I like your Christ, I just don't like your Christians

[ananda]

Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

I think you are making several presumptions and failing to keep them distinct from your facts.

What presumptions do you suppose I am confusing with facts?

 

[ananda]

But how does "create disciples of every nation" necessarily mean "circumcise the gentiles?" Or, more accurately, how does it necessarily mean "proselytize all gentiles into Judaism?"

The problem is that in order to learn what the discples actually did with that command (how did they understand it and what happened afterward?), you have to read Paul and Luke...who Netzarim discounts.

Wait ... I have to read Paul the Pharisee and Luke his disciple to understand what Messiah's disciples actually did with Messiah's Mt 28:18-20 command? Why must I have to? What presumptions exist with that claim?

The fact is, I can easily read what the Apostle John, the Apostle Peter, elder James, and the elder Jude wrote about it. They wrote in favor of obeying YHVH's commandments, they wrote about not walking after the error of the lawless, they wrote about faith and works - all without distinction between Jew or Gentile. All in harmony with the clear and straightforward command given by Messiah.

Secondly, it wasn't only "create disciples of every nation". It also included "teaching them [the Gentiles] to obey everything I commanded you [the Jewish apostles]". If Messiah spoke only what the Father gave Him to speak, then all that Messiah commanded is what His Father commands - including circumcision.

Now, why must I read Paul and Luke instead?

That makes it convenient for him to make up his own version of what it all means.

Forgive me if I see it differently - those who prefer to heed Paul the Pharisee created a radical revision of what Messiah actually meant. The end result being "disciples" who are nothing like the wholly Torah-observant Messiah Himself.

 

[dlamberth]

The trajectory of this thread has moved towards the very stuff that causes people to not like Christians.

Forgive me, the conversation here has turned to exactly the kind of stuff that I'd say has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. It's turned to correct beliefs and dogma and stuff that this ex-Christian feels has nothing to do with Christ.

Jesus is Love and Compassion and Forgiveness and Helping those in need as well as being the Light of God. And that's also what a Christian needs to become in order to change the world to the better.

The stuff you guys are going back and forth on has nothing to do with being Christ like.

.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The trajectory of this thread has moved towards the very stuff that causes people to not like Christians.

Forgive me, the conversation here has turned to exactly the kind of stuff that I'd say has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. It's turned to correct beliefs and dogma and stuff that this ex-Christian feels has nothing to do with Christ.

Jesus is Love and Compassion and Forgiveness and Helping those in need as well as being the Light of God. And that's also what a Christian needs to become in order to change the world to the better.

The stuff you guys are going back and forth on has nothing to do with being Christ like.

.

I honestly thought we were talking about Gandhi and the quote attributed to him as well as the significance thereof with that statement - but it seemed to veer quickly into battles of Christianity vs. Judaism or combatting labels of what Messianic Judaism is.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

It's a great quote, and too true for my liking. Most, if not all Christians fail to live up to the standards of Jesus. He was perfect, after all. But we should always strive to try and live up to His commandments and teachings, and, hard though it is, always try to think what Jesus would do. I think there are some Christians (the most prominent example right now being Pope Francis) who are very active in their attempts to be more like Christ.

 

[oi_antz]

I cannot judge his heart, I can only evaluate the evidence on hand ...

Well it's pretty obvious that someone who believes they will answer to God for what they have said about Him will make sure they are honest in what they say. So, I suggest that if Paul is wrong, he must have either not had that degree of faith or he must have been mistaken. You seem to be suggesting that he was deliberately dishonest in his teachings of God, so I wanted to see whether you think he wasn't necessarily dishonest about his faith too.

You're right, we may not have all the information available. However, should that preclude us from individually judging the facts that we do have available on hand, then revising judgment if and when additional evidence is obtained?

Not entirely, but it should provide sufficient doubt to consider the possiblity that the evidence is misleading.

To that, I would ask, did Messiah lie to save His life? Does the commandment say "do not bear false witness, unless it's to save your life?"

It is obvious that the Messiah did not lie to save His own life even though that was the ultimatum. You seem to be suggesting that we are all capable of living up to His example. I don't think that is true and this response makes me think that you might not have ever been set on by someone intent to kill you.

Yes. If one believes that salvation is through faith in Christ, then "hedging the bet" with a belief that salvation is also in circumcision is not redundant, it's a reversal of faith.

Salvation clearly requires more than just faith, according to Jesus' statement that only those who do the will of The Father will enter.

I think a lot of peoples issues with christianity really stems from the attitudes of some christians who just happen to have the loudest voices.

I agree with this statement, but since there are people who also attempt to express their issues with a louder voice, why would anyone take sides with them?

What presumptions do you suppose I am confusing with facts?

