the Word [Memra] Of YHWH who had revealed Himself to her.”
Genesis 16:13, The “angel of the LORD” is called “LORD’s Mimra.”
Genesis 22, Abraham speaks with the angel of the LORD, “the LORD’s Mimra,” in v.8 “The LORD’s Mimra himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.”
Exodus 3:14, “And the Word [Memra] of YHWH said to Moses: ‘I am He who said unto the world ‘Be!’ and it was: and who in the future shall say to it ‘Be!’ and it shall be.’ And He said: ‘Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘I Am’ has sent me to you.”
Exodus 20:1, “And the LORD’s Mimra spoke all these words.”
Numbers 10:35, “Rise up, O LORD!…Rise up, O Mimra of the LORD!…Return, O Mimra of the LORD!”
Targum Onkelos or Onqelos:
Genesis 9:17, “And YHWH said to Noah, ‘This is the token of the covenant which I have established between My Word [Memra] and between all flesh that is upon the earth.’”
Genesis 15:6, “Abraham believed in the LORD’s Mimra, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Genesis 17:7, “And I will establish my covenant between My Word [Memra] and between you.”
Genesis 28:20-21, “And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, ‘If the Word [Memra] of YHWH will be my support, and will keep me in the way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the Word [Memra]of YHWH be my G-d.’”
Exodus 14:31, “they believed in the LORD’s Mimra and in the prophecy of his servant Moses.”
The beginning of Deuteronomy Ch. 28, “If you will accept the LORD’s Mimra so that the LORD’s Mimra will be your God.”
Deuteronomy 33:27, “these arms are the Mimra, through whom the world was created.”
Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan:
Genesis 1:27, “And the Word [Memra] of YHWH created man in his likeness, in the likeness of YHWH, YHWH created, male and female created He them.”
Genesis 19:4, “And the Word of the YHWH caused to descend upon the peoples of Sodom and Gommorah, brimstone and fire from the YHWH in heaven.”
Genesis 49:18, “Our father Jacob said: "My soul does not wait for salvation such as that wrought by Gideon, the son of Joash, for that was but temporal; neither for a salvation like that of Samson, which was only transitory; but for that salvation which You have promised to come, through Your Word unto Your people, the children of Israel; for your salvation my soul hopes.”
Isaiah 45:17 & 25, “Israel will be saved by the LORD’s Mimra” and “Through the instrumentality of the LORD’s Mimra they will be made righteous.”
Hosea 1:7, “Yet I will show love to the house of Judah, and I will save them by their God, the LORD’s Mimra.”
Genesis ch. 18, “Refresh your hearts and give thanks to the Name of the Memra of the Lord, and after that you may go on…The Lord said in his Memra…”[1]
[1] Martin McNamara, M.S.C., trans., The Aramaic Bible Vol. 1B, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992), pp. 66-67
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 3 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 3 of 5...
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem:
Genesis 1:27, “And the LORD’s Mimra created man.”
Genesis 22:14, “And Abraham worshipped and prayed in the name of the Word [Memra] of YHWH, and said, ‘You are YHWH who does see, but You cannot be seen.’”
Genesis 16:3, “And Hagar praised and prayed in the name of the Word [Memra] Of YHWH who had revealed Himself to her.”
Genesis 16:13, The “angel of the LORD” is called “LORD’s Mimra.”
Genesis 22, Abraham speaks with the angel of the LORD, “the LORD’s Mimra,” in v.8 “The LORD’s Mimra himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.”
Exodus 3:14, “And the Word [Memra] of YHWH said to Moses: ‘I am He who said unto the world ‘Be!’ and it was: and who in the future shall say to it ‘Be!’ and it shall be.’ And He said: ‘Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘I Am’ has sent me to you.”
Exodus 20:1, “And the LORD’s Mimra spoke all these words.”
Numbers 10:35, “Rise up, O LORD!…Rise up, O Mimra of the LORD!…Return, O Mimra of the LORD!”
Targum Onkelos or Onqelos:
Genesis 9:17, “And YHWH said to Noah, ‘This is the token of the covenant which I have established between My Word [Memra] and between all flesh that is upon the earth.’”
Genesis 15:6, “Abraham believed in the LORD’s Mimra, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Genesis 17:7, “And I will establish my covenant between My Word [Memra] and between you.”
Genesis 28:20-21, “And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, ‘If the Word [Memra] of YHWH will be my support, and will keep me in the way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the Word [Memra]of YHWH be my G-d.’”
Exodus 14:31, “they believed in the LORD’s Mimra and in the prophecy of his servant Moses.”
The beginning of Deuteronomy Ch. 28, “If you will accept the LORD’s Mimra so that the LORD’s Mimra will be your God.”
Deuteronomy 33:27, “these arms are the Mimra, through whom the world was created.”
Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan:
Genesis 1:27, “And the Word [Memra] of YHWH created man in his likeness, in the likeness of YHWH, YHWH created, male and female created He them.”
Genesis 19:4, “And the Word of the YHWH caused to descend upon the peoples of Sodom and Gommorah, brimstone and fire from the YHWH in heaven.”
Genesis 49:18, “Our father Jacob said: "My soul does not wait for salvation such as that wrought by Gideon, the son of Joash, for that was but temporal; neither for a salvation like that of Samson, which was only transitory; but for that salvation which You have promised to come, through Your Word unto Your people, the children of Israel; for your salvation my soul hopes.”
Isaiah 45:17 & 25, “Israel will be saved by the LORD’s Mimra” and “Through the instrumentality of the LORD’s Mimra they will be made righteous.”
Hosea 1:7, “Yet I will show love to the house of Judah, and I will save them by their God, the LORD’s Mimra.”
Genesis ch. 18, “Refresh your hearts and give thanks to the Name of the Memra of the Lord, and after that you may go on…The Lord said in his Memra…”[1]
[1] Martin McNamara, M.S.C., trans., The Aramaic Bible Vol. 1B, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992), pp. 66-67
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 3 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 3 of 5...
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 10 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
The James Ossuary:
The “James son of Joseph brother of Jesus,” ossuary is mentioned in the documentary:
Moreover,
Furthermore,
The Geological Survey of Israel (GSI) and the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) have declared that the inscription on the James Ossuary is a forgery. They also state, “the ‘letters patina’ of ‘James Ossuary’ reveals that the patina could not have formed under natural climatic conditions (temperature and water composition) that prevailed in the Judea Mountains during the last 2000 years.”[iv]
Most noteworthy is the fact that Kloner was specifically asked,
He responds thusly,
Of further archeological interest may be The Jesus Tablet - “L'shloshet Yamin—In Three Days” - “Sar Hasarin—Prince of Princes.
Concluding Musings:
It appears that the documentary is accurate in its depictions of actual findings:
The “facts” are one part of the documentary and the “perhaps” are another. It is the perhaps portions that threaten to discredit an otherwise interesting documentary about ancient history and modern archaeology. The dramatic recreations, being based on perhaps, are unfounded personal interpretations that are only an accurate representation of the filmmaker’s active imaginations.
We find the filmmaker’s irresponsible hype in his claims to have found the ossuaries of “The Virgin Mary, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene and Judah, their son,” when, in fact, no such thing was found.
The scientific fact of DNA is less than conclusive. The statistics are questionable, at best. We are left with many unanswered and unasked questions.
[i] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[ii] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[iii] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
[iv] Kristin Romey, Geologists: Ossuary Patina Faked (A publication of the Archaeological Institute of America, June 23, 2003)
[v] David Horovitz, Kloner: A Great Story, But Nonsense (The Jerusalem Post, Feb. 27, 2007 3:33)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 10 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 10 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
The James Ossuary:
The “James son of Joseph brother of Jesus,” ossuary is mentioned in the documentary:
“Forensic testing of the patina on the Jesus ossuary and that of James conclude that they came from the same tomb seemingly proving the authenticity of the often-questioned James ossuary and further increasing the likelihood that it is the tomb of the holy family.
But there is one wrinkle that is not examined in the documentary, one that emerged in a Jerusalem courtroom just weeks ago at the fraud trial of James ossuary owner Oded Golan, charged with forging part of the inscription on the box. Former FBI agent Gerald Richard testified that a photo of the James ossuary, showing it in Golan’s home, was taken in the 1970s, based on tests done by the FBI photo lab. The trial resumes tomorrow.
Jacobovici conceded in an interview that if the ossuary was photographed in the 1970s, it could not then have been found in a tomb in 1980. But while he does not address the conundrum in the documentary, he said in an interview that it’s possible Golan’s photo was printed on old paper in the 1980s.”[i]
Moreover,
“Archaeologists also balk at the filmmaker’s claim that the James Ossuary – the center of a famous antiquities fraud in Israel – might have originated from the same cave. In 2005, Israel charged five suspects with forgery in connection with the infamous bone box. ‘I don’t think the James Ossuary came from the same cave,’ said Dan Bahat, an archaeologist at Bar-Ilan University.
‘If it were found there, the man who made the forgery would have taken something better. He would have taken Jesus.’”[ii]
Furthermore,
“The antiquities dealer (Oded Golan) from which the James ossuary was procured, attests that it came from Silwan, not Talpiot, and had dirt in it matching the soil from that location in Jerusalem, whereas the ossuaries from Talpiot came out of a rock cave from a different place, without such soil in it. ‘To theorize that there was a Jesus family tomb, and yet the one member of Jesus’ family who we know was buried in Jerusalem for a long time did not come out of the ground from that locale contradicts this theory.
Furthermore, Eusebius reports that the tomb marker for James’ burial was close to where James was martyred near the temple mount, indeed near the famous tombs in the Kidron valley such as the so-called tomb of Absalom. Talpiot is nowhere near this locale.”[iii]
The Geological Survey of Israel (GSI) and the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) have declared that the inscription on the James Ossuary is a forgery. They also state, “the ‘letters patina’ of ‘James Ossuary’ reveals that the patina could not have formed under natural climatic conditions (temperature and water composition) that prevailed in the Judea Mountains during the last 2000 years.”[iv]
Most noteworthy is the fact that Kloner was specifically asked,
“What of the assertion that the 10th ossuary disappeared from your care and may be none other than the ‘James’ ossuary?”
He responds thusly,
“Nothing has disappeared. The 10th ossuary was on my list. The measurements were not the same (as the James ossuary). It was plain (without an inscription). We had no room under our roofs for all the ossuaries, so unmarked ones were sometimes kept in the courtyard (of the Rockefeller Museum).”[v]
Of further archeological interest may be The Jesus Tablet - “L'shloshet Yamin—In Three Days” - “Sar Hasarin—Prince of Princes.
Concluding Musings:
It appears that the documentary is accurate in its depictions of actual findings:
A tomb was, in fact, found.
Ossuaries were, in fact, found.
Legible inscriptions were, in fact, found.
Very common names were, in fact, found.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Perhaps it was a family tomb.
Perhaps someone name Yeshua was married to Mariamne or Mara or Maria.
Perhaps Yehuda was their son.
Perhaps this was even the family tomb of Jesus the Messiah.
Perhaps.
The “facts” are one part of the documentary and the “perhaps” are another. It is the perhaps portions that threaten to discredit an otherwise interesting documentary about ancient history and modern archaeology. The dramatic recreations, being based on perhaps, are unfounded personal interpretations that are only an accurate representation of the filmmaker’s active imaginations.
We find the filmmaker’s irresponsible hype in his claims to have found the ossuaries of “The Virgin Mary, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene and Judah, their son,” when, in fact, no such thing was found.
The scientific fact of DNA is less than conclusive. The statistics are questionable, at best. We are left with many unanswered and unasked questions.
[i] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[ii] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[iii] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
[iv] Kristin Romey, Geologists: Ossuary Patina Faked (A publication of the Archaeological Institute of America, June 23, 2003)
[v] David Horovitz, Kloner: A Great Story, But Nonsense (The Jerusalem Post, Feb. 27, 2007 3:33)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 10 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 10 of 10...
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 2 of 5
In this parsed essay we will present some example of the charges of corruption made against Christianity and some examples of the Rabbinic manner of interpretation.
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
The Targunim:
Here we present samples of the Targunim (plural for Targum) which are Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament dating from the 1st c. BC. The Targunim take liberties in paraphrasing texts.
For example, if the Targumist thought that a text spoke of the Messiah they would insert the word Messiah. Below we will consider example of where the Targunim takes the concept of the Word of God (known as God’s Memra or Mimra) and inserts it into the Biblical text.
These paraphrases, these insertions, these changes, are not thought to be malicious corruption but rather, helpful elucidation. The point being that if such works were to be produced by Christians they would be attacked as malicious corruption.[1]
Gentile scholar Risto Santala explains,
Alfred Edersheim notes,
It is interesting to note that while the Mimra concept was reduced from 179 to 0. Before Jesus this concept is useful and acceptable but the all of a sudden after Jesus this concept disappears. The timing is very interesting.
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia,
In Isaiah the Targum refers to the Messiah as the Lord’s servant in Isaiah 42:1, 43:10, 52:13.
And refers to the Messiah in general in: Isaiah 4:2, 9:5, 10:27, 11: 1, 11:6, 14:29, 16:l, 28:5, 42:l, 43:10, 52:13 and 60:1.
[1] In this article we have borrowed from the research of James Scott Trimm, The Memra and the research of Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah, the Mimra or 'Word' of God
[2] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah, the Mimra or 'Word' of God he refers us to Gottlieb Klein, Sex Föredrag, p. 88
[3] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. I, pp. 46-48 & Vol. II pp. 659-664
[4] Santala
[5] Isaac Landman, ed.; Rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim and founder and director of the Academy for Adult Jewish Education, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, In Ten Volumes (New York: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1942), p. 167
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 2 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 2 of 5...
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
The Targunim:
Here we present samples of the Targunim (plural for Targum) which are Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament dating from the 1st c. BC. The Targunim take liberties in paraphrasing texts.
For example, if the Targumist thought that a text spoke of the Messiah they would insert the word Messiah. Below we will consider example of where the Targunim takes the concept of the Word of God (known as God’s Memra or Mimra) and inserts it into the Biblical text.
These paraphrases, these insertions, these changes, are not thought to be malicious corruption but rather, helpful elucidation. The point being that if such works were to be produced by Christians they would be attacked as malicious corruption.[1]
Gentile scholar Risto Santala explains,
“The Jerusalem Talmud states that the Patriarchs knew only the ‘God of heaven, but God did not reveal to them the Lord’s MIMRA.’ This Aramaic word MIMRA the Rabbis often identified with the Messiah. It corresponds to the Greek logos or ‘word.’ Targum Jonathan says that, ‘My name the LORD I did not, however, reveal to them through my Holy Spirit’…
Of special note in these passages from the Targums is that often the Mimra seems to be identified with the name of God: ‘The LORD’s Mimra will be my God’; ‘I will save them through their God, the LORD’s Mimra’; Abraham was justified through the Mimra; the Mimra gave Israel the Law; Moses prayed to the Mimra; Israel was justified through the Mimra’s instrumentality and the Mimra even created the world…
Professor Gottlieb Klein identified Metatron, used as an epithet for the Messiah, with Yahweh’s Mimra or ‘Word.’ In Klein’s opinion it was precisely this Aramaic word which gave the grounds to the belief that Christ is ‘the Word or Logos of God become flesh.’ The Jewish philosopher Philo, who lived about the same time as Jesus, considered the Logos to be God’s delegate, his emissary and angel who ‘prays as High Priest before God on behalf of the world.’”[2]
Alfred Edersheim notes,
“The Mimra concept associated with God and his manifestations appears 596 times in the Targums—but not once in the Talmud…Targum Onqelos uses the word 179 times, Targum Yerushalmi 99 times, and Targum Jonathan 321 times. Over half of these references to the Mimra approach it as if it were ‘personified.’”[3]
It is interesting to note that while the Mimra concept was reduced from 179 to 0. Before Jesus this concept is useful and acceptable but the all of a sudden after Jesus this concept disappears. The timing is very interesting.
“The absence of ‘Mimra’ from the Talmud may be a reaction to the first Christians’ interpretation of it as indicating Jesus. But are there really grounds for understanding ‘Mimra’ to mean the same as the New Testament’s ‘Logos’? In answering this question there is good reason to appeal to the Rabbis’ way of grading the old writings according to their source value:
‘The Old Testament leads to the Targums, the Targums lead to the Mishna, the Mishna to the Talmud, and so on.’ [Sifrei Shoftim, piska 160a] Proceeding in this way the Targums give earlier information on the Rabbis’ exegesis than even the Mishna, the oldest part of the Talmud…
If these ideas are joined to the Messianic expectation, a connection the Rabbis made, they will receive a new significance for Christians too. Although consideration of the Greek logos concept will be left for the New Testament section on the opening verses of John’s gospel, it is worth noting even at this point that a similar ‘word’ theology as that found in connection with the Mimra was in part current among the Essenes of Qumran a little before the birth of Christ.
