The NT is Anti Jewish?

Judaism · Jul 27, 2006

LittleLambofJesus said:
Since the book of revelation is a symbolic Jewish book and in my view, a change of Priesthoods/Covenants, I have to look back to the OT/OC

The Altar of Burnt Offerings comes to mind as that Fire was to burn Continually I believe, and I actually did a study on that about a year ago.

Gehenna is also used as the garbage dump outside the City of Jerusalem which was pretty much extensively used after God sent the Roman army against the City in the first century.

Matt 23: 31 "Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 "Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' [guilt.] 33 "Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of gehenna?

Levi 9:23 And Moses and Aaron went into the tabernacle of meeting, and came out and blessed the people. Then the glory of the LORD appeared to all the people, 24 and fire came out from before the LORD and consumed the burnt offering and the fat on the altar.When all the people saw [it,] they shouted and fell on their faces.

How do you know you're interpreting that correctly from both Hebrew and Xian bibles?

BTW, there is no such thing as an "old" testament.

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 27, 2006

Judaism said:
How do you know you're interpreting that correctly from both Hebrew and Xian bibles?

BTW, there is no such thing as an "old" testament.

Your right, it is actually the "OC" and why I use OT/OC just to make it more clear to christians and others how I view it. :wave:

Exodus 24:8 And Moses took the blood, sprinkled [it] on the people, and said, "This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you according to all these words."

(Young) Hosea 9:7 Come in have the days of inspection, Come in have the days of recompence, Israel doth know! a fool [is] the prophet, Mad [is] the man of the Spirit, Because of the abundance of thine iniquity, And great [is] the hatred.

Hebrews 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than [that of] Abel.

(NKJV) Luke 19:44 "and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation."

vajradhara · Jul 27, 2006

Namaste LLJ,

is the Christian Testament anti-Jewish? i do not think that it is. Saul/Paul, on the other hand, is quite the anti-Semite.

so

Christian Testament/Christianity = no hate Jew

Paulinity = hate Jew.

metta,

~v

arunma · Jul 27, 2006

vajradhara said:
Namaste LLJ,

is the Christian Testament anti-Jewish? i do not think that it is. Saul/Paul, on the other hand, is quite the anti-Semite.

so

Christian Testament/Christianity = no hate Jew

Paulinity = hate Jew.

metta,

~v

My friend Vajradhara, in the past you've said that you don't take any issue with Christianity, but only with the Apostle Paul. That's quite a bit like saying that you approve of Islam and Judaism, but disapprove of Mohammad and Moses. There's no such thing as "Paulinity." The teachings of the Apostle Paul are an integral part of Christianity, and they cannot be separated. Indeed, no major church rejects the epistles of Paul. It would be better, therefore, for you to simply reject Christianity as a "spiritual refuge," since it cannot be separated from the teachings of Paul and still rigthly be called Christianity.

By the way, most people who accuse Christianity of anti-semitism attack not Paul, but Matthew and John. Methinks you've been on the anti-Pauline campaign for so long that you are not offering an objective assessment.

HumbleSiPilot77 · Jul 27, 2006

dawiyd said:
Great, so you make unsubstantiated claims, and when you are called out on them, its the typical - it's what G-d says cop out. Actually support what you say with scripture or be quiet.

Claims? These are straight from the Bible. Sorry that you are not able to understand what I just said in that particular post. I don't have to substantiate anything for the misunderstanding of the Christian Scripture by the author of that article. It is not me who approached a simple position of the Lord on religious corruption with anti-semitism. This doesn't need no back-up or proof. You have nerve to tell me to be quiet without even understanding where I am coming from. There is nothing anti-semitic in what Lord had said and this is a simple fact, Hope that straightened it for you! Oh sorry, my bad, if it had straightened out, you would have been a Christian...

arunma · Jul 27, 2006

Judaism said:
Lol. Wasn't Jesus a Jew too? So why was he insulting himself then?

Ethnically Jesus was most certainly Jewish. However, the Judaism that Jesus practiced would probably not be recognizable to a modern Jew. Remember that Judaism in the first century was quite diverse, whereas modern Judaism comes to us mostly from the Pharisees (and perhaps a few other sects).