If I may interject with my observation, you have said that since Jesus speaks words given by The Father, all the words given by The Father must have been words intended by Jesus to everyone that reads them. I think that forms an assumption that God's commandment to Abram can be taken as a direct commandment from Jesus to His disciples. I don't know of evidence that Jesus said to His disciples that they must circumcise the gentiles. I would like to know which scripture you draw that impression from.

The trajectory of this thread has moved towards the very stuff that causes people to not like Christians.

Forgive me, the conversation here has turned to exactly the kind of stuff that I'd say has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. It's turned to correct beliefs and dogma and stuff that this ex-Christian feels has nothing to do with Christ.

Jesus is Love and Compassion and Forgiveness and Helping those in need as well as being the Light of God. And that's also what a Christian needs to become in order to change the world to the better.

The stuff you guys are going back and forth on has nothing to do with being Christ like.

.

Thank you for saying that dlamberth, I have been eagerly expecting it I would like to just remind you that Jesus was very enthusiastic about the truth, and it is clear that there are some Christian beliefs that are not true. I am interested in examining these, so I actually find that to be educational rather than harmful. When there is dissension though, it can be harmful.

 

[ContraMundum]

The point is separating circumcision from commandments is nonsense. No matter whom he is addressing. No Jew would ever do that. Which only reinforces my pov that Paul was either not Jewish or not brought up in Jewish community.

Didn't I just demonstrate to you that Paul wasn't doing that? Does context no longer matter, or is it just about doing anything to "win" a point? Why not address the point I brought up rather than dismiss it and re-state what you implied earlier?

Why even bother?

 

[xTx]

Your title - 'I like your Christ, I just do not like your Christians'

Same here

 

[LoAmmi]

Didn't I just demonstrate to you that Paul wasn't doing that? Does context no longer matter, or is it just about doing anything to "win" a point? Why not address the point I brought up rather than dismiss it and re-state what you implied earlier?

Why even bother?

Well, I don't like Paul's writings but I imagine you can zero in on exactly why someone who practices Judaism would object to many of the things he said. I don't, however, understand Messianics. If they ran parallel to Christians for the last two thousand years, I could see it. But from my point of view it's just Christianity, sometimes stripped of elements they don't like, with a Jewish facade painted onto it.

 

[ContraMundum]

But how does "create disciples of every nation" necessarily mean "circumcise the gentiles?" Or, more accurately, how does it necessarily mean "proselytize all gentiles into Judaism?"

The problem is that in order to learn what the discples actually did with that command (how did they understand it and what happened afterward?), you have to read Paul and Luke...who Netzarim discounts.

That makes it convenient for him to make up his own version of what it all means.

There is no contradiction for Jesus to say that He was "sent for the lost sheep of Israel" and then later to send His own disciples beyond that horizon. Jesus is the final payment of God's contractual obligations of the Mosaic Covenant (fulfillment of the Law), and the start of a new covenant.

This is the truth, and a good assessment.

Real Judaism, in Jesus' time and ours, has always rejected the notion that the Gentiles must be circumcised, and that the Gentiles must keep the Sabbath in the same manner as the Jews. etc. This is based not on pharisaic tradition, but on careful analysis of the Torah over millenia.

This is why Jews who become Christians don't seem to have the problem with Paul and Luke that Gentile Christians who become infatuated with Judaism do (not meaning mainstream, orthodox Messianics here, just the extreme position of some). Religion of the outward kind is a powerful temptress of the carnal man. When people reject their own culture, they invariably look for another to embrace. Netz is of the camp in theology that tries to make the followers of Jesus like Jews and in doing so wipe out Jewish identity for Jews.

Why is this offensive? Some of us gave up our reputation, our family life and so much more when we chose to pick up our Cross and follow. We want to keep our culture though. We never forced Judaism onto the Gentiles, as we were raised to respect that the Torah gives different commandments to different nations. Now, people want to strip our identity from us, the last thing we have left of our own, and assume it for themselves. The church used to force Jews to become Gentiles, now by blurring the distinction people in Netz's camp want to wipe out our cultural identity and our heritage and take it as theirs.

Ever heard of a self-hating Jew? How about a self-hating Gentile? Is that not also a possibility?

I believe that Christ has made one new man, but he has kept the distinction of the Jews for His future purposes. Some Messianics wrote about this before.

Furthermore, without Paul, you have a very weak case for the resurrection. It is also held by some modern scholars that Paul's doctrine informs the later accounts of the Gospels.

Paul is not "Paul" to me, he is Rav Sha'ul ZT"L (zekher tzadik livrakha- may the memory of the righteous be a blessing)

 

[ContraMundum]

Well, I don't like Paul's writings but I imagine you can zero in on exactly why someone who practices Judaism would object to many of the things he said. I don't, however, understand Messianics. If they ran parallel to Christians for the last two thousand years, I could see it. But from my point of view it's just Christianity, sometimes stripped of elements they don't like, with a Jewish facade painted onto it.