These sectarians, for the most part former Temple priests, stress in their scrolls that everything received its beginning through God’s deliberate purposing, and ‘without him nothing was made’—‘Through your word everything received its beginning, and without you nothing was made’ [Eg. Megilath ha-serachim 1 QS XI:10 and Hôdayôth 1 QH I:19]”[4]
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia,
“LOGOS (Greek for ‘word’), a theological concept found in the Judaism of the period of the Second Temple and in Christianity…
In the Targums the word Memra is introduced in every instance in the Bible in which God is represented as talking to man, thus explaining away all the anthropomorphisms found in the text.”[5]
In Isaiah the Targum refers to the Messiah as the Lord’s servant in Isaiah 42:1, 43:10, 52:13.
And refers to the Messiah in general in: Isaiah 4:2, 9:5, 10:27, 11: 1, 11:6, 14:29, 16:l, 28:5, 42:l, 43:10, 52:13 and 60:1.
[1] In this article we have borrowed from the research of James Scott Trimm, The Memra and the research of Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah, the Mimra or 'Word' of God
[2] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah, the Mimra or 'Word' of God he refers us to Gottlieb Klein, Sex Föredrag, p. 88
[3] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. I, pp. 46-48 & Vol. II pp. 659-664
[4] Santala
[5] Isaac Landman, ed.; Rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim and founder and director of the Academy for Adult Jewish Education, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, In Ten Volumes (New York: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1942), p. 167
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 2 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 2 of 5...
Friday, September 25, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 9 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Erudite Elucidators?:
John Dominic Crossan is the co-founder and former co-chair of “The Jesus Seminar.” He makes his obligatory appearance in the documentary in order to make one statement:
[He emphasized the word “my”]
Note that on June 26, 2000 ABC aired “Peter Jennings Reporting: The Search for Jesus” in which John Dominic Crossan stated that crucifixion was feared because it “was not simply that it made you suffer a lot. It meant that you didn’t get buried. That’s what made it one of the supreme Roman penalties—lack of burial.” Crossan believes that Jesus’ body was simply thrown in the city dump and was eaten by wild dogs.
Firstly, let us note that the problem with this statement is lack of evidence. Moreover, the evidence we do have on this subject proves him wrong and proves the Bible right. In 1968 the remains of a crucified man named Yhohnn (or Yohann) Yehohanan were found in an ossuary at Giv'at ha-Mivtar in Jerusalem. This find proved many details of the biblical account including a large nail imbedded through the heel bone and still embedded into a piece the wood, broken shin bones and burial in a family grave.
In 2000 John Dominic Crossan’s expertise informed us that crucifixion victims did not get buried. In 2007 Crossan’s expertise informed us that Jesus may have been buried and may be found. It would appear that the only thing that could challenge Crossan’s faith would be if the New Testament were to be taken in a literal, traditional, orthodox manner and if he would consider other historical and archeological evidence.
Another expert who seems to be up for anything is James Tabor of whom Ben Witherington comments thusly:
While it is certainly difficult to discern a person’s mood and unacceptable to determine the motive of their heart; James Tabor appeared to be almost capricious or belittling at times:
The very cornerstone of the Christian faith is referred to as magical; well, we have been told worse. Notice his preconceived notion; “historical” and “realistic” does not allow the magical. You may say “Rightly so,” but do keep in mind that he is presenting us with an a priori commitment to naturalism/materialism. Unless it has been proven that naturalism/materialism is absolute we cannot simply dismiss the “magical.” It is a false dichotomy to juxtapose “historical” and “realistic” on the one hand and “magical” aka miraculous or supernatural on the other whilst asserting that never the twain shall meet.
He also states,
Who would have thunk it? Apparently, in two thousand years only James Tabor and a handful of people have noticed the genealogy in Luke. This reminds me of the author who wrote, “in a little-known passage of the Bible, the credit for killing Goliath is actually given to somebody completely different – David’s champion Elhanan”—“little known”?
We seem to be dealing with experts for whom any non-New Testament theory de jour will do.
[i] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 9 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 9 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Erudite Elucidators?:
John Dominic Crossan is the co-founder and former co-chair of “The Jesus Seminar.” He makes his obligatory appearance in the documentary in order to make one statement:
“If the bones of Jesus were to be found in an ossuary in Jerusalem tomorrow. Without doubt, let’s say they are definitely agreed to be the bones of Jesus. Would that destroy Christian faith? It certainly would not destroy my Christian faith. I leave what happens to bodies up to God.”
[He emphasized the word “my”]
Note that on June 26, 2000 ABC aired “Peter Jennings Reporting: The Search for Jesus” in which John Dominic Crossan stated that crucifixion was feared because it “was not simply that it made you suffer a lot. It meant that you didn’t get buried. That’s what made it one of the supreme Roman penalties—lack of burial.” Crossan believes that Jesus’ body was simply thrown in the city dump and was eaten by wild dogs.
Firstly, let us note that the problem with this statement is lack of evidence. Moreover, the evidence we do have on this subject proves him wrong and proves the Bible right. In 1968 the remains of a crucified man named Yhohnn (or Yohann) Yehohanan were found in an ossuary at Giv'at ha-Mivtar in Jerusalem. This find proved many details of the biblical account including a large nail imbedded through the heel bone and still embedded into a piece the wood, broken shin bones and burial in a family grave.
In 2000 John Dominic Crossan’s expertise informed us that crucifixion victims did not get buried. In 2007 Crossan’s expertise informed us that Jesus may have been buried and may be found. It would appear that the only thing that could challenge Crossan’s faith would be if the New Testament were to be taken in a literal, traditional, orthodox manner and if he would consider other historical and archeological evidence.
Another expert who seems to be up for anything is James Tabor of whom Ben Witherington comments thusly:
“What should we make of James Tabor’s being co-opted into this project? You will remember his book which came out last year The Jesus Dynasty. In that book he had quite a good deal to say about the Talpiot Tomb, and about Panthera being the father of Jesus, and about Jesus being buried in Galilee, and of course nothing about a ossuary which claims that Joseph is the father of Jesus.”[i]
While it is certainly difficult to discern a person’s mood and unacceptable to determine the motive of their heart; James Tabor appeared to be almost capricious or belittling at times:
“When He’s first buried it’s in a temporary tomb. And later, unless He somehow magically disappears and goes to heaven, which is a position of Christian faith, but if you’re gonna be historical and realistic, uh, He, He was put in a, would be put in a permanent place.”
The very cornerstone of the Christian faith is referred to as magical; well, we have been told worse. Notice his preconceived notion; “historical” and “realistic” does not allow the magical. You may say “Rightly so,” but do keep in mind that he is presenting us with an a priori commitment to naturalism/materialism. Unless it has been proven that naturalism/materialism is absolute we cannot simply dismiss the “magical.” It is a false dichotomy to juxtapose “historical” and “realistic” on the one hand and “magical” aka miraculous or supernatural on the other whilst asserting that never the twain shall meet.
He also states,
“Tell you something very interesting, there’re two genealogies of Jesus. Everybody reads the formal genealogy of Joseph…but the other genealogy is imbedded in Luke, people don’t notice it much, it’s Luke chapter three, you gotta turn a few pages.”
Who would have thunk it? Apparently, in two thousand years only James Tabor and a handful of people have noticed the genealogy in Luke. This reminds me of the author who wrote, “in a little-known passage of the Bible, the credit for killing Goliath is actually given to somebody completely different – David’s champion Elhanan”—“little known”?
We seem to be dealing with experts for whom any non-New Testament theory de jour will do.
[i] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 9 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 9 of 10...
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 1 of 5
In this parsed essay we will present some example of the charges of corruption made against Christianity and some examples of the Rabbinic manner of interpretation.
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
There is an odd contradiction when it comes to the Christian claim that quite often there is support for Christian theology in ancient Rabbinic writing.
One the one hand, when the ancient interpretation of the Old Testament—the Tanakh—as found in the Rabbinic writings is appealed to; the anti-missionaries charge that we do not understand those writings due to the various methods of interpretation employed by the ancient sages.
On the other hand, when anti-missionaries read the New Testament they claim that its writers are taking the Old Testament out of context or even claiming that certain texts are treated as prophecy when in reality they are not.
The contradiction is that when considering the New Testament use of the Old Testament it is the anti-missionaries who do not consider the various ancient methods of interpretation that, quite naturally, the writers of the New Testament would have employed.
The Charges (and the problems for those making them):
A common charge made by anti-missionaries is that Christians have tampered with the Old Testament in order to force it to agree with Christian doctrine.
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan charges,
This is quite a charge to make however, in the chapter of his anti-missionary book in which Rabbi Kaplan discusses Jesus he does just what he accuses Christians of doing. He offers incorrect citations, he makes utterly false claims as he removes texts from context to make pretexts for prooftexts and in his anti-missionary zeal; he comes to very odd and false conclusions. Here is one example,
One need not know too much about Jesus to know that this is dead wrong. But is it wrong? Did Jesus not say that?
Yes and no.
The Rabbi did not care to point out that the text he is quoting states, “While they were listening to this, He [Jesus] went on to tell them a parable.” Jesus was telling a parable, and there is a character in the parable that says those words. Yes He said that, but they were not His words.
Moreover, Rabbi Kaplan himself is not above inserting words into the Old Testament. He does so in his quoting of Isaiah 2:2-4, this type of practice, if done by Christians, is considered by him to be a corruption of Scripture.
He quotes,
While this may seem like no big change the point is a basic one; when the Rabbi wants the text to say Messiah he simply inserts the word.
And Rabbi Kaplan concludes,
This is clearly fallacious as Christian scholars most certainly do not admit that all proofs that make Christianity what it is are null and void.
Larry Levey, a self-described “Former Hebrew-Christian,” charges,
Interestingly, in Larry Levey’s article of less than one page he does exactly what he speaks out against. In his short article he makes reference to 26 New Testament texts; he does not do so with any interest in the actual teachings of Jesus and His Apostles but he desperately ransacks New Testament to find support for his preconceived ideas and is merely using the New Testament like a drunk uses a lamp post.
Rabbi Shraga Simmons,
Rabbi Simmons also states,
This is called elitism; the Rabbi has knowledge of Hebrew and therefore you cannot hope to challenge him. However, this would mean that a large percentage of Jewish people the world over cannot know the Bible since they do not know Hebrew.
But then again, of course they can, they rely on the Rabbi. But in that case why cannot Christians rely on Christian scholars who are Hebrew experts? Being bilingual I can tell you this much; translation can be difficult and translation is possible.
[1] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), p. 37
[2] Ibid., p. 74
[3] Ibid., pp. 94-95
[4] Ibid., p. 71
[5] Larry Levey, “Revelation,” Jews for Judaism Library
[6] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Jews for Jesus
[7] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 1 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 1 of 5...
Part 1: The Charges (and the problems for those making them)
Part 2: The Targunim
Part 3: Targum Yerushalmi or Jerusalem and Targum Onkelos or Onqelos and Targum Jonathan or Pseudo-Jonathan
Part 4: Fragmentary Targum and Targum Neofiti and Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation
Part 5: Examples of Rabbinic Interpretation (continued and concluded)
There is an odd contradiction when it comes to the Christian claim that quite often there is support for Christian theology in ancient Rabbinic writing.
One the one hand, when the ancient interpretation of the Old Testament—the Tanakh—as found in the Rabbinic writings is appealed to; the anti-missionaries charge that we do not understand those writings due to the various methods of interpretation employed by the ancient sages.
On the other hand, when anti-missionaries read the New Testament they claim that its writers are taking the Old Testament out of context or even claiming that certain texts are treated as prophecy when in reality they are not.
The contradiction is that when considering the New Testament use of the Old Testament it is the anti-missionaries who do not consider the various ancient methods of interpretation that, quite naturally, the writers of the New Testament would have employed.
The Charges (and the problems for those making them):
A common charge made by anti-missionaries is that Christians have tampered with the Old Testament in order to force it to agree with Christian doctrine.
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan charges,
“In many cases, they were not above using verses out of context, changing texts, and even mistranslating them, in order to prove their point.”[1]
This is quite a charge to make however, in the chapter of his anti-missionary book in which Rabbi Kaplan discusses Jesus he does just what he accuses Christians of doing. He offers incorrect citations, he makes utterly false claims as he removes texts from context to make pretexts for prooftexts and in his anti-missionary zeal; he comes to very odd and false conclusions. Here is one example,
“In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus instructed his followers (Matthew 5:43) ‘Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, and do good to those who hate you.’ This might have been a fine lesson if Jesus himself lived up to it. But when it came to his own enemies, Jesus declared (Luke 19:27), ‘Take my enemies, who would not have me rule over them, bring them here, and kill them before me.’”[2]
One need not know too much about Jesus to know that this is dead wrong. But is it wrong? Did Jesus not say that?
Yes and no.
The Rabbi did not care to point out that the text he is quoting states, “While they were listening to this, He [Jesus] went on to tell them a parable.” Jesus was telling a parable, and there is a character in the parable that says those words. Yes He said that, but they were not His words.
Moreover, Rabbi Kaplan himself is not above inserting words into the Old Testament. He does so in his quoting of Isaiah 2:2-4, this type of practice, if done by Christians, is considered by him to be a corruption of Scripture.
He quotes,
“…Come let us go up to the mountain of G-d to the house of the G-d of Jacob and He (the Messiah) will teach us His ways…And He (the Messiah) will judge between nations…”[3]
While this may seem like no big change the point is a basic one; when the Rabbi wants the text to say Messiah he simply inserts the word.
And Rabbi Kaplan concludes,
“The main things is that a clear reading of the Jewish Bible offers absolutely no support to the ‘proofs’ of Christianity. In most cases, all you need is a good translation (or better still, the Hebrew original), and all those ‘proofs’ fall away. Many contemporary Christian scholars admit as much.”[4]
This is clearly fallacious as Christian scholars most certainly do not admit that all proofs that make Christianity what it is are null and void.
Larry Levey, a self-described “Former Hebrew-Christian,” charges,
“Those Christians who desperately ransacked the Talmud to find support for their preconceived ideas are not students of the Talmud with any interest in the actual teachings of Rabbinic Judaism. They merely use the Talmud like a drunk uses a lamp post - not for illumination, but for support.”[5]
Interestingly, in Larry Levey’s article of less than one page he does exactly what he speaks out against. In his short article he makes reference to 26 New Testament texts; he does not do so with any interest in the actual teachings of Jesus and His Apostles but he desperately ransacks New Testament to find support for his preconceived ideas and is merely using the New Testament like a drunk uses a lamp post.
Rabbi Shraga Simmons,
“The missionaries’ approach to ensnare unsuspecting people includes quoting Torah verses out of context and gross mis-translations…These deceptions are most successful with Jews who have no knowledge of their own Jewish heritage.”[6]
Rabbi Simmons also states,
“Biblical verses ‘referring’ to Jesus are mistranslations….Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text—which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.”[7]
This is called elitism; the Rabbi has knowledge of Hebrew and therefore you cannot hope to challenge him. However, this would mean that a large percentage of Jewish people the world over cannot know the Bible since they do not know Hebrew.
But then again, of course they can, they rely on the Rabbi. But in that case why cannot Christians rely on Christian scholars who are Hebrew experts? Being bilingual I can tell you this much; translation can be difficult and translation is possible.
[1] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), p. 37
[2] Ibid., p. 74
[3] Ibid., pp. 94-95
[4] Ibid., p. 71
[5] Larry Levey, “Revelation,” Jews for Judaism Library
[6] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Jews for Jesus
[7] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 1 of 5...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Does Christianity Corrupt the Old Testament? And: On the Memra, part 1 of 5...
Monday, September 21, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 8 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Some Academics Dare to Disagree:
Let us consider some of the academics who are not considered in Simcha Jacobovici and DSC’s “all.”
Recall that in the section of this essay entitled Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty I quoted Jacobovici’s website to the effect that “there is absolutely no academic dispute concerning the provenance of any of the inscriptions. Nor is there any question as to how they should be read.” And that DSC claimed that “All leading epigraphers agree about the inscriptions. All archaeologists confirm the nature of the find.”
Bar Ilan University’s Amos Kloner was,
Kloner also stated,
Ben Witherington is the author of “What Have they Done With Jesus?” and he was involved in DSC’s special on the James ossuary that was produced by Smicha Jacobovici about whom Witherington had the following to say
Ben Witherington then enumerates various problems with the documentary’s various assertions (please see his website for these).
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 8 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 8 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Some Academics Dare to Disagree:
Let us consider some of the academics who are not considered in Simcha Jacobovici and DSC’s “all.”
Recall that in the section of this essay entitled Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty I quoted Jacobovici’s website to the effect that “there is absolutely no academic dispute concerning the provenance of any of the inscriptions. Nor is there any question as to how they should be read.” And that DSC claimed that “All leading epigraphers agree about the inscriptions. All archaeologists confirm the nature of the find.”
