Moderateman Moderateman

Jesus, Son of G-d or Satan's greatest trick?

▼

Jesus, Son of G-d or Satan's greatest trick?

from JoeUser Forums

So Satan sitting in his home listening to the screams of the tormented with a smile on his face, decided the Jews were to close to G-d, and this really angered him, he had to find a way to divide the damned Jews, after all G-d decided they were his chosen people and what better target for his evil deeds than watering down the religion, Now Satan had great power, let us not forget that after all he was arch Angel, most high, one of the three named Angels that sat at G-ds side at one time.

So along comes this good man Jesus was his name, he had many good things to say and the people listened, so first Satan hardened the hearts of the Rabbis, made them jealous of Jesus and his huge following, then Satan allowed some minor so called miracles to happen, an easy task for one as powerful as Lucifer. Satan also knew of the prophecy of the Messiah, and he thought what a great idea if he could trick the Jews into believing that Jesus was the Messiah, he could one, break up the tribes of Israel, really anger G-d whom Lucifer hated beyond all things and of course lead people away from the one true faith of Judaism. Needless to say his plan worked the people of Israel {some} believed the Messiah had come, the Rabbis who Lucifer had tricked into believing this good man was a threat to their power played their part perfectly and had the Romans crucify Jesus {all part of the prophecy} Some years after the death of Jesus, Christianity was born, Jesus NEVER claimed to be a Christian, he was circumcised in the Jewish religion and took Bar mitzvah at 13 again following the Jewish religion. Never once did he or his disciples call what Jesus was preaching Christianity, what he was preaching was Judaism in it purest form, with stress on the 10 commandments as a way to live your life. Did this really happen? I have no Idea, but it is no more believable or unbelievable than Jesus being the Human Son of G-d. Meanwhile we Jews of the one true faith are still waiting for the Messiah to arrive and on that day there will be much celebrating, for we have waiting patiently a very long time for this to happen.

religion
44,336 views 323 replies
Reply #126 from JoeUser Forums Top
That's my point - there isn't one that I know of, not one from the Bible. It specifically states that circumcision isn't required of the Gentiles.


I believe you are continuing with the NT? Because in the Torah it is required especially regarding Passover and Native or Alien One Law (Leviticus).

If so then we be in agreement!
Reply #127 from JoeUser Forums Top
Acts 15:1-11 (NIV)
1Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. 4When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.
5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."

6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

Thanks BibleGateway.com!

Yes, New Testament, so we are in agreement.
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #128 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thanks BibleGateway.com!


Biblegateway is great for sure.

Another one I really like because I can get into some word study is biblebrowser.com. E-sword has a program that you can download and contains a Strong's Concordance however the advantage of biblebrowser to me is the usage of Hebrew and Greek characters.

Just thought I would pass that on.
Reply #129 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ooo, resources!

Thanks!
Reply #130 from JoeUser Forums Top
You have some of that story right MM,Lucifer did create a false Messiah,but the Messiah he created divided christianity and the Nazerites/Messianics,the messiah created drove division,for the Jesus the church created is a roman citizen with roman ways,not jewish ways that Yahoshua ben Yosef brought out into the open.

Yahoshua plainly stated he did not come to bring peace but a sword,he was going to bring division,he was going to divide the people,those that follow and do the will of the Father on one side,those who do not follow and do the will of the Father on the other,which side is going to be blessed unto life eternal,the obedient or disobedient?

Last on this you being jewish,you know this better then the outsiders,tell the board what a kinsman redeemer is and the responsibilities of said kinsman.
Terry
Reply #131 from JoeUser Forums Top
Being celibate isn't a Catholic weird thing, it's Biblical and heroic.


No, it's not. Really. The only scriptures that even mention anything about why you might not want to get married was Paul's advice to Timothy - and he'd had a bad marriage himself. It wasn't advice to all people, and it wasn't inspired advice. It was basically Paul bitching about his bad marriage.


You must have St.Paul mixed up with some one else.

Regarding St. Paul's advice to Timothy, would you cite the chapter and verse? Concerning St.Paul being married and a bad one at that, I'm quite certain you're mistaken. Everything I've read has always said that St.Paul was never married and 1Cor. 7:7 seems to suggest that as well. I know in those days, it was the obligation of the Pharisees and ordained rabbis to marry, but one source has St.Paul saying, My soul cleaves to the Torah, let others keep the world going.