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 27, 2006

Namaste LLJ,

is the Christian Testament anti-Jewish? i do not think that it is. Saul/Paul, on the other hand, is quite the anti-Semite.
so
Christian Testament/Christianity = no hate Jew
Paulinity = hate Jew.
metta,
~v

arunma said:
My friend Vajradhara, in the past you've said that you don't take any issue with Christianity, but only with the Apostle Paul. That's quite a bit like saying that you approve of Islam and Judaism, but disapprove of Mohammad and Moses. There's no such thing as "Paulinity." The teachings of the Apostle Paul are an integral part of Christianity, and they cannot be separated. Indeed, no major church rejects the epistles of Paul. It would be better, therefore, for you to simply reject Christianity as a "spiritual refuge," since it cannot be separated from the teachings of Paul and still rigthly be called Christianity.

By the way, most people who accuse Christianity of anti-semitism attack not Paul, but Matthew and John. Methinks you've been on the anti-Pauline campaign for so long that you are not offering an objective assessment.

Paul was against the same Jews Christ was, the Priests/Rulers of Jerusalem.
Jesus didn't blame the Romans for His death but those who delivered Him to them, the Jewish Priests/Rulers in Jerusalem. My oh my. :wave:

Matt 23:31 "Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 "Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' [guilt.] 33 "Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of gehenna? 34 "Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes:

1 thess 2:14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they [did] from the Judeans, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men, 16 forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up [the measure of] their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.

Abdurrahim · Jul 27, 2006

is the jewish bible anti-jewish .

Supposed events make it look so .

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 27, 2006

Abdurrahim said:
is the jewish bible anti-jewish .

Supposed events make it look so .

You might find this interesting also:

http://www.awitness.org/contrabib/history/genress.html

Nations that were said to be the victims of Holy War and genocide rise from the dead in the first recorded resurrection on the pages of the Bible, demonstrating that much of what passes for history in the Bible is actually a kind of political propaganda and polemic, and that the Bible consists of source materials composed by different groups at different times, representing various ideological viewpoints.

Christ was not the messiah that Jews of the first century were expecting. They were expecting the appearance of a Joshua type character, a powerful military figure who would lead Israel in holy warfare resulting in swift world domination. Both Joshua of the Jewish Testament and the Messiah of the Church Testament were named ‘Joshua', but the ‘Joshua' of the first century disavowed temporal power and certainly was not the conquering military "Joshua" character described by Jewish eschatology of the day. It was said that for these reasons the Jewish people ‘missed the time of their visitation'.

vajradhara · Jul 27, 2006

Namaste arunma,

thank you for the post.

arunma said:
My friend Vajradhara, in the past you've said that you don't take any issue with Christianity, but only with the Apostle Paul. That's quite a bit like saying that you approve of Islam and Judaism, but disapprove of Mohammad and Moses.

not at all. well, it would be if you think Paul is more important that Jesus in the Christian paradigm. since that is only the view of Paulinists, it would be fairly expected of them but other Christians are not necessarily in agreement.

There's no such thing as "Paulinity."

equally, there is no such thing as "Christianity" as Jesus didn't call it that, he called it The Way. much like Tao in that regard. in any event, it is a descriptive term to refer to beings that accept the teachings of Paul as more authoritive than the teachings of the Apostles, hence the term "Aposlitic Christianity" and other permutations thereof.

The teachings of the Apostle Paul are an integral part of Christianity, and they cannot be separated.

not only can they be seperated, they should be, in my view.

it is a difficult position for a Christian to be in, without doubt for on one hand you have Jesus state something and, on the other, you have Paul contradict Jesus' teaching.

Indeed, no major church rejects the epistles of Paul. It would be better, therefore, for you to simply reject Christianity as a "spiritual refuge," since it cannot be separated from the teachings of Paul and still rigthly be called Christianity.

my view of Saul has no bearing on the spiritual refuge offered by the Christian paradigm.

If one cannot remove Paul one wonders how it is the Jerusalem Church was able to exist, seeing as how it was around before Saul ever became a Nazarite.

By the way, most people who accuse Christianity of anti-semitism attack not Paul, but Matthew and John. Methinks you've been on the anti-Pauline campaign for so long that you are not offering an objective assessment.

i am not most people and thus my arguments are not theirs. it is unlikely than any one human has a truly "objective" point of view. we are all subject to the sensory organs at our disposal resulting in purely subjective views.

i do not contend that my view is objective. it is my view and mine alone. my critique of Saul is and has remained the same over the years. until such time as those issues are cleared up i see absolutely no reason to abandon them.

metta,

~v

arunma · Jul 28, 2006

vajradhara said:
not at all. well, it would be if you think Paul is more important that Jesus in the Christian paradigm. since that is only the view of Paulinists, it would be fairly expected of them but other Christians are not necessarily in agreement.