Bar Ilan University’s Amos Kloner was,
“the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television. ‘They just want to get money for it’…Kloner also said the filmmakers’ assertions are false. ‘The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time.”[i]
Kloner also stated,
“It’s a beautiful story but without any proof whatsoever.”[ii]
“Shimon Gibson, one of three archaeologists who first discovered the tomb in 1980, said Monday of the film’s claims: ‘I’m skeptical, but that’s the way I am. I’m willing to accept the possibility.”[iii]
“Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film’s hypothesis holds little weight. Pfann is even unsure that the name ‘Jesus’ on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it’s more likely the name ‘Hanun.’ Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.”[iv]
“William Dever, an expert on near eastern archaeology and anthropology, who has worked with Israeli archeologists for five decades, said specialists have known about the ossuaries for years. ‘The fact that it’s been ignored tells you something,’ said Dever, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona. ‘It would be amusing if it didn’t mislead so many people.’”[v]
Ben Witherington is the author of “What Have they Done With Jesus?” and he was involved in DSC’s special on the James ossuary that was produced by Smicha Jacobovici about whom Witherington had the following to say
“He is a good film maker, and he knows a good sensational story when he sees one. This is such a story. Unfortunately it is a story full of holes, conjectures, and problems. It will make good TV and involves a bad critical reading of history. Basically this is old news with a new interpretation. We have known about this tomb since it was discovered in 1980. There are all sorts of reasons to see this as much ado about nothing much.”[vi]
Ben Witherington then enumerates various problems with the documentary’s various assertions (please see his website for these).
[i] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007) also Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Posted: 1:04 p.m. EST February 26, 2007)
[ii] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[iii] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007)
[iv] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007) also Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Posted: 1:04 p.m. EST February 26, 2007)
[v] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007)
[vi] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 8 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 8 of 10...
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 2 of 2
We now conclude our consideration of the Christian claim that Jesus did not fulfill all messianic prophecies 2,000 years ago due to the expectation of His doing so upon His return and the anti-missionary claims that a second coming is “not even hinted at in Biblical literature”[1] and “no concept of a second coming exists”[2] in Jewish sources.
Part 1: Two Comings of One Messiah
Part 2: Expectation of Two Messiahs
Expectation of Two Messiahs:
An interesting aspect of Messianic speculation is the question of whether one Messiah would come twice or whether we could expect two Messiahs.
Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; Prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar,
Footnote: (1) Cf. Sanhedrin 98a
Note the paraphrase of Isaiah 53 bruised and despised man and the concept of a Messiah who is killed and resurrected. Likewise, in the following quotes we will see many instances of a belief in the concept of the rejection, death and resurrection of the Messiah.
Again Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver,
Footnote: (1) Cf. Midrash Wayosha’, end.
William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms,
Footnote: (1) The Messiah of the tribe of Joseph will fall in battle; then the Messiah son of David will be revealed, conquer his adversaries, and receive the tributes of the nations. See JE, 5, 215.
Gerson D. Cohen,
Geoffrey Wigoder:
Raphael Patai; noted anthropologist and Biblical scholar who taught Hebrew at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem:
Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., D.H.L., on Zechariah 12:10,
Zechariah 12:10 reads (Jewish Publication Society translation):
Professor Gershom Scholem; Professor Emeritus of Jewish Mysticism at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem,
Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1,
Hebrew scholars Michael Wise and James Tabor comment on the Dead Sea scrolls:
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia:
[1] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), pp. 35-36
[2] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus, retrieved 2-17-03
[3] Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; Prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel, From the First Through the Seventh Centuries (Beacon Hill, Boston: Beacon Press, 1927), p. 49
[4] Ibid., pp. 43-44
[5] William G. Braude; Rabbi of the Congregation Sons of Israel and David, Providence-Rhode Island, The Midrash on Psalms (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), pp. 293-295
[6] Gerson D. Cohen, The Rabbinic Heritage quoted in Leo W. Schwarz, ed. & intro., Great Ages and Ideas of the Jewish People (New York: Random House, Inc., 1956), p. 208
[7] Geoffrey Wigoder, ed. in chief, The Encyclopedia of Judaism (New York: Macmillan Publishing, co., 1989), p. 4821
[8] Raphael Patai; Noted anthropologist and Biblical scholar who taught Hebrew at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Messiah Text (New York: Avon Books, 1979), pp. 166-167
[9] Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., D.H.L., The Twelve Prophets, Hebrew Text and English Translations with Introductions and Commentary (New York: Soncino Press, 1848, 12th ed. 1985)
[10] Professor Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, And Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality (New York: Schocken Books, 1971), p. 18
[11] Lawrence H. Schiffman & James C. VanderKam, Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 540
[12] Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Smith, The Search for Messiah (Co-published by Joy Publishing, Fountain Valley, CA. and The Word for Today, Costa Mesa, CA., 1996), pp.121-124. Quoting from Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1992, p. 60-61
[13] “Baraitha (lit. ‘outside); a teaching or a tradition of the Tannaim that has been excluded from the Mishnah and incorporated in a later collection compiled by R. Hiyya and R. Oshaiah, generally introduced by ‘Our Rabbis taught’, or ‘It has been taught.’” [Judah J. Slotki, M.A., comp., Midrash Rabbah (London & New York: The Soncino Press, 1983), p. Index-Glossary-1]
[14] Isaac Landman, ed.; Rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim and founder and director of the Academy for Adult Jewish Education, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, In Ten Volumes (New York: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1942), p. 501
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 2 of 2...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 2 of 2...
Part 1: Two Comings of One Messiah
Part 2: Expectation of Two Messiahs
Expectation of Two Messiahs:
An interesting aspect of Messianic speculation is the question of whether one Messiah would come twice or whether we could expect two Messiahs.
Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; Prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar,
The Book of Zerubbabel, an apocalypse, the ground work of which was probably written in Palestine between the years 629 and 636…
Zerubbabel, whose name was associated with the first restoration, is transported to Nineveh (Rome), and in the market place finds a ‘bruised and despised man,’ who reveals to him his identity.(1) He is the Messiah—Menahem ben ‘Amiel—doomed to abide there until his hour shall strike…
Five years prior to the coming of Hefzibah, the mother of the Messiah ben David, the Messiah ben Joseph (Nehemiah ben Hushiel) will appear, but he will be slain by Armilius. Afterward he will be resurrected by the Messiah ben David. This book, with its outspoken unequivocal Messianic date, exerted a great influence upon the Messianic thought of the day. The book is mentioned by name in the writings of Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Eleazar of Worms.[3]
Footnote: (1) Cf. Sanhedrin 98a
Note the paraphrase of Isaiah 53 bruised and despised man and the concept of a Messiah who is killed and resurrected. Likewise, in the following quotes we will see many instances of a belief in the concept of the rejection, death and resurrection of the Messiah.
Again Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver,
The Revelations of Simeon Yohani, an apocalypse written in Palestine after the year 750 C.E…the Messiah ben Joseph will appear and restore the Jews to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple…
But the cruel king Armilius (Antichrist) will then arise, who will be bald and scabby, having small eyes and deaf in one ear(1)…who will wage war upon the Messiah ben Joseph…and Israel will be driven into the wilderness for forty-five days, where the Messiah ben Joseph will die. The Messiah ben David will then appear.
The Jews will at first refuse to accept him, saying that the true Messiah had already appeared and been slain, but God will show them that he is in truth the Messiah. He will then slay Armilius. God will then assemble all Israel into Jerusalem, which will be cleansed of all sinners and of all uncircumcised.[4]
Footnote: (1) Cf. Midrash Wayosha’, end.
William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms,
Thou hast given him his heart’s desire (Ps. 21:3) means that Thou, O Lord, in the presence of the king Messiah, didst declare Edom’s guardian angel wrong…For the leader. A Psalm of David. The king shall joy in Thy strength, O Lord (Ps. 21:1-2). These words are to be read in the light of what Scripture says elsewhere: In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the peoples; unto him shall the nations seek (Isa. 11:10)—that is, seek the king Messiah, David’ son, who will remain hidden until the time of redemption.(1)[5]
Footnote: (1) The Messiah of the tribe of Joseph will fall in battle; then the Messiah son of David will be revealed, conquer his adversaries, and receive the tributes of the nations. See JE, 5, 215.
Gerson D. Cohen,
…the king of the lost ten tribes, the Messiah of the seed of Joseph, who would himself perish on the field of battle. But the people would again rally under ‘the shoot of the stock of Jesse,’ the Messiah of the seed of David, who would deal the enemy a crushing and final defeat. Then would the visions of all the prophets, of Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, Daniel and the others, come to pass: resurrection, peace, prosperity, and universal acknowledgment of the kingship of God.[6]
Geoffrey Wigoder:
The arrival of the Messiah, who will be a descendant of King David, will be heralded by the appearance of a Messianic figure who will be a descendant of Joseph and who will do battle with the forces of evil in order to bring about the redemption of the people of Israel. Following the inevitable defeat of the Josephic Messiah, the stage will be set for the triumphant entry of the Davidic Messiah.[7]
Raphael Patai; noted anthropologist and Biblical scholar who taught Hebrew at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem:
Scholars have repeatedly speculated about the origin of the Messiah ben Joseph legend and the curious fact that the Messiah figure has thus been split in two. It would seem that in the early legend, the death of the Messiah was envisaged, perhaps as a development of the Suffering Servant motif. A prophecy of Daniel, written about 164 B.C.E., is the earliest source speaking of the death of a Mashiah (‘Anointed’) sixty-two (prophetic) weeks after his coming and after the return and the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Dan. 9:24-26).
While it appears that Daniel had a temporal ruler in mind, whom he calls Mashiah Nagid (‘Anointed Prince’), some two centuries later, the author of 4 Ezra unmistakably refers to the Messiah, belief in whom had developed in the meantime, when he puts words in the mouth of God…‘For My son, the Messiah, shall be revealed, together with those who are with him, and shall gladden the survivors four hundred years. And it shall be, after those years, that My son, the Messiah, shall die.’ [4 Ezra 7:27-29]…
This splitting of the Messiah in two persons, which took place in the Talmudic period, achieved another purpose besides resolving the dilemma of the slain Messiah. According to an old tradition, the Messiah was perfectly prefigured in Moses. But Moses died before he could lead the Children of Israel into the Land of Promise. Consequently, for the parallel to be complete, the Messiah, too, had to die before accomplishing his great task of ultimate Redemption.
Since, however, the Messiah would not be the True Redeemer of God if he did not fulfill that task, the only solution was to let one Messiah, like Moses, die, and then assign the completion of the work of Redemption to a second Messiah.[8]
Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., D.H.L., on Zechariah 12:10,
In the Talmud the passage is interpreted with reference to the Messianic era, and the martyr who was thrust through is the Messiah the son of Joseph who will fall in battle.[9]
Zechariah 12:10 reads (Jewish Publication Society translation):
And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.
Professor Gershom Scholem; Professor Emeritus of Jewish Mysticism at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem,
The Messiah ben Joseph is the dying Messiah who perishes in the Messianic catastrophe. The features of the catastrophic are gathered together in him. He fights and loses—but he does not suffer. The prophecy of Isaiah regarding the suffering servant of God is never applied to him.
He is a redeemer who redeems nothing, in whom only the final battle with the powers of the world is crystallized. His destruction coincides with the destruction of history. By contrast, when the figure is split, all of the utopian interest is concentrated on the Messiah ben David.
He is the one in whom what is new finally comes to the fore, who once and for all defeats the antichrist, and thus presents the purely positive side of this complex phenomenon. The more these two sides are made independent and emphasized, the more this doubling of the Messiah figure remains alive for the circles of apocalyptic Messianists even in later Judaism. The more this dualism becomes weakened, the less is the doubling mentioned, and the special figure of the Messiah ben Joseph becomes superfluous and meaningless.[10]
Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1,
It is possible that the emphasis on the two Messiahs, one of Aaron and one of Israel, may have originated as a corrective merger of the high priestly and royal offices during the Hasmonean period [166-163 BC].[11]
Hebrew scholars Michael Wise and James Tabor comment on the Dead Sea scrolls:
Our Qumran text, 4Q521, is astonishingly, quite close to this Christian concept of the Messiah. Our text speaks not only of a single Messianic figure…but it also describes him in extremely exalted terms, quite like the Christian view of Jesus as a cosmic agent.
That there was, in fact, an expression of a single Messianic figure at Qumran is really not so surprising. A reexamination of the Qumran literature on this subject leads one to question the two Messiah theory. As a matter of fact, only once in any Dead Sea Scroll text is the idea of two Messiahs stated unambiguously…
In short, there is not much evidence in the previously published scrolls that straightforwardly supports a putative doctrine of two Messiahs…So the text that is the subject of this article (4Q521) is, in speaking of a single Messiah, more the rule than the exception. [12]
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia:
The double concept of the nature of the Messiah, that of a military leader and that of a spiritual being, is reflected also in Tannaitic literature [referring to the Rabbis mentioned in the Mishnah from circa 70-200 AD] and in the later beliefs centering around the Messianic ideal. The idea of the pre-existence of the Messiah is reduced in a Baraitha[13] merely to the name of the Messiah which is one of the seven things that existed before the world was created (Pes. 54b; Ned. 39b; cf. Midrash Gen. 1)…
On the other hand, the double function of the Messiah, that of a great warrior who would bring about that defeat of the enemies of Israel and the restoration of Israel to their land, and that of a moral and spiritual regenerator of the world, was separated and apportioned to two distinct individuals—Messiah, son of Joseph, and Messiah, son of David. The former will wage war against Gog and Magog and will be killed while defending Jerusalem but will be resurrected by Messiah, son of David. This new concept was probably introduced after the fall of Bar Kochba, but opinions differ greatly as to its origin.[14]
[1] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), pp. 35-36
[2] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus, retrieved 2-17-03
[3] Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; Prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel, From the First Through the Seventh Centuries (Beacon Hill, Boston: Beacon Press, 1927), p. 49
[4] Ibid., pp. 43-44
[5] William G. Braude; Rabbi of the Congregation Sons of Israel and David, Providence-Rhode Island, The Midrash on Psalms (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), pp. 293-295
[6] Gerson D. Cohen, The Rabbinic Heritage quoted in Leo W. Schwarz, ed. & intro., Great Ages and Ideas of the Jewish People (New York: Random House, Inc., 1956), p. 208
[7] Geoffrey Wigoder, ed. in chief, The Encyclopedia of Judaism (New York: Macmillan Publishing, co., 1989), p. 4821
[8] Raphael Patai; Noted anthropologist and Biblical scholar who taught Hebrew at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Messiah Text (New York: Avon Books, 1979), pp. 166-167
[9] Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., D.H.L., The Twelve Prophets, Hebrew Text and English Translations with Introductions and Commentary (New York: Soncino Press, 1848, 12th ed. 1985)
[10] Professor Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, And Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality (New York: Schocken Books, 1971), p. 18
[11] Lawrence H. Schiffman & James C. VanderKam, Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 540
[12] Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Smith, The Search for Messiah (Co-published by Joy Publishing, Fountain Valley, CA. and The Word for Today, Costa Mesa, CA., 1996), pp.121-124. Quoting from Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1992, p. 60-61
[13] “Baraitha (lit. ‘outside); a teaching or a tradition of the Tannaim that has been excluded from the Mishnah and incorporated in a later collection compiled by R. Hiyya and R. Oshaiah, generally introduced by ‘Our Rabbis taught’, or ‘It has been taught.’” [Judah J. Slotki, M.A., comp., Midrash Rabbah (London & New York: The Soncino Press, 1983), p. Index-Glossary-1]
[14] Isaac Landman, ed.; Rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim and founder and director of the Academy for Adult Jewish Education, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, In Ten Volumes (New York: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1942), p. 501
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 2 of 2...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 2 of 2...
Thursday, September 17, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 7 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Odd and Unfounded Assertions:
When we are presented with fanciful interpretations of evidence we inevitably run across strange comments on all sorts of issues.
Here are two examples:
One could only wonder whence the word “lad” was being quoted or where it is stated that anyone fell asleep in Jesus’ lap.
What we know about the event is the following:
The “lad” was John, who constantly describes himself as being the one whom Jesus loved. Moreover, we are told that it was a “disciple” and not a son. Although, the documentary claims, without evidence, that the beloved disciple was John’s way of secretly referring to Jesus’ son.
Furthermore, John did not lay down in Jesus’ lap in the way we would describe laying down. The way that they ate communal meals at that time was not to sit around a table (as in the Last Supper painting). Rather, they lay on their sides, on the floor, with their heads towards the meal and their legs away from it. In order to “lay on” Jesus’ John would merely have to lean back slightly: “they reclined and ate” (Mark 14:18), “He and the twelve apostles with Him reclined” (Luke 22:14).
Simcha Jacobovici states (paraphrase of DSC):
The documentary’s narrator stated,
Simply stated, there is absolutely no historical/archeological evidence, not even in the documentary, that the disciples ever did any such thing. This is purely imaginative storytelling that will, sadly, be taken by some to be more reliable than, among other things, the 24,000 manuscripts of the New Testament. Moreover, the rumor was not that they wanted to give Him a permanent burial but that they sought to deceive people into thinking that Jesus had physically resurrected (this would have made them purposeful deceivers who later were martyred for the lie that they invented).
Incidentally, there are also some other simply odd details shown in the reenactments: the woman caught in adultery is actually shown being stoned and Jesus literally jumps into the middle of flying stones. The woman who washed Jesus’ feet and dried them with her hair actually cuts her hair and then uses the handful that she cut to dry them. Etc.