I wrote a long response to this but it got lost in the cyber ether.

Let me just say that I think Jews awaiting Moshiach are expecting He will make changes. Logically, therefore, if we think He has already come, changes have been made.

Whether Messianics are Gentiles tacking on Jewish garb, or Jews dropping some Rabbinic traditions, it's still a mystery as to how this has happened. I can't logically explain why or how I became a follower of Jesus, all I know is that it is something that happened to me spritually and it changed me for the better. So, I believe this is God's work. I don't understand Messianics either. I just am who I am.

 

[LoAmmi]

Let me just say that I think Jews awaiting Moshiach are expecting He will make changes. Logically, therefore, if we think He has already come, changes have been made.

Isn't the "change" in Jewish tradition that all Jews will keep the Torah perfectly not that those who follow Messiah will be free from keeping it?

 

[ContraMundum]

Isn't the "change" in Jewish tradition that all Jews will keep the Torah perfectly not that those who follow Messiah will be free from keeping it?

Define "keep the Torah perfectly" and we'll both have the answer. I don't think anyone I know argues that we are free from keeping the Torah.

The question is how.

Sure, different laws apply to different folks (mentioned in another post) so keeping the Torah (in my estimation and how I understand it) is keeping the laws that apply to you. How to keep them perfectly though? Another question altogether. I would say that Jesus defined that for us all, but I understand the resulting complexities and questions that assertion poses for Rabbinic Judaism.

 

[LoAmmi]

Define "keep the Torah perfectly" and we'll both have the answer. I don't think anyone I know argues that we are free from keeping the Torah.

Following all 613 commandments would be my idea.

 

[ContraMundum]

Following all 613 commandments would be my idea.

That's not possible for an individual- a community, yes. How about a world community? What do you think Moshiach's halacha would like for the whole world?

 

[LoAmmi]

That's not possible for an individual- a community, yes. How about a world community? What do you think Moshiach's halacha would like for the whole world?

The individual would be responsible for the ones they can keep.


Well, wouldn't one assume the Noahide laws?

 

[RDKirk]

Well, I don't like Paul's writings but I imagine you can zero in on exactly why someone who practices Judaism would object to many of the things he said. I don't, however, understand Messianics. If they ran parallel to Christians for the last two thousand years, I could see it. But from my point of view it's just Christianity, sometimes stripped of elements they don't like, with a Jewish facade painted onto it.

I think that's the problem Paul faced evangelizing to the gentiles.

Within Christianity--and those of us who are firmly within Christianity do take Acts and the Pauline letters as part of our scripture--we believe that God leaped beyond "law" (requirements of procedure) to bring gentiles into our fold.

It's pretty clear reading Acts that if left to themselves, the apostles would not have moved beyond the Jewish community--they may not have even gone into the Hellenist Jewish community if left to their themselves. The record in Acts shows that the Judean believers were nearly useless in carrying the gospel beyond Judea until after that ground had already been broken by the "Hellenist" and gentile believers.

Acts record that the major spead of Christianity beyond Judea was by the Hellenist believers--which includes Paul.

As the Church moved beyond Jerusalem and Judea beyond the Jewish community, there were two initial and important questions: Must these new non-Jewish believers be "back dated" into Judaism?

There was initially a question of whether gentiles had to then "catch up on procedure" but when you look at the events logically--not only Cornelius but also Jesus with the Roman centurion and the Syro-Phoencian woman--the clear inferrence was that Jewish procedure was simply not necessary for gentiles. The letter issued by the Council of Jerusalem clarifies that point.

The second question, however was: Was it necessary for Jewish believers to continue their Judaic procedures? That question is never explicitly answered in Christians scriptures, but the Acts record and the Pauline epistles show that it became a major issue--with all the apostles (including Paul) walking the fence on that issue.

 

[ContraMundum]

The individual would be responsible for the ones they can keep.

Agreed...

Well, wouldn't one assume the Noahide laws?

Sounds a bit like Christianity to me. (With the Caveat that Christian "Law" as described in the NT is a lot harder than the Noachide laws)

 

[LoAmmi]

Sounds a bit like Christianity to me. (With the Caveat that Christian "Law" as described in the NT is a lot harder than the Noachide laws)

Well, unless of course Jesus isn't who he is claimed to be and people are worshiping a man as G-d. That violates #1.

 

[ContraMundum]

Well, unless of course Jesus isn't who he is claimed to be and people are worshiping a man as G-d. That violates #1.

Agreed. There's the real point of it all.