Sorry Vaj, but as far as I know, there is no such group called the Paulinists (at least no such group that has gained enough noteriety to be widely recognized). The sect that you're talking about does not exist.

Vajradhara said:
equally, there is no such thing as "Christianity" as Jesus didn't call it that, he called it The Way. much like Tao in that regard. in any event, it is a descriptive term to refer to beings that accept the teachings of Paul as more authoritive than the teachings of the Apostles, hence the term "Aposlitic Christianity" and other permutations thereof.

"What's in a name?" If you wish to call Christianity 'The Way,' then be my guest. Whatever it is, the label of Christianity refers to the religion that Christ Jesus founded, and which his servant Paul preached. And since Paul was an Apostle of Christ, the term "Apostolic Christianity" is useless. One cannot be a Christian and reject the teachings of Paul, anymore than one can be a Christian without believing that Jesus Christ is God.

Vajradhara said:
not only can they be seperated, they should be, in my view.

it is a difficult position for a Christian to be in, without doubt for on one hand you have Jesus state something and, on the other, you have Paul contradict Jesus' teaching.

There is no contradiction between the teachings of Paul, and the teachings of any other Apostle, or Christ Jesus himself (whose teachings we only have by way of the Apostles). I've examined your arguments in the past, and they are based on unnatural interpretations that are forced on the Scriptures in question.

my view of Saul has no bearing on the spiritual refuge offered by the Christian paradigm.

If one cannot remove Paul one wonders how it is the Jerusalem Church was able to exist, seeing as how it was around before Saul ever became a Nazarite.

You may be using an incorrect terminology here. A Nazirite is not a Christian, but rather a person who has taken a vow, as prescribed by Moses, for a specific amount of time. The appropriate Scripture is Numbers 6:1-21. I'm guessing you meant to say that the Jerusalem Church existed before Paul became a Christian.

This is true, but Judaism is also said to have existed before Moses was ever born, and Muslims believe that Islam existed before Mohammad became a Muslim. So then, it is entirely conceivable for a religion to precede an essential teacher. That the church under Bishop Saint James existed before the conversion of Saint Paul does not negate the latter's great importance to Christianity.

Judaism · Jul 28, 2006

vajradhara said:
Namaste LLJ,

is the Christian Testament anti-Jewish? i do not think that it is. Saul/Paul, on the other hand, is quite the anti-Semite.

so

Christian Testament/Christianity = no hate Jew

Paulinity = hate Jew.

metta,

~v

Of course the Xian Bible is anti-Jewish! That's probably one reason why there's anti-Semitism!

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 28, 2006

Namaste LLJ, is the Christian Testament anti-Jewish? i do not think that it is. Saul/Paul, on the other hand, is quite the anti-Semite.
so
Christian Testament/Christianity = no hate Jew
Paulinity = hate Jew.
metta,
~v

What Jews do you think God, Jesus and Paul were against in the Bible? Have you ever read the OT/OC book of Malachi for instance?

Judaism said:
Of course the Xian Bible is anti-Jewish! That's probably one reason why there's anti-Semitism!

You mean "anti-Jewish".

That is your own Biased anti-christian opinion, and the more christians that study on what Jews God, Jesus and Paul were talking about, the less anti-Jewishness there would be.
Biblically, both all non-Jew Israelites and Jewish Isralited are seperate.

Yes, God, Jesus and Paul had no great love for the Jewish "rulers/Priests/Scribes that were corrupt. Heck, God even Cursed the Priesthood in Malachi!!!!

Please inform others that all Jews are Israelites but not all Israelites are Jews. :wave:

Malachi 2:1 And now, to you [is] this charge, O priests, 2 If ye hearken not, and if ye lay [it] not to heart, To give honour to My name, said Jehovah of Hosts, I have sent against you the curse, And I have cursed your blessings, Yea, I have also cursed it, Because ye are not laying [it] to heart.

Matt 23:32 and ye--ye fill up the measure of your fathers. 33 `Serpents! brood of vipers! how may ye escape from the judgment of the gehenna?

1 thess 2:14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they [did] from the Judeans, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men,

Judaism · Jul 28, 2006

LittleLambofJesus said:
You mean "anti-Jewish".

You know exactly what I mean buddy.

That is your own Biased anti-christian opinion, and the more christians that study on what Jews God, Jesus and Paul were talking about, the less anti-Jewishness there would be.
Biblically, both all non-Jew Israelites and Jewish Isralited are seperate.

Oh, so now you're saying that there would be no anti-Semitism if only people would study the Xian bible...? You're saying that the reason why anti-Semitism exists because people don't know the Bible?