[i] Jennifer Viegas, Jesus Family Tomb Believed Found (Discovery News Feb. 25, 2007)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, Theological Considerations-The Resurrection (retrieved 3-3-07) paraphrase from DSC’s Theological Considerations
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 7 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 7 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Odd and Unfounded Assertions:
When we are presented with fanciful interpretations of evidence we inevitably run across strange comments on all sorts of issues.
Here are two examples:
“Carney Matheson, a scientist at the Paleo-DNA Laboratory at Lakehead University in Ontario, Canada… ‘Judah,’ whom they indicate may have been their son, could have been the ‘lad’ described in the Gospel of John as sleeping in Jesus’ lap at the Last Supper.”[i]
One could only wonder whence the word “lad” was being quoted or where it is stated that anyone fell asleep in Jesus’ lap.
What we know about the event is the following:
“But there was one of His disciples leaning upon Jesus’ bosom, the one whom Jesus loved. Peter therefore signaled to him to ask whom it might be of whom He spoke. And lying on Jesus’ breast, he said to him, Lord, who is it?” (John 13:23-25).
“Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following (the one who also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, who is he who betrays You?) Seeing him, Peter said to Jesus, Lord, and what of this one?” (John 21:20-21).
The “lad” was John, who constantly describes himself as being the one whom Jesus loved. Moreover, we are told that it was a “disciple” and not a son. Although, the documentary claims, without evidence, that the beloved disciple was John’s way of secretly referring to Jesus’ son.
Furthermore, John did not lay down in Jesus’ lap in the way we would describe laying down. The way that they ate communal meals at that time was not to sit around a table (as in the Last Supper painting). Rather, they lay on their sides, on the floor, with their heads towards the meal and their legs away from it. In order to “lay on” Jesus’ John would merely have to lean back slightly: “they reclined and ate” (Mark 14:18), “He and the twelve apostles with Him reclined” (Luke 22:14).
Simcha Jacobovici states (paraphrase of DSC):
“The writer of the Gospel of Matthew (28:12-15) addresses a rumor that was circulating in Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion, a rumor that we suggest can be taken for the truth. The rumor was that the disciples came by night to remove Jesus’ body from the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. They would have done this to safeguard his remains from desecrators. His followers then would have taken the body of Jesus to a permanent tomb.”[ii]
The documentary’s narrator stated,
“But according to the Gospel of Matthew there was another story circulating after Jesus’ death. And though the Gospel called it a lie, it was rumored that Jesus’ disciples secretly too their mater’s body. Presumably to give Him a permanent burial.”
Simply stated, there is absolutely no historical/archeological evidence, not even in the documentary, that the disciples ever did any such thing. This is purely imaginative storytelling that will, sadly, be taken by some to be more reliable than, among other things, the 24,000 manuscripts of the New Testament. Moreover, the rumor was not that they wanted to give Him a permanent burial but that they sought to deceive people into thinking that Jesus had physically resurrected (this would have made them purposeful deceivers who later were martyred for the lie that they invented).
Incidentally, there are also some other simply odd details shown in the reenactments: the woman caught in adultery is actually shown being stoned and Jesus literally jumps into the middle of flying stones. The woman who washed Jesus’ feet and dried them with her hair actually cuts her hair and then uses the handful that she cut to dry them. Etc.
[i] Jennifer Viegas, Jesus Family Tomb Believed Found (Discovery News Feb. 25, 2007)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, Theological Considerations-The Resurrection (retrieved 3-3-07) paraphrase from DSC’s Theological Considerations
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 7 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 7 of 10...
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Christianity, Home Schooling, and Multiculturalism - “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights” by Cal Thomas
Cal Thomas, syndicated columnist and author, wrote the following article regarding an, apparently, newly discovered “law” and/or Constitutional standard, “Thou, judge, shalt determine who is and is not multicultural enough and shalt bequeath the terms of their worldview education.” By the way: this only applies to Christians.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Who wrote the following: "We must learn to welcome and not to fear the voices of dissent. We must dare to think about 'unthinkable things' because when things become unthinkable, thinking stops and action becomes mindless."
A "right-wing extremist" didn't write these words, nor did a cable TV or radio talk show host. Sen. J. William Fulbright, the late Arkansas liberal Democratic senator and Bill Clinton mentor, wrote them in his 1966 book, "Arrogance of Power."
The arrogance of power and disdain for average Americans is what fueled much of the dissent expressed in town hall meetings. Growing numbers of people see a small cadre of government, academic and media elites caring nothing about them, except when it comes to their tax dollars. Many, especially those who are conservative and even worse, religious, are viewed by these elites as enemies of progress and sophistication. They are mocked as NASCAR-loving, flag-waving, God-worshipping trailer trash. The people are getting the message and properly expressing themselves by peacefully (and loudly) assembling and petitioning government for a redress of their grievances.
The latest of many examples of government arrogance has come in New Hampshire, of all places, where the state motto is "Live Free or Die." A state judge has ordered a girl who was being educated at home by her mother to begin attending a public school because of the "rigidity" of her mother's religious views. The judge, Lucinda V. Sadler, said that the 10-year-old girl "needed to consider other worldviews as she matures."
The case developed as part of what appears to be a nasty fight between the girl's mother, Brenda Voydatch and her father, Martin Kurowski. Kurowski filed a lawsuit asking the court to place his daughter, Amanda Kurowski, in public school. The father doesn't share the mother's religious views.
There are a number of issues in this case, not the least of which is the court's attempt to define what represents an "extreme" religious view and what is more "mainstream." A growing number of parents, including some in my family, home-school their children. My personal experience is that these kids get a better education, are better adjusted and easily gain entry into college because of their superior grades and seriousness of purpose, not to mention their character.
Another issue is the apparent one-way street constructed by Judge Sadler. If a Christian girl ought to go to public school to learn about other views (this presumes she does not know about them through study at home, reading a newspaper, or turning on the television), why shouldn't the judge order a public school student to get a Christian-Jewish-Islamic-based education so that such a student might become acquainted with the Bible-Talmud-Koran? Many public school students used to be biblically literate before the ACLU and similar groups went to court to challenge the teaching of religious beliefs in the classroom.
Amanda's mother retained the Alliance Defense Fund, the conservative legal alliance that works to defend religious liberty, but meanwhile the girl has been forced by the court to sit in a fifth-grade classroom, which is a violation of her and her mother's conscience and the First Amendment.
In a letter to Henry Lee on Aug. 10, 1824, Thomas Jefferson wrote something that could be applied to the arrogant elites who have caused the rising anger in modern America: "Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depository of the public interests..."
I'm on the side of the people. The New Hampshire judge and the Obama administration are on the side of the elites. And that's why so many are justifiably angry.[1]
[1] Cal Thomas, “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights,” Sun Journal, Sep 13, 2009
Continue reading Christianity, Home Schooling, and Multiculturalism - “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights” by Cal Thomas...
Continue reading Christianity, Home Schooling, and Multiculturalism - “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights” by Cal Thomas...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Who wrote the following: "We must learn to welcome and not to fear the voices of dissent. We must dare to think about 'unthinkable things' because when things become unthinkable, thinking stops and action becomes mindless."
A "right-wing extremist" didn't write these words, nor did a cable TV or radio talk show host. Sen. J. William Fulbright, the late Arkansas liberal Democratic senator and Bill Clinton mentor, wrote them in his 1966 book, "Arrogance of Power."
The arrogance of power and disdain for average Americans is what fueled much of the dissent expressed in town hall meetings. Growing numbers of people see a small cadre of government, academic and media elites caring nothing about them, except when it comes to their tax dollars. Many, especially those who are conservative and even worse, religious, are viewed by these elites as enemies of progress and sophistication. They are mocked as NASCAR-loving, flag-waving, God-worshipping trailer trash. The people are getting the message and properly expressing themselves by peacefully (and loudly) assembling and petitioning government for a redress of their grievances.
The latest of many examples of government arrogance has come in New Hampshire, of all places, where the state motto is "Live Free or Die." A state judge has ordered a girl who was being educated at home by her mother to begin attending a public school because of the "rigidity" of her mother's religious views. The judge, Lucinda V. Sadler, said that the 10-year-old girl "needed to consider other worldviews as she matures."
The case developed as part of what appears to be a nasty fight between the girl's mother, Brenda Voydatch and her father, Martin Kurowski. Kurowski filed a lawsuit asking the court to place his daughter, Amanda Kurowski, in public school. The father doesn't share the mother's religious views.
There are a number of issues in this case, not the least of which is the court's attempt to define what represents an "extreme" religious view and what is more "mainstream." A growing number of parents, including some in my family, home-school their children. My personal experience is that these kids get a better education, are better adjusted and easily gain entry into college because of their superior grades and seriousness of purpose, not to mention their character.
Another issue is the apparent one-way street constructed by Judge Sadler. If a Christian girl ought to go to public school to learn about other views (this presumes she does not know about them through study at home, reading a newspaper, or turning on the television), why shouldn't the judge order a public school student to get a Christian-Jewish-Islamic-based education so that such a student might become acquainted with the Bible-Talmud-Koran? Many public school students used to be biblically literate before the ACLU and similar groups went to court to challenge the teaching of religious beliefs in the classroom.
Amanda's mother retained the Alliance Defense Fund, the conservative legal alliance that works to defend religious liberty, but meanwhile the girl has been forced by the court to sit in a fifth-grade classroom, which is a violation of her and her mother's conscience and the First Amendment.
In a letter to Henry Lee on Aug. 10, 1824, Thomas Jefferson wrote something that could be applied to the arrogant elites who have caused the rising anger in modern America: "Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depository of the public interests..."
I'm on the side of the people. The New Hampshire judge and the Obama administration are on the side of the elites. And that's why so many are justifiably angry.[1]
[1] Cal Thomas, “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights,” Sun Journal, Sep 13, 2009
Continue reading Christianity, Home Schooling, and Multiculturalism - “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights” by Cal Thomas...
Continue reading Christianity, Home Schooling, and Multiculturalism - “Liberal Judge Rules Against Girl's Rights” by Cal Thomas...
Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 1 of 2
As to the Christian explanation that Jesus did not fulfill all messianic prophecies 2,000 years ago due to the expectation of His doing so upon His return; anti-missionary Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan states that the Jews were,
unconvinced by the answer of the “second coming,” since it was not even hinted at in Biblical literature.[1]
Rabbi Shraga Simmons wrote,
Jewish sources show that…no concept of a second coming exists.[2]
In this essay we will ascertain that it is hinted at and clearly stated in Rabbinic literature. The question now becomes; why is it acceptable for Rabbis to develop this kind of concept but it is not acceptable for Christianity to do so? This was done in the concepts of one Messiah coming twice and one coming of two Messiahs.
Part 1: Two Comings of One Messiah
Part 2: Expectation of Two Messiahs
Two Comings of One Messiah:
Modern Rabbinic Judaism has reduced the dynamic figure and complex concept of the Messiah to the simplicity of a Supermessiah who will appear and instantly wipe out Israel’s enemies and rule as king. To believe this one must ignore a great deal of scripture and a great deal of ancient Rabbinic writings (some of which we considered in the post Jewish Messianic Concepts).
That Jesus did not fulfilled every messianic prophecy is a common means used in order to disqualify Jesus as Messiah even though Christianity has never claimed that Jesus has fulfilled every messianic prophecy. While this argument should come as no surprise, in reality it is no problem and not an issue. This is the whole reason for awaiting Jesus’ Second Coming; He will come again and fulfill the rest of messianic prophecies—some ancient Rabbis understood this.
Midrash Rabbah Ruth 5:6 on Ruth 2:14,
R. Jonathan interpreted this verse in six ways…The fifth interpretation makes reference to the Messiah. COME HITHER : approach to royal state. AND EAT OF THE BREAD refers to the bread of royalty; AND DIP THY MORSAL IN THE VINEGAR refers to his sufferings, as it is said, But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities (Isa. 53:5).
AND SHE SAT BESIDE THE REAPERS, for he will be deprived of his sovereignty for a time, as it is said, For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city will be taken (Zech. 14:2). AND THEY REACHED HER PARCHED CORN, means that he will be restored to his throne, as it is said, And he shall smite the land with the rod of his mouth (Isa. 9:4).
R. Berekiah said in the name of R. Levi: The future Redeemer will be like the former Redeemer [Moses]. Just as the former Redeemer revealed himself and later was hidden…so the future Redeemer will be revealed to them, and then be hidden from them. [italics in original bold and underlining added]
Incidentally: note the messianic application of Isaiah 53 (“R.” refers to Rabbi).
Midrash Pesikta Rabbati 15:10,
My beloved is like a gazelle [Song of Solomon 2:9]. R. Isaac said: As a gazelle appears and then disappears, so [Moses], the first Messiah, appeared to Israel and then disappeared from them…
R. Berechiah said in the name of R. Levi: Like the first redeemer, so the last redeemer; as the first one appeared before them and then disappeared from them, so the last redeemer will appear to them and then disappear from them. And for how long will he disappear from them? R. Tanhuma said in the name of R. Hama who said it in the name of R. Joshua, [and] R. Menahema said in the name of R. Hama bar Hanina: For forty-five days. With reference to this period Scripture says, From the time that the continual burnt offering shall be taken away…there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days (Dan. 12:11), and then goes on to say, Happy is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days (Dan. 12:12).
These days, over and above the number given in the previous verse, to what do they refer? They refer to the period of forty-five days during which the Messiah, who will have appeared to them, will disappear from Israel again. [By way of testing their faith]…
R. Isaac son of R. Marion said: At the end of the forty-five days, the Holy One, blessed be He, will appear to them and bring down the manna for them. [italics in original bold and underlining added]
Incidentally: note the messianic application of Daniel 12.
Midrash Rabbah-Ecclesiastes I. 9, § I-I0, § I,
R. Berekiah said in the name of R. Isaac, ‘As the first redeemer was, so shall the later Redeemer be. What is stated of the former redeemer? And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass (Ex. IV, 20). Similarly will it be with the latter Redeemer, as it is stated, Lowly and riding upon an ass (Zech. IX, 9).
As the former redeemer caused manna to descend, as it is stated, Behold, I will cause to rain bread from heaven for you (Ex. XVI, 4), so will the latter Redeemer cause manna to descend, as it is stated. May he be as a rich cornfield(1) the land (Ps. LXXII, 16) As the former redeemer made a well to rise [V. Num. XXI, 17 f], so will the latter Redeemer bring up water, as it is stated, And a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord, and shall water the valley of Shittim (Joel IV, 18).
Footnote: (1)
“[Hebrew font not available] is read as [Hebrew font not available] ‘pieces of bread.’”
“In the corresponding parallel passage Rabbi Yitshak Bar Maryon (ca. 290-320 AD) says that, ‘At the end, the LORD himself will appear and provide manna from heaven.’”[3]
Commenting on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hebrew scholars Michael Wise and James Tabor wrote,
The Messiah of our text is thus much closer to the Christian Messiah, in this regard, than in any previously published text and requires us to reexamine the previously, rather restricted, views of Messianic expectations at Qumran…
There is no doubt that the Qumran community had faith in the ultimate victory of such a Messiah over all evil. However, a close reading of these texts reveal an additional theme, equally dominant-that of an initial, though temporary, triumph of the wicked over righteousness. That is, there was the belief among the Qumran community that the Messiah would suffer initial defeat, but that he would ultimately triumph in the end of days.[4]
[1] Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries (New York: National Conference of Synagogue Youth, 1976, New edition, 1985), pp. 35-36
[2] Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus, retrieved 2-17-03
[3] Risto Santala, Translated from Finnish by William Kinnaird, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—ch. The Messiah as the Last Saviour
[4] Hebrew scholars Michael Wise and James Tabor, Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1992, p. 60-61
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 1 of 2...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : One Messiah or Two Messiahs?, part 1 of 2...
Sunday, September 13, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 6 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension:
As we have seen, James Cameron stated, “I’m not a theologist [sic.],”[i] and Smicha Jacobovici stated, “I am not a theologian.”[ii]
Yet, it is easy to see how theological issues are raised by their assertions. It would also be easy to accuse them of besmirching Christianity. Certainly, they filmed the documentary two decades after the tomb was found, after the success of The Da Vinci Code, and just before Easter.
Personally, I will be disappointed with them if they do not continue corroborating and continue making documentaries that call into question each of the world’s religions. But, and it may be due to the fact that they are not theologians, they appear to be taking a fairly non-confrontational approach. That is to say, let us be fair about what they are actually claiming. Although, let us keep in mind that they tend to take a grain of sand’s worth of evidence and turn it into an edifice of biblical proportions—pun intended.
Regarding the resurrection, Simcha Jacobovici, in a paraphrase of DSC, states:
Granted, they do not prove that Jesus, at least Jesus the Messiah, was in the Talpiot tomb. But they are at least offering the possibility that Jesus the Messiah did resurrect.
Regarding the ascension, Simach Jacobovici states (paraphrase of DSC):
Be that as it may, it appears that if you can believe in something as magical (see JamesTabor’s comment below) as a resurrection and ascension you might as well believe that they were spiritual and not physical (whatever that may mean). For information about the Judeo-Christian theological position on the physical resurrection and particular that of Jesus please see the post Resurrection.