As a Christian, St.Paul clearly looked upon his celibacy as a mystical betrothal to Christ and the Church.

Really, though, the idea of celibate priests and the concept of celibacy being "Biblical and heroic" is laughable and best, and ridiculous at worst.


Think what you want SC...makes me wonder if you've ever actually read Sacred Scripture. Please before you spout off any further, you might want to actually read in 1Cor. 7: 25-39 how the Apostle Paul explains the excellence of virginity and celibacy.


For the love of God, the unmarried person can dedicate him/herself to God more fully than the married person can who has to look after the family and is "divided" v.34. The primary purpose and reason for Christian virginity is to dedicate oneself to Divine things, giving oneself to God completely body and soul.

Virginity, or celibacy and marriage are the 2 ways of expressing and living the one mystery of the covenant of God with His people. St. Paul teaches that when one or the other isn't esteemed, when human sexuality isn't regarded as a great value given by God, then being married or being celibate for the sake of the Kingdom of God loses its meaning.

Being celibate is indeed Biblical and heroic. Everyone one is called be virginal and celibate unless we are married.

Reply #132 from JoeUser Forums Top
See this is one of those things about Christians that drive me nuts, a 8 day old baby does not submit to anything, it has no say in anything that happened to it! No voice, cannot talk or make its wishes known!


I don't know about modern Judaism, but circumcising 8 day old boys was/is and always has been very much a Jewish religious rite, not Christian, MM. And going back to when God first instituted circumcision as explained in the Torah, it was grown men who had to submit themselves to circumcision.

It was this very same discussion of the first Jewish converts of the Chruch in St. Paul's circumcision that the first Jews who converted to Christianity in St.Paul's day in Antioch, around 54AD, categorically asserted that salvation is impossible unless a person is circumcised and tractices the Law of Moses.



AD,


Are these words of a man who turned his back against Torah?


It's not that St.Paul turned his back against the Torah. Discussing circumcision with MM made me think of Acts 15 on Circumcision. The time was around 45 or 50AD, about 15 years after Christ's death, resurrection and ascension into Heaven. There was much confusion and controversy between Christian Jews and Gentiles over whether the Mosaic rites and precepts (in this case circumcision) are still necessary for obtaining salvation. St.Paul is called by special revelation (Gal.2:2) to Jerusalem who together with the other Apostles decide that baptized Gentiles are not obliged to be circumcised and to keep the Old Law. They decide that it is grace and the Law that saves and therefore circumcision and the Law have been supreceded by faith in Jesus Christ. Both St.Paul and St. Peter decide now that Christ has been proclaimed, the Law is not necessary for salvation. In other words, observing the ceremonies, sacrifices and rites of the OLd Covenant Law is not necessary in order to be saved. Whether one can or wants to keep the Law for other reasons is a different and secondary matter.

St.Paul confirms this in his teaching to the Galatians 2:15,
"We, ourselves who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, yet who know that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, becasue by works of the law shall no one be justified.

Reply #133 from JoeUser Forums Top
There was much confusion and controversy between Christian Jews and Gentiles over whether the Mosaic rites and precepts (in this case circumcision) are still necessary for obtaining salvation.


Agreed circumcision was NEVER about salvation! Circumcision is a 'sign' of the covenant. Circumcision is directly linked to inheritance, Passover and land owning in Torah. I believe in Torah the 'strangers among you' were to be circumcised as well but again this was regarding the previously mentioned items and not salvation.

I think we are in agreement on this one.
Reply #134 from JoeUser Forums Top

St.Paul confirms this in his teaching to the Galatians 2:15,
"We, ourselves who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, yet who know that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, becasue by works of the law shall no one be justified.


Lula,

Galatians 2:11-21
Is again talking about salvation. Salvation never has and never will come through works through Torah. Salvation came and comes through a blood sacrifice and faith. So I'm not sure of your argument here. The issue here is about salvation.

Think about WHY we need salvation? We need salvation because we are sinners. How are we sinners? Because 1 John 3:4 says "Sin is the transgression of Torah."
Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned and come short of the glory of G-D.

Paul also tells us that legalistic observance of Torah doesn't provide any salvation. Faith has ALWAYS been an aspect of Torah for salvation.

Ask any Jew about why they go to the wailing wall? It was because of the sacrifices that they found atonement for sins.