Perhaps if Xians only got the correct interpretation instead of doing it on their own...

Please inform others that all Jews are Israelites but not all Israelites are Jews.

What? Where did this come from? I'm not talking about Israel here. Why are you saying this?

Malachi 2:1 And now, to you [is] this charge, O priests, 2 If ye hearken not, and if ye lay [it] not to heart, To give honour to My name, said Jehovah of Hosts, I have sent against you the curse, And I have cursed your blessings, Yea, I have also cursed it, Because ye are not laying [it] to heart.

Matt 23:32 and ye--ye fill up the measure of your fathers. 33 `Serpents! brood of vipers! how may ye escape from the judgment of the gehenna?

1 thess 2:14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they [did] from the Judeans, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men,

Hmmm...By what you post as well as your signature:

Jeremiah 4:22 "For My people [are] foolish, They have not known Me. They [are] silly children, And they have no understanding. They [are] wise to do Evil, But to do Good they have no knowledge." Isaiah 43:19 Lo, I am doing a New Thing, now it springeth up, Do ye not know it? Yea, I put in a Wilderness a Way John 14:6 Jesus saith to him, `I am the Way, and the truth, and the life

...I'm trying to figure out if you are really anti-Semite or if you're just a person who likes to condem Jews and non-Xians alike. :scratch:

arunma · Jul 28, 2006

Judaism said:
Oh, so now you're saying that there would be no anti-Semitism if only people would study the Xian bible...? You're saying that the reason why anti-Semitism exists because people don't know the Bible? Perhaps if Xians only got the correct interpretation instead of doing it on their own...

I assume you mean to tell us that Jews have the proper interpretation of the Bible? In Christianity, most of us do not believe that this is true. A person who does not believe in Christ Jesus will almost never reach an accurate interpretation of the Bible. So if I were looking for the correct interpretation of the Bible, Jews would not be the appropriate resource for me.

...I'm trying to figure out if you are really anti-Semite or if you're just a person who likes to condem Jews and non-Xians alike.

Trust me, LittleLambofJesus is no anti-semite. To be honest, I've never really figured out if he even calls himself a Christian or not. He usually just posts seemingly random quotations from the Bible, and then highlights a few words to show that they really are applicable to whatever issue is being discussed at the time. He's a bit different from your average poster, but he's harmless.

I, on the other hand, might be a bit more difficult to figure out, so I'll give you more information right now. I personally believe that Judaism is an utterly false religion, and that Jews are not a chosen people. So far I might sound anti-semitic, but I hope you'll bear with me for a moment. As I see it, Judaism and Christianity are entirely separate religions that have no relationship with one another at all. Yes, we share some common Scripture, but our interpretation of those Scriptures is so vastly different that we might as well be reading different books. I do not regard Judaism as a false religion because I have a special dislike for Judaism. On the contrary I think that all non-Christian religions are false, and Judaism just happens to fall outside of Christianity. That I view non-Christian religions as false does not mean that I believe in showing less respect for non-Christians, or in being unfriendly towards them. In fact I've had many fruitful and enlightening discussions with Jews on this forum, and I've come to respect Judaism on its own terms (and not because I've cooked up some end-times belief in which Jews play a grand role).

Am I an anti-semite? Well, I hope you'll be able to judge that based on my actions themselves.

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 28, 2006

I, on the other hand, might be a bit more difficult to figure out, so I'll give you more information right now. I personally believe that Judaism is an utterly false religion, and that Jews are not a chosen people. So far I might sound anti-semitic, but I hope you'll bear with me for a moment. As I see it, Judaism and Christianity are entirely separate religions that have no relationship with one another at all. Yes, we share some common Scripture, but our interpretation of those Scriptures is so vastly different that we might as well be reading different books. I do not regard Judaism as a false religion because I have a special dislike for Judaism. On the contrary I think that all non-Christian religions are false, and Judaism just happens to fall outside of Christianity.

That I view non-Christian religions as false does not mean that I believe in showing less respect for non-Christians, or in being unfriendly towards them. In fact I've had many fruitful and enlightening discussions with Jews on this forum, and I've come to respect Judaism on its own terms (and not because I've cooked up some end-times belief in which Jews play a grand role).

I get along with Atheists, other religions along with Christianity, and yes I do believe in the Lord Jesus, Son of God and Savior of Israel, Judah and the World.