[i] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[ii] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[iii] Simcha Jacobovici, Theological Considerations-The Resurrection (retrieved 3-3-07) paraphrase from DSC’s Theological Considerations [iv] Ibid.
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 6 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 6 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension:
As we have seen, James Cameron stated, “I’m not a theologist [sic.],”[i] and Smicha Jacobovici stated, “I am not a theologian.”[ii]
Yet, it is easy to see how theological issues are raised by their assertions. It would also be easy to accuse them of besmirching Christianity. Certainly, they filmed the documentary two decades after the tomb was found, after the success of The Da Vinci Code, and just before Easter.
Personally, I will be disappointed with them if they do not continue corroborating and continue making documentaries that call into question each of the world’s religions. But, and it may be due to the fact that they are not theologians, they appear to be taking a fairly non-confrontational approach. That is to say, let us be fair about what they are actually claiming. Although, let us keep in mind that they tend to take a grain of sand’s worth of evidence and turn it into an edifice of biblical proportions—pun intended.
Regarding the resurrection, Simcha Jacobovici, in a paraphrase of DSC, states:
“‘The Lost Tomb Of Jesus’ does not challenge the Resurrection. It asks viewers to consider the possibility that the Resurrection occurred from a second tomb…Belief in the resurrection is based not on which tomb he was buried in, but on alleged sightings of Jesus that occurred after his burial and that are documented in the Gospels.”[iii]
Granted, they do not prove that Jesus, at least Jesus the Messiah, was in the Talpiot tomb. But they are at least offering the possibility that Jesus the Messiah did resurrect.
Regarding the ascension, Simach Jacobovici states (paraphrase of DSC):
“There is much debate among Christians as to whether this was a spiritual or a physical ascent. Did he leave his body behind or did he take it with him? If Jesus’ mortal remains have indeed been found, this would contradict the idea of a physical ascension. However, it says nothing against the possibility of a spiritual ascension.”[iv]
Be that as it may, it appears that if you can believe in something as magical (see JamesTabor’s comment below) as a resurrection and ascension you might as well believe that they were spiritual and not physical (whatever that may mean). For information about the Judeo-Christian theological position on the physical resurrection and particular that of Jesus please see the post Resurrection.
[i] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[ii] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[iii] Simcha Jacobovici, Theological Considerations-The Resurrection (retrieved 3-3-07) paraphrase from DSC’s Theological Considerations [iv] Ibid.
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 6 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 6 of 10...
Friday, September 11, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Jewish View of Jesus
There certainly is not one single Jewish view of Jesus. Rather, there are various: from the respectful and empathetic to the malicious and condemnatory. In this essay we simply provide a sampling a various opinions.
In typical Jewish humor Franz Rosenzweig and David Flusser wrote,
Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer:
Lawrence J. Epstein:
See the post Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible? for some elucidations of Lawrence Epstein’s misconceptions.
Alfred J. Kolatch:
Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3:
For an elucidation of the controversy over this text please see Paul L. Maier’s Josephus and Jesus
Pinchas Lapide:
Jacob Bernadagus:
Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver:
Footnote: (1) Otto J. Baab, The Theology of the Old Testament (1949), p. 270
(2) F.J. Foakes Jackson and Krisopp Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity, I, 288-289
Julius H. Greenstone:
Joseph Klausner:
[1] Franz Rosenzweig and David Flusser quoted in Naomi W. Cohen ed., Essential Papers on Jewish-Christian Relations in the United Sates (New York: New York University Press, 1990), p. 332
[2] Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer; revised by Rabbi Lawrence A. Hoffman, What is a Jew? (Don Mills, Ontario, Maxwell Macmillan Canada, Inc. 1993), p. 275-276
[3] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Inc., 1998), pp. 57, 58
[4] Alfred J. Kolatch, The Second Jewish Book of Why (New York: Jonathan David Publishing Inc. 1985), pp. 71, 73
[5] Pinchas Lapide, The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1983), pp. 125-26
[6] Ibid., p 11
[7] Jacob Bernadagus, Dialogue and Tradition, The Challenges of Contemporary Judeo-Christian Thought (New York: Abegard-Schuman, 1970), p. 39
[8] Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar, Where Judaism Differs, An Inquiry Into the Distinctiveness of Judaism (New York: Collier Books, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987. First edition 1956), pp. 85-86
[9] Ibid., p. 90-91
[10] Julius H. Greenstone, The Messiah Idea in Jewish History (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Publishers, 1972. Originally printed in 1906 by the Jewish Publication Society), pp. 72-73
[11] Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth, His Times, His Life and His Teaching (New York: Menorah Publishing Company, Inc. 1979)
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish View of Jesus...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish View of Jesus...
In typical Jewish humor Franz Rosenzweig and David Flusser wrote,
Whether Jesus was the Messiah will be shown when the Messiah comes…I do not think many Jews would object if the messiah when he came again was the Jew Jesus.[1]
Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer:
Jesus’ ministry on earth coincided with the lives of the early Rabbis known as Pharisees. Jews therefore see Jesus as a historical personality whose work and teachings parallel those of other wonder-working Jewish leaders of the time…
The Romans crucified Jesus just as they tortured Rabbi Akiba to death, because they feared the revolutionary effect of their doctrine of love and justice. But Jews stop short of identifying Jesus as in any way divine. Simply put, Jews do not believe that God had a son or appeared in human form…Jews do not quote Jesus as a model, not because we cannot identify with much that he said, but because his life and death are so intrinsically central to Christianity…
Were we to point to Jesus’ behavior or teachings as our guide in life, we would feel as if we were crossing the boundary from Judaism to Christianity. The Lord’s prayer, for instance, has nothing in it with which Jews would not agree. It is a prayer for the coming of God’s reign, a doctrine taught by every Rabbi of the first and second century. But we would not say the Lord’s prayer, since it is part of Christian liturgy, associated firmly with the bedrock of Christian faith. Similarly, Jesus is known to have preached the Golden Rule. But we do not cite Jesus to the effect that we should love our neighbors as ourselves, even though we agree that we should. Instead, we have our own daily prayer called the Kaddish [KAH-dish], which parallels the Lord’s prayer and was formulated about the same time…
It is always hard to second-guess history, but it is interesting to imagine what would have happened if the life of Jesus had not been appropriated by Christianity. What would have happened if he had been remembered only as the Jew he was, but not as the savior? His life might in that case have been retained by Jewish sources. He might well have remained a Jewish moral hero like the Pharisees of the time, who were much like him. But precisely because Jesus was recognized by Christians as the Christ, he could not be recognized as a Jewish role model by those Jews who did not accept his divinity.[2]
Lawrence J. Epstein:
To Jews, whatever wonderful teacher and storyteller Jesus may have been, he was just a human, not the son of God (except in the metaphorical sense in which all humans are children of God). In the Jewish view, Jesus cannot save souls; only God can. Jesus did not, in the Jewish view, rise from the dead….
Jesus is not seen as the messiah. In the Jewish view, the messiah is a human being who will usher in an era of peace. We can tell the messiah by looking at the world and seeing if it is at peace. From the Jewish view, this clearly did not happen when Jesus was on Earth or anytime after his death…
No one who is Jewish, no born Jew and no one who converts to Judaism, can believe in Jesus as the literal son of God or as the Messiah. For the Jewish people, there is no God but God.[3]
See the post Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible? for some elucidations of Lawrence Epstein’s misconceptions.
Alfred J. Kolatch:
Many Jewish scholars believe that Jesus considered himself a prophet only. They reject the contention of Christian scholars that when Jesus used the phrase “Son of Man” in his preaching (first mentioned in Daniel 7:13, where the Aramaic phrase bar enash is used), he was referring to himself as the Messiah.
The phrase “Son of God,” in the Jewish view, is used in the third person, and more likely than not, when Jesus used the phrase he was referring to someone other than himself. Jewish scholars also point to the fact that there is little evidence in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke)-the earliest accounts of the life of Jesus-that Jesus regarded himself as the Messiah….
According to the doctrine of incarnation, God transformed himself to human life in the form of Jesus. To Jews, who believe that God is One and unchangeable, this doctrine is unacceptable.[4]
Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3:
Now there was about this time, Yeshua, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles.
He was Mashiach; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of “Christians,” so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
For an elucidation of the controversy over this text please see Paul L. Maier’s Josephus and Jesus
Pinchas Lapide:
In none of the cases where rabbinic literature speaks of such visions did it result in an essential change in the life of the resuscitated or of those who had experienced the visions…
It is different with the disciples of Jesus on that Easter Sunday…
If the defeated and depressed group of disciples overnight could change into a victorious movement of faith, based only on autosuggestion or self-deception—without a fundamental faith experience—then this would be a much greater miracle than the resurrection itself.[5]
I accept Jesus as a believing Jew who had a central role to play in God’ plan of salvation and in whose name a worldwide church was founded.[6]
Jacob Bernadagus:
The Message of Jesus was stated within the context of Jewish thought at the time. His ethics and his faith were within the prophetic tradition; the only point at issue was whether or not he was the expected Messiah, or “son of man.”[7]
Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver:
The Jews did not reject the God concept of Jesus, for that was Jewish in essence and Jesus derived it from the Torah. “The New Testament adds nothing to the content of the ideas of God which is not already present in the literature and faith of Israel. It is often argued that Jesus held a unique conception of God, by which is usually meant the father hood of God. We have seen, however…that the divine characteristics which the term ‘fatherhood’ denotes are fully evident in the Old Testament.”(1)…
“In what way did the teaching of Jesus differ from that of his contemporaries?” query the editors of The Beginnings of Christianity, and they reply: “Not by teaching anything about God essentially new to Jewish ears. The God of Jesus is the God of the Jews, about whom he says nothing that cannot be paralleled in Jewish literature. Nor was it in his doctrine as to the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus differed markedly from the Jewish teachers.(2)”[8]
Footnote: (1) Otto J. Baab, The Theology of the Old Testament (1949), p. 270
(2) F.J. Foakes Jackson and Krisopp Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity, I, 288-289
As regards Sabbath observance—“that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27)—this did not represent any break with the basic attitude of Pharisaic Judaism. In the second century of the Common Era [C.E. or A.D.], when Sabbath laws had been elaborated much further by the Rabbis and culminated in the thirty-nine chief categories of prohibited work, R. Jonathan b. Joseph (2 c.) employed the almost identical words of the Gospel: “The Sabbath is committed to your hands, not you to its hands [Yoma 85b].”
Both the Gospel and the Rabbis were probably quoting a popular folk saying in vogue among the people. It was an established principle that in the case of danger to human life, in war, in sickness or accident, all the laws of the Sabbath may be suspended. Even when the danger was not clear, the Sabbath law was to be suspended. Quick action in its suspension is praised, delay condemned [J. Yoma 8:5].
Jesus’ controversy with the Pharisees over the charge that his disciples plucked ears of corn unlawfully on the Sabbath day and ate them because they were hungry (Mark 2:23-28) could have involved no real difference of opinion as regards the law. Such action could quite properly be justified under the law on the ground that it was necessary to preserve life.
This is true also of the other Gospel references to the Sabbath. They are rather the reflections of the antinomist controversy, developed in later times by other men, which sought to establish that “the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day’ (Matt. 12:8), that he could abolish the Biblical law of the Sabbath altogether, as well as all other laws, and that ‘Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law” (Gal. 3:13).[9]
Julius H. Greenstone:
In the Psalms of Solomon [circa 70 and 40 B.C.E. (B.C.)]…The Messiah is represented as purging Jerusalem of its sins…Though conceived as pure from sin and constantly sustained by God’s holy spirit, he is still taken to be only a temporary ruler.
The author of the Similitudes of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch makes the Messiah almost a supernatural being, gives him titles, which were later applied to Jesus in the New Testament, such as “the anointed,” “the elect one,” “the righteous one,” “the son of man.” It regards him as penetrating the deepest mysteries and possessing the power of reviving the dead, and accords him a place in the immediate presence of God.[10]
Joseph Klausner:
in his ethical code there is a sublimity, distinctiveness and originality in form unparalleled in any other Hebrew ethical code.[11]
[1] Franz Rosenzweig and David Flusser quoted in Naomi W. Cohen ed., Essential Papers on Jewish-Christian Relations in the United Sates (New York: New York University Press, 1990), p. 332
[2] Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer; revised by Rabbi Lawrence A. Hoffman, What is a Jew? (Don Mills, Ontario, Maxwell Macmillan Canada, Inc. 1993), p. 275-276
[3] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Inc., 1998), pp. 57, 58
[4] Alfred J. Kolatch, The Second Jewish Book of Why (New York: Jonathan David Publishing Inc. 1985), pp. 71, 73
[5] Pinchas Lapide, The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1983), pp. 125-26
[6] Ibid., p 11
[7] Jacob Bernadagus, Dialogue and Tradition, The Challenges of Contemporary Judeo-Christian Thought (New York: Abegard-Schuman, 1970), p. 39
[8] Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver; prominent religious leader and renowned Hebrew scholar, Where Judaism Differs, An Inquiry Into the Distinctiveness of Judaism (New York: Collier Books, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987. First edition 1956), pp. 85-86
[9] Ibid., p. 90-91
[10] Julius H. Greenstone, The Messiah Idea in Jewish History (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Publishers, 1972. Originally printed in 1906 by the Jewish Publication Society), pp. 72-73
[11] Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth, His Times, His Life and His Teaching (New York: Menorah Publishing Company, Inc. 1979)
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish View of Jesus...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish View of Jesus...
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 5 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Statistical Probability:
We again find personal interpretations of evidence being passed off as scientific conclusions. Statistical probability is a mathematical discipline but it is only as accurate as the numbers that are being used.
Let us begin with James Cameron’s sensationalistic claims. On NBC’s “Today,” he claimed that statisticians favored the documentary’s conclusions about the ossuaries “in the range of a couple of million to one.”[i]
Also, note that DSC claims that “A statistical study commissioned by the broadcasters…concludes that the probability factor is 600 to 1 in favor of this tomb being the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family.”[ii]
Moreover, “Cameron and Jacobovici said statisticians who have looked at markings on the bone boxes estimate that the probability that the remains uncovered in 1980 are not those of Joseph, Mary, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, a son of Jesus and other relatives are more than 100 to 1.”[iii]
On Larry King’s show Simcha Jacobovici claimed that the stats were “2,000,000 to 1” in favor.
The claims were: “a couple of million to one,” “600 to 1,” “100 to 1,” “2,000,000 to one.”
This poses quite a statistical discrepancy.
Moreover, the calculation are based “on a few assumptions: that the Maria on one of the ossuaries is the mother of the Jesus found on another box, that Mariamne is his wife and that Joseph (inscribed as the nickname Jose) is his brother.”[iv]
Darrell Bock (author of “Breaking the Da Vinci Code”) notes,
Also, note that Bar Ilan University’s Amos Kloner,
At the end of the essay Archeological Identity Theft the author makes short work of the statistical calculations.
[i] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007)
[ii] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[iii] TODAYshow/MSNBC, Director Defends Jesus Tomb Findings - James Cameron is Convinced Remains Are of Those of Christ, Family
[iv] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[v] Michael Foust, ‘Jesus Tomb’ Documentary Ignores Biblical & Scientific Evidence, Logic, Experts Say
[vi] Raw Story, Israeli expert quashes film claim about Jesus tomb (Published: Monday February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 5 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 5 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Statistical Probability:
We again find personal interpretations of evidence being passed off as scientific conclusions. Statistical probability is a mathematical discipline but it is only as accurate as the numbers that are being used.
Let us begin with James Cameron’s sensationalistic claims. On NBC’s “Today,” he claimed that statisticians favored the documentary’s conclusions about the ossuaries “in the range of a couple of million to one.”[i]
Also, note that DSC claims that “A statistical study commissioned by the broadcasters…concludes that the probability factor is 600 to 1 in favor of this tomb being the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family.”[ii]
Moreover, “Cameron and Jacobovici said statisticians who have looked at markings on the bone boxes estimate that the probability that the remains uncovered in 1980 are not those of Joseph, Mary, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, a son of Jesus and other relatives are more than 100 to 1.”[iii]
On Larry King’s show Simcha Jacobovici claimed that the stats were “2,000,000 to 1” in favor.
The claims were: “a couple of million to one,” “600 to 1,” “100 to 1,” “2,000,000 to one.”
This poses quite a statistical discrepancy.
Moreover, the calculation are based “on a few assumptions: that the Maria on one of the ossuaries is the mother of the Jesus found on another box, that Mariamne is his wife and that Joseph (inscribed as the nickname Jose) is his brother.”[iv]
Darrell Bock (author of “Breaking the Da Vinci Code”) notes,
“Joseph is the second most common male name in the period. Jesus is the sixth. Matthew’s the ninth,” “Mary is the most popular female name – 21 percent of the female names of the period. So, you’re dealing with a lot of familiar names.”[v]
Also, note that Bar Ilan University’s Amos Kloner,
“is adamant there is no evidence to support claims that it was the burial site of Jesus…‘I’m a scholar. I do scholarly work which has nothing to do with documentary film-making’ he told AFP in a telephone interview…
‘Who says that ‘Maria’ is Magdalena and ‘Judah’ is the son of Jesus? It cannot be proved. These are very popular and common names from the 1st century BC,’ said the academic at Israel’s Bar Ilan University. Kloner said that of 900 burial caves found within four kilometres (two and a half miles) of Jerusalem’s Old City and from the same era, the name Jesus or Yeshu was found 71 times, and that ‘Jesus son of Joseph’ had also been found.”[vi]
At the end of the essay Archeological Identity Theft the author makes short work of the statistical calculations.