Reply #135 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's a fact... Jesus is either the Messiah and the Only Name under Heaven by Which Mankind Can Be Saved... or He is the embodiment of falsehood and evil. Whether a person accepts Him as their personal savior or not only matters if He is Our Savior. If He isn't, then nothing about Christianity (in any form) matters at all.

The thing is, to me Judaism and Christianity are only a matter of eras. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; He who taught Moses; He who banished Cain; and He who taught Adam and Eve after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden... That was the same He who was crucified on the cross... and will be at he final judgement.

Reply #136 from JoeUser Forums Top
(Citizen)ParaTed2kNovember 1, 2007 17:26:57


The thing is, to me Judaism and Christianity are only a matter of eras. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; He who taught Moses; He who banished Cain; and He who taught Adam and Eve after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden... That was the same He who was crucified on the cross... and will be at he final judgement.


That's what I do admire about you Ted, you just state how you personally feel without condemning anyone. Wonderful!!!!
Reply #137 from JoeUser Forums Top
It was the Sadducees and Pharisees that rejected him NOT 'the Jews' which implies a collective whole.


Well in scripture quite often it would say "the Jews" and most of the time it was as you say Sadducees and Pharisees. But also they had their following including many that wished to see Jersualem liberated from Rome.

Wouldn't 1 John 3:4 suggest that he HAD to be circumcised or he couldn't observe Passover without circumcision (according to Torah)?


How do you figure using 1 John 3:4? It says:

"Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law."

What does this have to do with circumcision?

Also where does it say one has to be circumcized to eat of the Passover?

If the OT was OLD and done away with then why circumcise your child? Yes I have heard the medical reason but many agree that isn't the 'sole' purpose it is 'faith' based which suggests OT.


I would say most are NOT faith based. It wasn't in our case anyway and most people I know that have done this have no religious ties at all. So it would be for medical and culteral reasons rarely for religious ones.

Galatians 2:11-21
Is again talking about salvation


Yes. Galatians is about answering the question...how can men (sinful by nature) come to God (holy by nature)? Paul answers this in this letter. There is only one way.....accept the salvation God's grace makes available thru Christ's death and resurrection. Forget about merit-salvation thru obedience to the law of Moses. Man is too weak by nature to accomplish self salvation or self sanctification. The Judaizers (Jewish Christians) were teaching that such works are necessary and that Paul's gospel was not correct. He was constantly having to affirm that he was a genuine Apostle (1:1) but they didn't believe it. Paul answered them by proclaiming the doctrine of justification by faith plus nothing and of sanctification by the Holy Spirit not the Mosaic Law.

All theologies that teach salvation by faith plus human effort are forcefully negated by this great letter.






Reply #138 from JoeUser Forums Top
Lula POsts:
There was much confusion and controversy between Christian Jews and Gentiles over whether the Mosaic rites and precepts (in this case circumcision) are still necessary for obtaining salvation.


AD posts:
Agreed circumcision was NEVER about salvation! Circumcision is a 'sign' of the covenant. Circumcision is directly linked to inheritance, Passover and land owning in Torah.


I always thought circumcision was one of the ceremonial rites necessary for salvation. Perhaps that's because I relate it to Christian Baptism which according to Christ is necessary for salvation.

Anyway, here is my thinking on it.

First of all, circumcision was instituted by God and practiced from the beginning by holy Israelites exclusively for religious reasons.

Jews circumcised because of the declaration of Moses that the male who is not circumcised "that soul shall be destroyed out of his people" Gen. 17:14.

Granted, circumcision was enjoined in the covenent of God with Abraham which promised him and his descendents the Messiah. It signified citizenship of the male child in the nation of God's chosen children just as the Christ instituted Sacrament of Baptism (which displaced circumcision) signifies citizenship in the kingdom of the Messiah. Circumcision essentially was the consecration of the children of Abraham to the God of Abraham.

This is what I was referring to earlier. St. Paul and the other Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem decided that circumcision, as a religious ceremonial requirement ended with the institution by the Messiah of the priesthood in the New Covenant. St. Paul wrote, In Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith that worketh by charity."


Reply #139 from JoeUser Forums Top
AD posts:
Galatians 2:11-21
Is again talking about salvation. Salvation never has and never will come through works through Torah. Salvation came and comes through a blood sacrifice and faith.


In the Old Covenant, salvation came through blood sacrifices and faith in God of Abraham.