[i] Jerusalem (AP), Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary (Posted: 9:27 a.m. EST, February 27, 2007)
[ii] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[iii] TODAYshow/MSNBC, Director Defends Jesus Tomb Findings - James Cameron is Convinced Remains Are of Those of Christ, Family
[iv] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[v] Michael Foust, ‘Jesus Tomb’ Documentary Ignores Biblical & Scientific Evidence, Logic, Experts Say
[vi] Raw Story, Israeli expert quashes film claim about Jesus tomb (Published: Monday February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 5 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 5 of 10...
Monday, September 07, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : List of Old Testament Texts Applied to the Messiah in Rabbinic Writings
This essay is a succinct presentation of the research published in Alfred Edersheim’s 1883 book “The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.” I have limited the quotation to the mention of the Biblical texts that are applied to the Messiah. By consulting Alfred Edersheim’s book (or the online reproduction) you can also find in which Rabbinic writings these texts are mentioned. Below we also include Risto Santala’s comments on Christ’s life in the Psalms.
Alfred Edersheim wrote:
From the Old Testament—the Tanakh:
Genesis 1:2; 2:4; 3:15; 4:25; 8:11; 9:27; 14:1; 15:18; 18:4-5; 19:32; 22:18; 33:1; 35:21; 38:1-2; 49:1, 9-10, 12, 19.
Exodus 4:22; 12:2, 42; 15:1; 16:25, 33; 17:16; 21:1; 40:9, 11.
Leviticus 26:13
Numbers 7:12; 23:21; 24:7, 17; 27:16.
Deuteronomy 1:8; 11:21; 16:3; 19:8-9; 20:10; 23:11; 25:19; 30:4; 32:7; 33:5, 12, 17.
Judges 5:31.
Ruth 1:1; 2:14; 3:15; 4:18, 20.
1st Samuel 2:10.
2nd Samuel 22:28; 23:1-4.
1st Kings 4:33.
1st Chronicles 3:24.
Psalms 2:1-2, 4, 6-9; 16:5, 9; 18:31, 50; 21:1, 3-5, 7; 22:7, 15; 23:5; 31:19; 36:9; 40:7; 45:2-3, 6-7; 50:2; 60:7; 61:6, 8; 68:31; 72:1, 8, 10, 16-17; 80:17; 89:22-25, 27, 51, 53; 90:15; 92:8, 11, 13; 95:7; 102:16; 106:44; 110:1, 2, 7; 116:9, 13; 119:33; 120:7; 121:1; 126:2; 132:18; 133:3; 142:5.
Ecclesiastes 1:9, 11; 7:24; 11:8; 12:1.
Canticle of Canticles (Song of Songs) 1:8; 2:8; 3:11; 4:5, 16; 5:10; 6:10; 7:6, 13; 8:12, 4, 11.
Isaiah 1:25, 26; 2:4; 4:2, 4-6; 6:13; 7:21; 8:14; 9:6; 10:27, 34; 11:1, 3-7, 11-12; 12:3; 14:2, 29; 15:2; 16:1, 5; 18:5; 21:11-12; 23:8, 15; 24:23; 25:8-9; 26:19; 27:10, 13; 28:5, 16; 30:18-19, 25-26; 32:14-15, 20; 35:1, 5-6, 10; 40:1-3, 5, 10; 41:18, 25; 42:1; 43:10; 45:22; 49:8-10, 12, 14, 21, 23, 26; 51:12, 17; 52:3, 7-8, 12-13; 53:5, 10; 54:2, 5, 11, 13; 55:12; 56:1, 7; 57:14, 16; 59:15, 17, 19-20; 60:1-5, 7-10, 19, 21-22; 62:10; 63:2, 4; 64:4; 65:17, 19, 25; 66:7; 68:22.
Jeremiah 3:17-18; 5:19; 12:9; 16:13-14; 23:5-7; 30:21;
31:8, 20, 31, 33-34; 33:13.
Lamentations 1:16; 2:22; 4:22.
Ezekiel 11:19; 16:55; 17:22-23; 25:14; 29:21; 32:14; 36:25, 27; 39:2; 47:9, 12; 48:19.
Daniel 2:22, 35; 7:9, 13, 27; 8:13-14; 9:24; 12:3, 11-12.
Hosea 2:2, 13, 18; 3:5; 6:2; 13:14; 14:7.
Joel 2:28; 3:18.
Amos 4:7; 5:18; 8:11; 9:11.
Obadiah v.18, 21.
Micah 2:13; 4:3; 5:2-3; 7:6, 8.
Nahum 2:1.
Habakkuk 2:3; 3:18.
Zephaniah 3:8-9.
Zechariah 1:20; 2:10; 3:8, 10; 4:7, 10; 6:12; 7:13; 8:12, 23; 9:1, 9-10; 10:4; 11:12; 12:10; 14:2-9.
Malachi 3:1, 4, 16; 4:1-2, 5.
From the Apocryphal Books:
Tobit 14:5-7.
Wisdom of Solomon 3:7-8.
Ecclesiasticus a.k.a. Sirach (not to be confused with Ecclesiastes) 44:21; 47:11; 48:10-11.
Baruch 2:34-35; 4:29; Ch. 5.
1st Maccabees 2:57.
2nd Maccabees 2:18.
Gentile scholar Risto Santala notes:
[1] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah Appendix 9: List of Old Testament Passages Messianically Applied in Ancient Rabbinic Writings, Vol. II, Ch. 5, 1883
[2] Risto Santala, William Kinnaird, Trans. from Finnish, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—Ch. What the Psalm s Have to Say About Christ
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : List of Old Testament Texts Applied to the Messiah in Rabbinic Writings...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : List of Old Testament Texts Applied to the Messiah in Rabbinic Writings...
Alfred Edersheim wrote:
The following list contains the passages in the Old Testament applied to the Messiah or to Messianic times in the most ancient Jewish writings. They amount in all to 456, thus distributed: 75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa, and supported by more than 558 separate quotations from Rabbinic writings…
The Rabbinic works from which quotations have been made are: the Targumim, the two Talmuds, and the most ancient Midrashim…I have, however, frequently quoted from the well-known work Yalkut, because, although of comparatively late date, it is really, as its name implies, a collection and selection from more than fifty older and accredited writings…
And if any student should arrive at a different conclusion from mine in regard to any of the passages hereafter quoted, I can at least assure him that mine is the result of the most careful and candid study I could give to the consideration of each passage. With these prefatory remarks I proceed to give the list of Old Testament passages Messianically applied in ancient Rabbinic writings.[1]
From the Old Testament—the Tanakh:
Genesis 1:2; 2:4; 3:15; 4:25; 8:11; 9:27; 14:1; 15:18; 18:4-5; 19:32; 22:18; 33:1; 35:21; 38:1-2; 49:1, 9-10, 12, 19.
Exodus 4:22; 12:2, 42; 15:1; 16:25, 33; 17:16; 21:1; 40:9, 11.
Leviticus 26:13
Numbers 7:12; 23:21; 24:7, 17; 27:16.
Deuteronomy 1:8; 11:21; 16:3; 19:8-9; 20:10; 23:11; 25:19; 30:4; 32:7; 33:5, 12, 17.
Judges 5:31.
Ruth 1:1; 2:14; 3:15; 4:18, 20.
1st Samuel 2:10.
2nd Samuel 22:28; 23:1-4.
1st Kings 4:33.
1st Chronicles 3:24.
Psalms 2:1-2, 4, 6-9; 16:5, 9; 18:31, 50; 21:1, 3-5, 7; 22:7, 15; 23:5; 31:19; 36:9; 40:7; 45:2-3, 6-7; 50:2; 60:7; 61:6, 8; 68:31; 72:1, 8, 10, 16-17; 80:17; 89:22-25, 27, 51, 53; 90:15; 92:8, 11, 13; 95:7; 102:16; 106:44; 110:1, 2, 7; 116:9, 13; 119:33; 120:7; 121:1; 126:2; 132:18; 133:3; 142:5.
Ecclesiastes 1:9, 11; 7:24; 11:8; 12:1.
Canticle of Canticles (Song of Songs) 1:8; 2:8; 3:11; 4:5, 16; 5:10; 6:10; 7:6, 13; 8:12, 4, 11.
Isaiah 1:25, 26; 2:4; 4:2, 4-6; 6:13; 7:21; 8:14; 9:6; 10:27, 34; 11:1, 3-7, 11-12; 12:3; 14:2, 29; 15:2; 16:1, 5; 18:5; 21:11-12; 23:8, 15; 24:23; 25:8-9; 26:19; 27:10, 13; 28:5, 16; 30:18-19, 25-26; 32:14-15, 20; 35:1, 5-6, 10; 40:1-3, 5, 10; 41:18, 25; 42:1; 43:10; 45:22; 49:8-10, 12, 14, 21, 23, 26; 51:12, 17; 52:3, 7-8, 12-13; 53:5, 10; 54:2, 5, 11, 13; 55:12; 56:1, 7; 57:14, 16; 59:15, 17, 19-20; 60:1-5, 7-10, 19, 21-22; 62:10; 63:2, 4; 64:4; 65:17, 19, 25; 66:7; 68:22.
Jeremiah 3:17-18; 5:19; 12:9; 16:13-14; 23:5-7; 30:21;
31:8, 20, 31, 33-34; 33:13.
Lamentations 1:16; 2:22; 4:22.
Ezekiel 11:19; 16:55; 17:22-23; 25:14; 29:21; 32:14; 36:25, 27; 39:2; 47:9, 12; 48:19.
Daniel 2:22, 35; 7:9, 13, 27; 8:13-14; 9:24; 12:3, 11-12.
Hosea 2:2, 13, 18; 3:5; 6:2; 13:14; 14:7.
Joel 2:28; 3:18.
Amos 4:7; 5:18; 8:11; 9:11.
Obadiah v.18, 21.
Micah 2:13; 4:3; 5:2-3; 7:6, 8.
Nahum 2:1.
Habakkuk 2:3; 3:18.
Zephaniah 3:8-9.
Zechariah 1:20; 2:10; 3:8, 10; 4:7, 10; 6:12; 7:13; 8:12, 23; 9:1, 9-10; 10:4; 11:12; 12:10; 14:2-9.
Malachi 3:1, 4, 16; 4:1-2, 5.
From the Apocryphal Books:
Tobit 14:5-7.
Wisdom of Solomon 3:7-8.
Ecclesiasticus a.k.a. Sirach (not to be confused with Ecclesiastes) 44:21; 47:11; 48:10-11.
Baruch 2:34-35; 4:29; Ch. 5.
1st Maccabees 2:57.
2nd Maccabees 2:18.
Gentile scholar Risto Santala notes:
The New Testament expounds virtually the whole history of salvation in the light of the Psalms.
Christ was despised, Ps. 22:6, 69:19-22;
he was rejected, Ps. 118:22;
he was mocked, Ps. 22:7-8, 89:51-52;
he was whipped, Ps. 129:3;
he was derided, Ps. 69:8,20;
he was impaled on a cross, Ps. 22:1-2, 14-17;
he was thirsty, Ps. 22:16;
he was given wine mixed with gall on the cross, Ps. 69:20-22;
lots were cast for his garments, Ps. 22:18-19;
his bones were not broken, Ps. 34:21;
he rose from the dead, Ps.16:10;
he ascended to heaven, Ps. 68:19;
he is at the right hand of God, Ps. 110:1 and 80:17;
he is the High Priest, Ps. 110:4;
he will judge the nations, Ps. 89:3-5;
his reign is eternal, Ps. 89:35-37;
he is the son of God, Ps. 2:7;
he spoke in parables, Ps. 78:2;
he calmed the storm, Ps. 89:10;
the people sang Hosanna to him, Ps. 118:25-26;
he is blessed forever, Ps. 45:1-4,8,18;
and he will come in his glory in the Last Days, Ps. 102:16-23.[2]
[1] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah Appendix 9: List of Old Testament Passages Messianically Applied in Ancient Rabbinic Writings, Vol. II, Ch. 5, 1883
[2] Risto Santala, William Kinnaird, Trans. from Finnish, 1992, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings—Ch. What the Psalm s Have to Say About Christ
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : List of Old Testament Texts Applied to the Messiah in Rabbinic Writings...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : List of Old Testament Texts Applied to the Messiah in Rabbinic Writings...
Saturday, September 05, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 4 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Deoxyribonucleic Acid:
It appears that some of the unfounded claims of the documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus are supposed to be excused due to reliance on “science.” DNA research is a science but the documentary’s conclusions are not scientific. Here is one such claim made by DSC,
If you found my DNA how could you prove that it was mine? You would have to extract DNA from me and match it up. Finding DNA in an ossuary that says Yeshua does not tell us who this Yeshua was.
Note this interesting comment by Simcha Jacobovici regarding “Ossuary 80/503 ‘Yeshua bar Yosef’ - ‘Jesus, Son of Joseph’”:
[He emphasized the word “that”]
Simply stated, since there is no independent DNA control sample the storytelling in the documentary about Jesus, His alleged wife and His alleged child are simply unfounded and merely disguised as science.
We are told that since the DNA in the Yeshua and the Mariamne ossuary does not match the best explanation, considering that they are in a family tomb and yet not genealogically related, is that they were husband and wife. But how do we know this? Because it fits the theory. In fact, Yose may have been married to Mariamne and Yeshua could have been their son. Then Yeshua could have been married to Maria and had a son named Yehuda.
For proof that Jesus was married the documentary relies heavily on The Acts of Philip. They particularly rely on the most complete version of the text ever found.
In 1974 AD a 700 year old manuscript of the 4th century text of The Acts of Philip that contained “an early description of Mary Magdalene, unmarked by later Christian tradition.” Think about it; some three centuries after the time of Jesus and Mary Magdalene a text was written. We then find a manuscript that dates to circa fourteenth century which is considered the most reliable version. At this point we may state that the skeptics will instantly embrace, accept, exalt and proclaim the absolute truth of any text that contradicts the New Testament. They do this by establishing different standards for that which will back up what they already believe; if it contradicts the New Testament it must be true—clearly, this is a substandard double standard. Therefore, they consider The Acts of Philip to be, pardon the pun, gospel truth (in this regard my essay of the gospel of Judas may be relevant). In reality, The Acts of Philip does not mention “Mary Magdalene” but it does include some interesting stories about the conversion of a talking leopard and goat.
Of course, we have no historical evidence that Jesus was married or that He had a child. I wrote about this in “Their Own Whims and Lusts” - Liberal Scholars and Jesus’ Marriage. Ah, but there is no evidence because it was kept secret—lack of evidence is not evidence, we cannot say that we know that it is true because there is no evidence.
[i] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, Yeshua Bar Yosef (retrieved 3-3-07)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 4 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 4 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Deoxyribonucleic Acid:
It appears that some of the unfounded claims of the documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus are supposed to be excused due to reliance on “science.” DNA research is a science but the documentary’s conclusions are not scientific. Here is one such claim made by DSC,
“The film also documents DNA extraction from human residue found in two of the ossuaries and reveals new evidence that throws light on Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene.”[i]
If you found my DNA how could you prove that it was mine? You would have to extract DNA from me and match it up. Finding DNA in an ossuary that says Yeshua does not tell us who this Yeshua was.
Note this interesting comment by Simcha Jacobovici regarding “Ossuary 80/503 ‘Yeshua bar Yosef’ - ‘Jesus, Son of Joseph’”:
“there is a large cross mark right next to the name ‘Jesus.’ A cross, deliberately carved. The archaeologists, however, immediately and ever since, dismissed this as a mason’s mark. Besides, they say, Christians didn’t use crosses until the time of Constantine in the 4th century. This ‘Jesus, Son of Joseph’ ossuary couldn’t belong to that Jesus, son of Joseph. Back in 1926, another ‘Jesus, son of Joseph’ ossuary was discovered…[it] is on display at the Israel Museum. It is in no way connected with Jesus of Nazareth but instead is on display to send a message: don’t get excited if you find archaeological mention of any ‘Jesus.’ The name is common.”[ii]
[He emphasized the word “that”]
Simply stated, since there is no independent DNA control sample the storytelling in the documentary about Jesus, His alleged wife and His alleged child are simply unfounded and merely disguised as science.
We are told that since the DNA in the Yeshua and the Mariamne ossuary does not match the best explanation, considering that they are in a family tomb and yet not genealogically related, is that they were husband and wife. But how do we know this? Because it fits the theory. In fact, Yose may have been married to Mariamne and Yeshua could have been their son. Then Yeshua could have been married to Maria and had a son named Yehuda.
For proof that Jesus was married the documentary relies heavily on The Acts of Philip. They particularly rely on the most complete version of the text ever found.