God ordained sacrifices to be the center of divine worship under the OLd Law. what was sacrificed was given to God and had to be wholly consumed in His honor. The victims (lambs) were killed and burnt and wine was poured out, and incense was burnt.

The bloody sacrifices were sacrifices of vicarious expiation, and for this reason the person offered laid his hands on the head as a token as he laid his sins on it and sacrifice as a substitute for himself. By these sacrifices taught men that they depended absolutely upon God and owed Him worship and thanksgiving. They also were roused that they were sinners before God and owed satisfaction to the DIvine Justice and they themselves couldn't make satisfaction, but required a High Priest.


These bloody sacrifices were types of the one holy and most world redeeming Sacrifice of Christ. All the sacrifices of the OLd Law found their fulfillment in the Sacrifice of Christ.

So in the New Covenant, salvation comes through Christ's blood Sacrifice and faith. His had infinite efficacy to blot out all sin and win grace for all men. Christ's Sacrifice had infinite efficacy becasue Jesus Christ is also true God, and so able to make infinite satisfaction to the Divine Justice. The Sacrifice of Christ was a true holocaust becasue He shed all His blood and was a sin-offering in the highest sense of the word, becasue it took away the sins of the world and cancelled the debt of man.

It was the greatest of peace-offerings becasue it reconciled heaven to earth, and brought peace to the world. Since our Lord offered Himself as a Sacrifice, the typical sacrifices of the Old Law have lost all efficacy and all legitimate existence.






Salvation came I agree with all if by blood sacrifice is Christ death on the Cross.

Reply #140 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ask any Jew about why they go to the wailing wall? It was because of the sacrifices that they found atonement for sins.


Yes, I've read about the Temple, the festivals, the priestly office was hereditary in Aaron's family, the blood of the sin-offering was offered on the mercy seat, even of the vestments worn and what they meant.

But today, modern Judaism is without all of that. No priesthood, no sacrifices, so how do modern day Jews find atonement for their sins? Just curious.

Reply #141 from JoeUser Forums Top
In the Old Covenant, salvation came through blood sacrifices and faith in God of Abraham.


Not quite Lula. It's the faith and works thing you have on your mind.

Salvation comes the same way in the OT as it does in the NT. Faith. It all boils down to faith.

Go back to read about Abraham. He's called the father of Faith yet the sacrificial system wasn't even instituted yet. He was found "righteous" before God. He had not given or done any sacrifices at that time. That wasn't instituted until later with Moses.

The sacrifice that you're speaking of was for atonement. They were to atone for their sins on the Day of Atonement, it didn't bring them salvation but only made resitution for their sin. Sin brings separation between us and God. All of this was a shadow of the real thing to come when Christ, the reality, would be the final atonement for sins, (Col 2:16-17 Hebrews 9-10).

The Day of Atonement was the most important of all the ordinances given to Israel because on that day atonement was made for all the sins of the entire congregation as well as for the sanctuary. It took place on the 10th day in the month of Tishri (7th month). It was one of only three required fasts in scripture. It was a very Holy Day and still is for many Jewish people today.


Reply #142 from JoeUser Forums Top
How do you figure using 1 John 3:4? It says:

"Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law."

What does this have to do with circumcision?

Also where does it say one has to be circumcized to eat of the Passover?


Exodus 12:42-51

It is a night to be observed for the LORD for having brought them out from the land of Egypt; this night is for the LORD, to be observed by all the sons of Israel throughout their generations.
43 The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover: no foreigner is to eat of it;
44 but every man’s slave purchased with money, after you have circumcised him, then he may eat of it.
45 “A sojourner or a hired servant shall not eat of it.
46 “It is to be eaten in a single house; you are not to bring forth any of the flesh outside of the house, nor are you to break any bone of it.
47 “All the congregation of Israel are to celebrate this.
48 “But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.
49 “The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you.”
50 Then all the sons of Israel did so; they did just as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron.
51 And on that same day the LORD brought the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt by their hosts.

My point is that sin is the transgression of the Torah and I just pointed out that his partaking of Passover WITHOUT being circumcised would classify as sin.
Reply #143 from JoeUser Forums Top

This is what I was referring to earlier. St. Paul and the other Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem decided that circumcision, as a religious ceremonial requirement ended with the institution by the Messiah of the priesthood in the New Covenant. St. Paul wrote, In Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith that worketh by charity."


Again I respectfully disagree here. It was an issue of salvation through circumcision. I don't recall them denouncing them specifically the importance of circumcision. Since Jesus became our sin sacrifice we have salvation through him. But as I mentioned before circumcision has never been linked to salvation. This is the mistake the individuals in Acts 15 where they were preaching, be circumcised so that you can be saved. I recall NOTHING in Torah ever suggests that.
Reply #144 from JoeUser Forums Top
But today, modern Judaism is without all of that. No priesthood, no sacrifices, so how do modern day Jews find atonement for their sins? Just curious.


Just as they did in the days without the Temple. Belief that through their prayers and repentance they might receive grace. I believe this is written in one of the prophets but I am not certain of which and where.
Reply #145 from JoeUser Forums Top

Go back to read about Abraham. He's called the father of Faith yet the sacrificial system wasn't even instituted yet. He was found "righteous" before God. He had not given or done any sacrifices at that time.


Abraham did several sacrifices. In fact we have a famous story of him taking Isaac on top of the mountain (aka The Akedah) in Gen 22. So I may be missing your point here KFC.
Reply #146 from JoeUser Forums Top
It was one of only three required fasts in scripture. It was a very Holy Day and still is for many Jewish people today.


I only know of ONE required fast in scripture. The other ones my understanding are Rabbinically observed or suggested. If I have missed the other two please feel free to correct me. Thanks.
Reply #147 from JoeUser Forums Top
Abraham did several sacrifices. In fact we have a famous story of him taking Isaac on top of the mountain (aka The Akedah) in Gen 22. So I may be missing your point here KFC.


I'm specifically referring to Gen 15:6 which says:

"And he BELIEVED in the Lord; and he counted IT (salvation) to him for righteousness."

The word believed is "aman" (interesting huh?) and means to lean whole weight upon.

So after this time, 14 years later (17:23) Abraham was circumcised. It was AFTER that that he attempted to give his son to God for a sacrifice.

Paul speaks about this in Romans 4 when he wrote about Abraham's faith apart from circumcision and apart from the law. Obviously both happened AFTER Abraham was counted righteous before God.

Thanks AD on the Exodus 12 piece. Now that you bring it up I remembered it. But I still have a hard time putting that with 1 John specifically. I look further into John and see...

"all unrighteousness is sin"....1 John 5:17a

I only know of ONE required fast in scripture. The other ones my understanding are Rabbinically observed or suggested. If I have missed the other two please feel free to correct me. Thanks.


The required public fasts that I'm referring to was Day of Atonement, the day before Purim and the ninth of AB, commemorating the fall of Jerusalem.

So yes while I know that God only proclaimed the Day of Atonement as a Fast Day but these two others were also very big and considered public fasting days. One is in the book of Esther and the other...I have to hunt for...Jeremiah? I like to say that God is a God of feast days, not fast days. Most of the fasting comes about because we want to not because we're being told or made to.





Reply #148 from JoeUser Forums Top
Just as they did in the days without the Temple. Belief that through their prayers and repentance they might receive grace. I believe this is written in one of the prophets but I am not certain of which and where.


Yes it all boils down to belief outside of external ceremonies and works. David realized this when he wrote:

"Sacrifice and offerning you did not desire, mine ears have you opened, burnt offering and sin offering has thou not required." Psalm 40:6

David realized that God wants his heart. In effect David in this psalm was saying "here I am Lord to do what you would have me to do because I do it from my heart." It's not about externals but internals.

There are many scriptures you could be referring to AD...maybe this one from Micah:

Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has showed thee O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of thee, but to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God. 6:6-8

Moses said the same thing in Deut 10:12. This is repeated all thru scripture. It's not about the externals, but always about the internals. It's not about outward show and robotic obedience. It's about loving God with all heart, soul and mind so much so that you would do anything for him realizing who he is and what he's done for you.
Reply #149 from JoeUser Forums Top
refute your assertion that St.Paul continued practicing Old Covenant Judaism after his conversion to Christianity.


Lula,

I have listed several verses that support my assertion that Paul DID observe and continued to observe Torah after his 'conversion' which were HIS words not mine. My conclusion is either I am to believe Paul kept Torah or he is a liar.
Reply #150 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's not about outward show and robotic obedience.


KFC, you and I are in very much agreement here. Torah and a relationship with G-D was never about legalistic observance (aka robotic obedience) it was first faith and then adhering to HIS instruction.