In 1974 AD a 700 year old manuscript of the 4th century text of The Acts of Philip that contained “an early description of Mary Magdalene, unmarked by later Christian tradition.” Think about it; some three centuries after the time of Jesus and Mary Magdalene a text was written. We then find a manuscript that dates to circa fourteenth century which is considered the most reliable version. At this point we may state that the skeptics will instantly embrace, accept, exalt and proclaim the absolute truth of any text that contradicts the New Testament. They do this by establishing different standards for that which will back up what they already believe; if it contradicts the New Testament it must be true—clearly, this is a substandard double standard. Therefore, they consider The Acts of Philip to be, pardon the pun, gospel truth (in this regard my essay of the gospel of Judas may be relevant). In reality, The Acts of Philip does not mention “Mary Magdalene” but it does include some interesting stories about the conversion of a talking leopard and goat.
Of course, we have no historical evidence that Jesus was married or that He had a child. I wrote about this in “Their Own Whims and Lusts” - Liberal Scholars and Jesus’ Marriage. Ah, but there is no evidence because it was kept secret—lack of evidence is not evidence, we cannot say that we know that it is true because there is no evidence.
[i] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, Yeshua Bar Yosef (retrieved 3-3-07)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 4 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 4 of 10...
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 3 of 3
The Talmud-Megillah 13a states,
Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
We now continue considering what the difference id between a “Jew” who believes in Jesus and a “Christian” as well as the general question of who is a Jew?
Part 1: Intro and Individual Jewish Opinion
Part 2: The Halakah—Jewish Religious Law
Part 3: Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy
Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy:
Lawrence Epstein wrote a book entitled “Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism.” He makes quite a few comments in his book that would leave the reader with no doubt that according to Judaism a Jew who believes in Jesus as the Messiah is no longer Jewish.
For example, he writes:
I had a chance to correspond with Lawrence Epstein quite some time ago and asked him to elaborate on the contradictory and anti-halakhic (Halakah is Jewish Law) statements made in his book.
Some of his explanations are as follows:
Not surprisingly, his responses mirror the comments in his book. The contradictions do not seem to occur to him nor does the fact that he himself is speaking and acting against the Jewish Law that he admits is still binding and claims to uphold.
He admits that “a person born Jewish is always Jewish,” but that such a person, “forfeits the privileges of being a Jew” by accepting Jesus as Messiah and then he goes back to stating that “a born Jew who follows Jesus is halachically Jewish,” and finally, “a born Jew who has accepted another religion has renounced certain rights as a Jew.”
What appears to be going on here is that he places more weight on the opinion of the Israeli Supreme Court than on the Jewish religious law. This is because “in the technical halakhic sense, apostasy is impossible,”[2] therefore technical allowing for Jewish-Christianity. On the other hand the Israeli Supreme Court does not and therefore, its opinions are elevated above those of religious law because they support the rejection of Jewish Christianity.
He gives us a glimpse of the motivation of the Israeli Supreme Court to rule on the issue of who is a Jew. Apparently, they do not do come to their conclusions based on halakhic considerations or in order to ensure either Jewish purity or proper religious worship. They seem to rule on the issue out of secular politics which is obvious as Lawrence Epstein points out that a Jewish Christian will lose civil legal rights. This seems to be what he means by “privileges of being a Jew” and “renounced certain rights as a Jew.”
He goes on to state, “Every community has the right to determine its borders. A person can't simply move to the U.S. and declare himself American, no matter how he feels.” Moving to the U.S. as an outsider and declaring oneself a citizen is a faulty metaphor and is actually the reverse of the issue that I was discussing with him. A more appropriate metaphor is that a person who moves to the U.S. and is not a citizen of the U.S. is still considered a citizen of his country of origin. If the person wanted to become a citizen of the U.S. she could apply for a status known as dual-citizenship. Even in a strictly secular-political example we see that there is no need to abandon, denounce or reject ones origins.
Of course every metaphor eventually breaks down because it is after all just that, a metaphor. A Jewish person who accepts Jesus as Messiah does not cease to be Jewish. Instead, they retain their original status as sons of Abraham. Thus, being Jewish; they embrace the Jewish Messiah, who was Himself a Jew.
The personal opinions of individual Jewish people are just that yet, the Halakah does not rob Jews of their Judaism.
[1] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), pp. 55, 58
[2] Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 3, p. 211
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 3 of 3...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 3 of 3...
Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
We now continue considering what the difference id between a “Jew” who believes in Jesus and a “Christian” as well as the general question of who is a Jew?
Part 1: Intro and Individual Jewish Opinion
Part 2: The Halakah—Jewish Religious Law
Part 3: Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy
Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy:
Lawrence Epstein wrote a book entitled “Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism.” He makes quite a few comments in his book that would leave the reader with no doubt that according to Judaism a Jew who believes in Jesus as the Messiah is no longer Jewish.
For example, he writes:
No mainstream Jewish movement recognizes the possibility that a person can be Jewish while believing in Jesus as the messiah or in any way professing Christian religious views…
There are religious movements that fall under the general heading of Hebrew Christians…
However, their desire to be accepted as legitimate Jews has not been accepted, or even considered, because their views are fully Christian and, because of that, incapable of simultaneously being Jewish. Put simply, if one believes in Jesus as the messiah, then one cannot be Jewish. A person with those beliefs is seen by the Jewish community as a Christian….
No one who is Jewish, no born Jew and no one who converts to Judaism, can believe in Jesus as the literal son of God or as the messiah. For the Jewish people, there is no God but God.[1]
I had a chance to correspond with Lawrence Epstein quite some time ago and asked him to elaborate on the contradictory and anti-halakhic (Halakah is Jewish Law) statements made in his book.
Some of his explanations are as follows:
Jewish law does state that a person born Jewish is always Jewish. However, the person who voluntarily accepts Jesus as the Messiah forfeits the privileges of being a Jew. That, at least, has been the consistent rulings of the Israeli Supreme Court. Therefore, for example, a born Jew who follows Jesus is halachically Jewish but is not recognized as any longer part of the community and loses civil legal rights, such as the right of return… a born Jew who has accepted another religion has renounced certain rights as a Jew.
Not surprisingly, his responses mirror the comments in his book. The contradictions do not seem to occur to him nor does the fact that he himself is speaking and acting against the Jewish Law that he admits is still binding and claims to uphold.
He admits that “a person born Jewish is always Jewish,” but that such a person, “forfeits the privileges of being a Jew” by accepting Jesus as Messiah and then he goes back to stating that “a born Jew who follows Jesus is halachically Jewish,” and finally, “a born Jew who has accepted another religion has renounced certain rights as a Jew.”
What appears to be going on here is that he places more weight on the opinion of the Israeli Supreme Court than on the Jewish religious law. This is because “in the technical halakhic sense, apostasy is impossible,”[2] therefore technical allowing for Jewish-Christianity. On the other hand the Israeli Supreme Court does not and therefore, its opinions are elevated above those of religious law because they support the rejection of Jewish Christianity.
He gives us a glimpse of the motivation of the Israeli Supreme Court to rule on the issue of who is a Jew. Apparently, they do not do come to their conclusions based on halakhic considerations or in order to ensure either Jewish purity or proper religious worship. They seem to rule on the issue out of secular politics which is obvious as Lawrence Epstein points out that a Jewish Christian will lose civil legal rights. This seems to be what he means by “privileges of being a Jew” and “renounced certain rights as a Jew.”
He goes on to state, “Every community has the right to determine its borders. A person can't simply move to the U.S. and declare himself American, no matter how he feels.” Moving to the U.S. as an outsider and declaring oneself a citizen is a faulty metaphor and is actually the reverse of the issue that I was discussing with him. A more appropriate metaphor is that a person who moves to the U.S. and is not a citizen of the U.S. is still considered a citizen of his country of origin. If the person wanted to become a citizen of the U.S. she could apply for a status known as dual-citizenship. Even in a strictly secular-political example we see that there is no need to abandon, denounce or reject ones origins.
Of course every metaphor eventually breaks down because it is after all just that, a metaphor. A Jewish person who accepts Jesus as Messiah does not cease to be Jewish. Instead, they retain their original status as sons of Abraham. Thus, being Jewish; they embrace the Jewish Messiah, who was Himself a Jew.
The personal opinions of individual Jewish people are just that yet, the Halakah does not rob Jews of their Judaism.
[1] Lawrence J. Epstein, Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism (Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1998), pp. 55, 58
[2] Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 3, p. 211
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 3 of 3...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 3 of 3...
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 3 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Let the Debate Begin…Without Us:
James Cameron stated,
However, the producer and director also take a Dan Brownesque retreat from the debate as they state:
You may recall how Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, claimed that he had done the historical research and now he would leave it up to the historians to debate the facts. He quickly took his millions of dollars and disappeared from public view (in order to work on his next book about Freemasonry).
There is something important to point out here; something about how the fact/fiction of Dan Brown and James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici function: dan Brown has stated, “How historically accurate is history itself?”[v]
Think about it: if history is not historically accurate how can he begin his novel The Da Vinci Code with the word “FACT” and claim that “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate”? Just how does he know that the history upon which he is relying is accurate?
We ought not make the claim of pure subjectivism in history in order to construct a self-fulfilling prophecy by dealing loosely with the facts—on purpose.
Now James Cameron and Smicha Jacobovici are making a charge at a theological, historical, archeological subject while at the same time retreating virtually before the debate begins. At least Jacobovici appeared on a debate forum after the documentary was released. Here I only wanted to note the “Don’t ask me, that’s not my field” preemptions; the “I made the charge but will not debate” mentality.
[i] Jennifer Viegas, Jesus Family Tomb Believed Found (Discovery News Feb. 25, 2007)
[ii] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[iii] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[iv] TODAYshow/MSNBC, Director Defends Jesus Tomb Findings - James Cameron is Convinced Remains Are of Those of Christ, Family
[v] Dan Brown quoted in Father Jonathan Morris for FOX Fan Central, Dan Brown Responds – ‘The Da Vinci Code’ — Part II
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 3 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 3 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Let the Debate Begin…Without Us:
James Cameron stated,
“We’ve done our homework; we’ve made the case; and now it’s time for the debate to begin.”[i]
However, the producer and director also take a Dan Brownesque retreat from the debate as they state:
James Cameron,
“I’m not a theologist [sic.]. I’m not an archaeologist. I’m a documentary film maker.”[ii]
Simcha Jacobovici,
“I am not a theologian. I didn’t want to take anyone on.”[iii]
Jacobovici also said,
“We’re just reporting the news. We’re not statisticians. We’re not theologians.”[iv]
You may recall how Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, claimed that he had done the historical research and now he would leave it up to the historians to debate the facts. He quickly took his millions of dollars and disappeared from public view (in order to work on his next book about Freemasonry).
There is something important to point out here; something about how the fact/fiction of Dan Brown and James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici function: dan Brown has stated, “How historically accurate is history itself?”[v]
Think about it: if history is not historically accurate how can he begin his novel The Da Vinci Code with the word “FACT” and claim that “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate”? Just how does he know that the history upon which he is relying is accurate?
We ought not make the claim of pure subjectivism in history in order to construct a self-fulfilling prophecy by dealing loosely with the facts—on purpose.
Now James Cameron and Smicha Jacobovici are making a charge at a theological, historical, archeological subject while at the same time retreating virtually before the debate begins. At least Jacobovici appeared on a debate forum after the documentary was released. Here I only wanted to note the “Don’t ask me, that’s not my field” preemptions; the “I made the charge but will not debate” mentality.
[i] Jennifer Viegas, Jesus Family Tomb Believed Found (Discovery News Feb. 25, 2007)
[ii] Jerusalem (AP), "Scholars, Clergy Slam Jesus Documentary" (Feb 26 1:04 PM US/Eastern)
[iii] Stuart Laidlaw, Jesus tomb claim sparks furor (Feb 26, 2007 04:30 AM)
[iv] TODAYshow/MSNBC, Director Defends Jesus Tomb Findings - James Cameron is Convinced Remains Are of Those of Christ, Family
[v] Dan Brown quoted in Father Jonathan Morris for FOX Fan Central, Dan Brown Responds – ‘The Da Vinci Code’ — Part II
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 3 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 3 of 10...
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 2 of 3
The Talmud-Megillah 13a states,
Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
We now continue considering what the difference id between a “Jew” who believes in Jesus and a “Christian” as well as the general question of who is a Jew?Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
Part 1: Intro and Individual Jewish Opinion
Part 2: The Halakah—Jewish Religious Law
Part 3: Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy
The Halakah—Jewish Religious Law:
Let us now consider the teaching of the law which the authors quoted in part 1 claim to uphold and live by:
Encyclopedia Judaica 3:211 states:
In Jewish religious law, it is technically impossible for a Jew (born to a Jewish mother or properly converted to Judaism) to change his religion. Even though a Jew undergoes the rites of admission to another religious faith and formally renounces the Jewish religion he remains-as far as the Halakah is concerned-a Jew, albeit a sinner (Sanh. 44a)…For the born Jew, Judaism is not a matter of choice…in the technical halakhic sense, apostasy is impossible.
In the above footnote “Sanh. 44a” refers to the Talmud-Sanhedrin 44a which states,
Israel hath sinned. R. Abba b. Zabda said: Even though [the people] have sinned, they are still [called] “Israel”.(1) R. Abba said: Thus people say, A myrtle, though it stands among reeds, is still a myrtle, and it is so called.Footnote (1),
“Israel is the name of honor for the people when faithful to God.” Thus, a sinning Jew is still a Jew.
I have no problem being called a sinner by the Jewish community yet, as we saw here, Jewish law has no problem calling me a Jew. The main point is that according to Jewish Law a person born Jewish is always Jewish however, by “cutting us off” individual Jews chose to act and speak against their own Jewish law, which they claim to uphold and admit, is still binding.
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia states,
According to the Jewish religious law, every one born of a Jewish mother is and remains a part of Judaism; hence a converted Jew is regarded solely as a transgressor of the Jewish religious law…converts were more energetically disliked and despised by the Jewish consciousness than by the Jewish religious law.[1]
Again we see an affirmation that a Jew remains a Jew and the interesting admission that it is not Jewish law that proclaims a converted Jew as no longer Jewish, but the Jewish consciousness or psychology. As I can personally attest to, Jews do not hesitate to state that Jewish-Christians are no longer Jewish. Now, note carefully that a convert (away from Judaism, in this discussion a Jewish-Christian) is identified as “a converted Jew is regarded solely as a transgressor of the Jewish religious law.” What is the term for a Jew who, in clear violation of Jewish law, claims that a convert is no longer Jewish?
The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia reads,
According to Jewish law, the apostate remains a Jew, albeit a sinner, and no formal ceremony is required if he returns to Judaism. Nevertheless, for psychological reasons a ceremony was sometimes considered desirable, prayers for the occasion figuring in some modern rituals.[2]
A Concise Encyclopedia of Judaism states,
Traditionally an apostate remains a Jew, although he is viewed as a sinner; no formal ceremony is required if such a person returns to the Jewish faith.[3]
The Encyclopedia of Judaism,
There are halakhic discussions as to whether a Jew who once converted, and who now wishes to return to the fold, need perform any symbolic act—such as immersion in a ritual bath (mikveh) before resuming his former status (although, halakhically , a Jew who converts still remains a Jew).[4]
A Popular Dictionary of Judaism,
According to Jewish Law, an apostate is still counted among the Jewish community—he can, for example, contract a Jewish marriage. However under the Law of Return, apostate Jews may not become citizens of the state of Israel.[5]
The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion,
The status of apostates in religious law was frequently discussed in rabbinic literature; for example, whether a penitent apostate required a ceremony of readmission to Judaism…An apostate (Heb. meshummad or mumar), although a sinner, is still regarded essentially as a Jew; however, that person loses certain rights and privileges of an Israelite and is disqualified from giving testimony or performing ritual slaughter.[6]
The message is clear and well agreed upon. But is it? Are there any personal opinions to the contrary? Yes there are personal opinions to the contrary.
For example, Rabbi Harry A. Cohen’s,
One ceases to be a Jew when he adopts another religion.(1) Yet he can become a Jew again by renouncing the religion he had adopted and accepting the Jewish faith again. According to Jewish law, no ceremony of conversion is necessary, but there must be a ritual immersion, under the direction of a Jewish court [three persons, at least one of whom is a Rabbi].[7]Footnote: (1),
One ceases to be a Jew when he adopts another religion: Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveichik (Hatzofeh, December 6, 1962), “He has severed himself and his descendants from the Jewish community”; Rabbi Yehezkel Landau (Derushay Hatzelah, Warsaw 1897, p. 37a), “He has left the (Jewish) community and he is not called a Jew.” See “The Law Regarding Apostates” by Rabbi Simon Federbush (Hatzofeh, April 19 and 26, 1963) citing the Talmud, Maimonides, and other authorities, “A Jew who adopts another religion is not called a Jew.”
Obviously, the above quote contradicts the previous quotes which all alluded to Jewish Law. We have learned from the previous quotes that Jewish law still accepts the apostate as Jewish. Reference has been made to the Talmud which to orthodox Judaism is as authoritative as the written word of God—the Tanakh.
Thus, it appears that the opinions to the contrary are the sorts that are stated do to dislike, consciousness, psychology and view. We must empathize with the emotional response to apostasy, after all orthodox Christianity rightfully does not regard as any longer Christian: Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christian Science, Mormonism and Seventh Day Adventism (arguably some Adventists are more orthodox than others), et al.
Yet, while people are born Jewish, no one is ever born Christian. Christianity is not a people group and thus, can be abandoned. But a born Jew is a Jew is a Jew. As we now know the Talmud states at Sanhedrin 44a that Israel hath sinned and even though the people have sinned, they are still called Israel and that Israel is the name of honor for the people when faithful to God and so a sinning Jew is still a Jew.
[1] Isaac Landman, ed.; Rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim and founder and director of the Academy for Adult Jewish Education, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, In Ten Volumes (New York: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1942), p. 344
[2] Geoffrey Wigoder, D. Phil., ed. in chief, new revised ed., Cecil Roth, B. Litt., M.A., D. Phil., ed. in chief first ed., The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1992 7th ed., 1959 1st ed.)
[3] Dan Cohn-Sherbok, A Concise Encyclopedia of Judaism (Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 1998)
[4] Geoffrey Wigoder, ed. in chief, The Encyclopedia of Judaism (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., and Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Publishing House, Ltd., 1989)
[5] Lavinia and Dan Cohn-Sherbok, A Popular Dictionary of Judaism (Surrey, TW9 2QA: Curzon Press, 1995)
[6] R. J. Zwi Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wigoder, eds. in chief, The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)
[7] Rabbi Harry A. Cohen, PH. D., A Basic Jewish Encyclopedia; Jewish Teachings and Practices Listed and Interpreted in the Order of Their Importance Today (Hartford, Conn.: Hartmore House Inc., 1965), p. 37
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 2 of 3...
Continue reading Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 2 of 3...
Friday, August 28, 2009
“The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 2 of 10
We now continue considering, dissecting and responding to the documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.”
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
DSC states,
It is granted, given the lowly state of The Da Vinci Culture, that the most half-baked theory backed by the least amount of evidence is exalted beyond the incredible amount of evidence supporting the New Testament’s reliability—this is a substandard double standard. Thus, this documentary depicts, in living color, Jesus and His family, something which is, as we shall see below, simply unfounded. In this case, the latest historical evidence is the fanciful imaginations of the documentary’s storytellers. This is where a documentary goes from simply showing us what was found to weaving stories based on personal interpretation of evidence.
Simcha Jacobovici states,
The problem with this claim is that it is a good old fashioned overstatement. This is not surprising since the quote came from his website’s homepage. Apparently, it is supposed to peak your interest. However, accuracy is always important. Let us consider the claim, “changes history,” how so? “shocks the world,” shocks with accurate revelation or with shock at weak evidence and imaginative storytelling?
We are then told that the tombs are inscribed with the names “The Virgin Mary, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene and Judah, their son.” But the fact is: “No” on the first claim, “No” on the second, “No” on the third and “No” on the fourth.
“The Virgin Mary” was not found but rather, “Maria,” with no indication of who she was nor whether or not she was a virgin.
“Jesus of Nazareth” was not found but rather, “Yeshua bar Yosef” Jesus son of Joseph—it may be Jesus of Talpiot, Jesus of Jerusalem, Jesus of Fresno, etc.).
“Mary Magdalene” was not found but rather, “Mariamne”—“Magdalene” denotes her being from Magdala, but again, this could be Mary from elsewhere. One reason that Mariamne is interpreted to be Mary Magdalene is that “Mariamne e Mara” is said to mean “Mary the Master.”
At least it is said to mean that within the confined of the documentary. However, the original scholars who worked on the site, and who are sited as sources on DSC’s website, are of a different opinion.
In his “Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries,” L.Y. Rahmani translates “Mariamne e Mara” as “of Mariamne, who is (also called) Mara.” He also notes that “Mara” is “a contraction of the name Martha.” And that “e” is “used in cases of double names.”
Likewise, in his “A Tomb With Inscribed Ossuaries in East Talpiyot, Jerusalem,” Amos Kloner translates “Mariamne e Mara” as “of Mariamene, [also called] Mara.” And likewise states, “Mara, a contraction of the name Martha, is used here as a second name.”
Richard Bauckham makes the following statement,
“Judah, their son” was not found but rather, “Yehuda bar Yeshua” or “Judah the son of Jesus”—there is absolutely no indication that it was the son of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, or even this Yehuda and this Mariamne; in this regard my essay “Their Own Whims and Lusts” Liberal Scholars and Jesus' Marriage may be of interest.
The documentary’s narrator asks, “Why didn’t anyone take notice of these names?” Considering that they tomb was found two decades ago.
They did, and they found them to be generic and inconclusive. This is actually something that the documentary goes on to firmly establish by citing various scholars.
Also, what are we to make of “Matia,” (Matthew)? Who is he to the family? It is inferred that since there are Matthew-like names in the genealogy in the Gospel of Luke (which according to James Tabor, “people don’t notice it much,” see below). At this point, it may be advantageous to mention that it appears that the way in which the documentary explains various discrepancies in the evidence is by plugging them into their preconceive notions. In other words, instead of the evidence informing the theory it appears that the theory is manipulating the evidence. If we say, “Well, certainly there is a New Testament character, in fact the author of a Gospel, that is named Matthew. This must be him.” Please do keep in mind that as appealing or even as correct as this may be; we are simply inventing 2,000 year old history right off of the tops of our 21st century heads merely in order to force a piece of evidence to fit our preconceived theory.
Clearly, what Simcha Jacobovici presented us on his website is a perfect example of mixing the evidence with a personal interpretation which is then retold as if it was what the inscriptions actually stated.
[i] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, The Lost Tomb of Jesus (retrieved 3-3-07)
[iii] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 2 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 2 of 10...
Hereinafter DSC denotes “The Discovery Channel.”
This parsed essay is divided into the following segments:
Part 1: Introduction and Utterly Absolute Unquestionable Certainty
Part 2: Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
Part 3: Let the Debate Begin…Without Us
Part 4: Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Part 5: Statistical Probability
Part 6: Theological Considerations - The Resurrection and the Ascension
Part 7: Odd and Unfounded Assertions
Part 8: Some Academics Dare to Disagree
Part 9: Erudite Elucidators?
Part 10: The James Ossuary and Concluding Musings
Sensationalistic Claims - The Hype is Ripe
DSC states,
“The documentary includes dramatic recreations, based on the latest historical evidence, illustrating accurate images of Jesus of Nazareth, his family, his followers, his ministry, his crucifixion and his entombment.”[i]
It is granted, given the lowly state of The Da Vinci Culture, that the most half-baked theory backed by the least amount of evidence is exalted beyond the incredible amount of evidence supporting the New Testament’s reliability—this is a substandard double standard. Thus, this documentary depicts, in living color, Jesus and His family, something which is, as we shall see below, simply unfounded. In this case, the latest historical evidence is the fanciful imaginations of the documentary’s storytellers. This is where a documentary goes from simply showing us what was found to weaving stories based on personal interpretation of evidence.
Simcha Jacobovici states,
“An incredible archaeological discovery in Israel changes history and shocks the world. Tombs with the names The Virgin Mary, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene and Judah, their son, are found and an investigation begins.”[ii]
The problem with this claim is that it is a good old fashioned overstatement. This is not surprising since the quote came from his website’s homepage. Apparently, it is supposed to peak your interest. However, accuracy is always important. Let us consider the claim, “changes history,” how so? “shocks the world,” shocks with accurate revelation or with shock at weak evidence and imaginative storytelling?
We are then told that the tombs are inscribed with the names “The Virgin Mary, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene and Judah, their son.” But the fact is: “No” on the first claim, “No” on the second, “No” on the third and “No” on the fourth.
“The Virgin Mary” was not found but rather, “Maria,” with no indication of who she was nor whether or not she was a virgin.
“Jesus of Nazareth” was not found but rather, “Yeshua bar Yosef” Jesus son of Joseph—it may be Jesus of Talpiot, Jesus of Jerusalem, Jesus of Fresno, etc.).
“Mary Magdalene” was not found but rather, “Mariamne”—“Magdalene” denotes her being from Magdala, but again, this could be Mary from elsewhere. One reason that Mariamne is interpreted to be Mary Magdalene is that “Mariamne e Mara” is said to mean “Mary the Master.”
At least it is said to mean that within the confined of the documentary. However, the original scholars who worked on the site, and who are sited as sources on DSC’s website, are of a different opinion.
In his “Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries,” L.Y. Rahmani translates “Mariamne e Mara” as “of Mariamne, who is (also called) Mara.” He also notes that “Mara” is “a contraction of the name Martha.” And that “e” is “used in cases of double names.”
Likewise, in his “A Tomb With Inscribed Ossuaries in East Talpiyot, Jerusalem,” Amos Kloner translates “Mariamne e Mara” as “of Mariamene, [also called] Mara.” And likewise states, “Mara, a contraction of the name Martha, is used here as a second name.”
Richard Bauckham makes the following statement,
“‘Mara’ in this context does not mean Master. It is an abbreviated form of Martha. probably the ossuary contained two women called Mary and Martha (Mariamne and Mara).”[iii]
“Judah, their son” was not found but rather, “Yehuda bar Yeshua” or “Judah the son of Jesus”—there is absolutely no indication that it was the son of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, or even this Yehuda and this Mariamne; in this regard my essay “Their Own Whims and Lusts” Liberal Scholars and Jesus' Marriage may be of interest.
The documentary’s narrator asks, “Why didn’t anyone take notice of these names?” Considering that they tomb was found two decades ago.
They did, and they found them to be generic and inconclusive. This is actually something that the documentary goes on to firmly establish by citing various scholars.
Also, what are we to make of “Matia,” (Matthew)? Who is he to the family? It is inferred that since there are Matthew-like names in the genealogy in the Gospel of Luke (which according to James Tabor, “people don’t notice it much,” see below). At this point, it may be advantageous to mention that it appears that the way in which the documentary explains various discrepancies in the evidence is by plugging them into their preconceive notions. In other words, instead of the evidence informing the theory it appears that the theory is manipulating the evidence. If we say, “Well, certainly there is a New Testament character, in fact the author of a Gospel, that is named Matthew. This must be him.” Please do keep in mind that as appealing or even as correct as this may be; we are simply inventing 2,000 year old history right off of the tops of our 21st century heads merely in order to force a piece of evidence to fit our preconceived theory.
Clearly, what Simcha Jacobovici presented us on his website is a perfect example of mixing the evidence with a personal interpretation which is then retold as if it was what the inscriptions actually stated.
[i] The Discovery Channel, Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been found? (retrieved 3-3-07)
[ii] Simcha Jacobovici, The Lost Tomb of Jesus (retrieved 3-3-07)
[iii] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start (Monday, February 26, 2007)
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 2 of 10...
Continue reading “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”, part 2 of 10...
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Jewish / Judaism : Jewish and Christian? Is Messianic Judaism Possible?, part 1 of 3
The Talmud-Megillah 13a states,
Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
What is the difference between a “Jew” who believes in Jesus and a “Christian”? The difference is one of heritage. Jews are traditionally identified as those who were born to a Jewish mother (or converted). Jews are by birth, sons of Abraham of the people of Israel.Whoever repudiates idolatry is accounted a Jew.
Part 1: Intro and Individual Jewish Opinion
Part 2: The Halakah—Jewish Religious Law
Part 3: Lawrence Epstein’s Fallacy
Jews who have come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah call themselves “Messianic Jews,” “Jewish Christians,” “Jewish Believers,” “Christians,” etc. “Christ” is English for “Kristos,” which is Greek for the Hebrew “Mashiach,” which is to say “anointed one,” and is referred to as “Messiah” in English. Therefore, a Christian is a follower of Christ, the anointed Jewish Messiah.
Please do not get me wrong; some of my best friends are Gentiles. Jewish believers are not ontologically more special than they. Jewish believers in Jesus are also called “Messianic Jews” etc. to make the same exact point about their lineage, their peoplehood; they are Jews who see the New Testament as the inspired scripture which simply lays out what the life of a Jew (and gentile believers) is to be according to the new covenant, just as the Tanakh (Old Testament) laid out what the life of a Jew was to be according to the old covenant.
Contrary to popular belief, when a Jew becomes a Christian it does not mean they have converted to a Gentile-Pagan religion. It means that they believe that the Messiah has come (and will come again). I once shared my belief in Jesus’ messiahship with a Jewish person who asked me if I was going to convert. I told him that there was nothing to convert to since I am a Jew who believes that the Jewish Messiah has come in the person of the Jewish man Jesus as predicted in the Jewish Scripture.
Interestingly enough, Rabbi Saul of Tarsus (later known as Paul) rhetorically asked and answered the question, what advantage has the Jew?,
Then what advantage has the Jew? What is the value of being circumcised? Much in every way! In the first place, the Jews were entrusted with the very words of God… (Romans 3:1).
Common Jewish opinion states that if a Jew believes in Jesus as the Messiah they are no longer Jewish. Ironically, a Jew who is an atheist, agnostic or secular in every way is still accepted as a Jew, no questions asked. The following quotes demonstrate the strong denunciations of Jews who would come to believe in Jesus. Towards the end of this essay I will show that despite emotionally charged arguments and personal opinions Jewish Law is clear; a Jew is a Jew even if she becomes a Christian. The very end of this essay has been devoted exclusively to Lawrence J. Epstein who wrote a book entitled “Questions and Answers on Conversion to Judaism.”
It must be understood that there are persons who have termed themselves “Anti-missionaries,” these people, many of them Rabbis, have dedicated themselves to thwarting Christian missionaries. It is sad but true to say that in order to do accomplish this task many anti-missionaries are willing to go against Judaism’s own teachings in order to attempt to prove Christians wrong. This charge will be demonstrated here and in many of our essays regarding Jewish issues where I will demonstrate that anti-missionaries contradict authoritative Rabbinic writing as well as various Jewish scholars and even other Rabbis.
Individual Jewish Opinion:
The following are some thoughts on the question of who is a Jew?
Michael Asheri wrote:
The full answer is that to be Jewish you either have to be born Jewish or undergo religious conversion to Judaism…But what does “born Jewish” mean? Anyone Born of a Jewish Mother Is Jewish by Birth..it is possible to be Jewish without being religious in any accepted sense…there are atheists who are, nonetheless, Jews…the one basic condition of being Jewish: that the Jews are the chose people of God and that it is precisely to obey His commandments-all of them-that God chose them and they, in turn, chose Him…
Being a Jew is also a great privilege and there are certain obligations attached to that privilege which we are not free to reject.[1]
What an oddity; a person can be an atheist and still be Jewish but then we are told that to be a Jew the condition is a set of beliefs which the atheist will instantly reject including the belief in God.
Regarding “Reconstructionists” who “seem to be attempting a definition of Judaism without revelation and, finally, without God, based only on an undefined peoplehood of Israel.” Asheri goes on to write,
in spite of their denial of everything basic to Judaism, it should not for a moment be thought that these people are no longer Jews. The reason is clear and has already been pointed out: Judaism is more than a religion. The Jews are a people. And the Reconstructionists have made it clear that they have not cut themselves off... If they have not cut themselves off, we cannot cut them off. What is really significant here, to be exact, is that they have not adopted another religion in place of Judaism or, as the early Christians did, created another religion. As for those few people who, having accepted or even solicited baptism, continue to maintain that they are Jews, and, in that guise, attempt to win over faithful Jews to their religion, we should not hesitate to classify them not only as no longer Jews but as active enemies of Israel, deserving of our unceasing opposition and scorn.[2]
Again, what an oddity; you can purposefully reject and actively seek to abolish everything that makes Judaism what it is, including belief in God, and you can still be a Jew. However, if you are a Jew and you believe that the Jewish Messiah has come as prophesied in the Jewish Scripture then you are not only no longer Jewish but an “enemy deserving unceasing opposition and scorn.”
Yet, this same author wrote, as quoted above, that the one basic condition of being Jewish: that the Jews are the chose people of God and that it is precisely to obey His commandments—all of them—that God chose them and they, in turn, chose Him. This is accepted and taught by Christianity and so a Jewish person who accepts Jesus as the Messiah believes all of this and is therefore, still a Jew. Conversely, how can a positive affirmation of God’ non-existence atheist be said to believe any of this?
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan wrote:
Conversion to Christianity or any other faith is an abandonment of Judaism….Christianity negates the fundamentals of Jewish faith, and one who accepts it rejects the very essence of Judaism…A Jew who accepts Christianity might call himself a “Jewish Christian,” but he is no longer a Jew. He can no longer even be counted as part of a Jewish congregation. Conversion to another faith is an act of religious treason. It is one of the worst possible sins that a Jew can commit…The truth is that one who falls into their [the missionary’s] net is eternally cast away from before his G-d.[3]
Rabbi Shmuel Arkush wrote,
When a Jew accepts Jesus he not only rejects the history of his people but, by adopting Christian faith he places himself outside the Jewish religion…By accepting a Christian god you commit a cardinal sin. You become a traitor to your people and cannot be cou