Reve 2: 18 " And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write, ' These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass:

May I quote a verse from one of the most Important and Symbolic Parables ever spoken by Jesus concerning the division between OC Judaism and NC Spirit of Christ/Faith of Abraham? :wave:

[SIZE=+1]LUKE 16:26 "'And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.'"

[/SIZE]Chinese Proverb:
"When someone shares something of value with you and you benefit from it, you have a moral obligation to share it with others

vajradhara · Jul 28, 2006

Namaste arunma,

thank you for the post.

arunma said:
Sorry Vaj, but as far as I know, there is no such group called the Paulinists (at least no such group that has gained enough noteriety to be widely recognized). The sect that you're talking about does not exist.

no need to be sorry.

as i explained, it is a descriptive term to denote beings that value the teachings of Paul more than the teachings of the Apostles and Jesus. these beings can be found in all flavors of the Christian paradigm, especially the Catholic and Protestant sects.

"What's in a name?" If you wish to call Christianity 'The Way,' then be my guest.

indeed.

Whatever it is, the label of Christianity refers to the religion that Christ Jesus founded, and which his servant Paul preached. And since Paul was an Apostle of Christ, the term "Apostolic Christianity" is useless.

Paul wasn't present at Pentecost and Paul never saw Jesus to become one of the 12. it is only Pauls, varying, statements that lay claim to him being an Apostle. moreover, Paul also claims to be a Nazarite. want to guess who the only being in the Bible is a Nazarite besides Paul?

One cannot be a Christian and reject the teachings of Paul, anymore than one can be a Christian without believing that Jesus Christ is God.

of course they can. if not, then you are specifically stating that the Jerusalem Church is not Christian. i.e. that James and all the rest are not Christian. whilst i personally have little concern there, it does not bode well for a Christian.

There is no contradiction between the teachings of Paul, and the teachings of any other Apostle, or Christ Jesus himself (whose teachings we only have by way of the Apostles). I've examined your arguments in the past, and they are based on unnatural interpretations that are forced on the Scriptures in question.

Jesus clearly states that not one jot or tittle will pass from the Law (which is the Law of Moses, as you well know) yet Paul tells the Gentiles they don't have to adhere to the Law. in point of fact, Paul says that nobody can.

it is, of course, your opinion that my arguments are not grounded upon Pauls very words in the Bible. the documentation of my argument, however, demonstrates otherwise.

as i have said, if you would like to present a scholarly defense that addresses all the points in the essay, we are happy to host it on our site to present a more balanced argument.

You may be using an incorrect terminology here. A Nazirite is not a Christian, but rather a person who has taken a vow, as prescribed by Moses, for a specific amount of time. The appropriate Scripture is Numbers 6:1-21. I'm guessing you meant to say that the Jerusalem Church existed before Paul became a Christian.

that is correct.

there are two examples in the Hewbrew scriptures of Nazarites, Samson and Samuel. in both cases, their mothers made this vow for them prior to their being born and it required to live an asectic lifestyle and, in return, they recieved extraordinary gifts.

This is true, but Judaism is also said to have existed before Moses was ever born, and Muslims believe that Islam existed before Mohammad became a Muslim. So then, it is entirely conceivable for a religion to precede an essential teacher. That the church under Bishop Saint James existed before the conversion of Saint Paul does not negate the latter's great importance to Christianity.

it is clear that much of the theology of Christianity was developed by Paul. of this there is no dispute. the question is, why is Paul given more authority than James the Just and the other Apostles that actually travelled with Jesus, spoke with him and comitted his words to memory and writing?

heck, Paul wasn't even consistent in explaning his "conversion" on the road to Damacus. how have you determined that Paul is not a 5th Column?

metta,

~v

vajradhara · Jul 28, 2006

Namaste LLJ,

thank you for the post.

LittleLambofJesus said:
What Jews do you think God, Jesus and Paul were against in the Bible?

those are not the same being, you know.

Jesus was clearly Jewish and upheld the Law. God is against all manner of beings, sometimes Jews and sometimes not.

Paul, on the other hand, abrogated the Law which Jesus claimed would be intact and practiced until Heaven and earth pass away.

the earth still seems to be here and thus, the Law is still in effect.

Paul also says that works have no bearing on ones salvation yet James directly contradicts him by stating that faith without works is dead faith.

if you would like to read the essay, you can do so here:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/articles/pauline_conspiracy/

Have you ever read the OT/OC book of Malachi for instance?You mean "anti-Jewish".

i've read both the Christian Old Testament and the Torah.

metta,

~v

LittleLambofJesus · Jul 28, 2006

it is clear that much of the theology of Christianity was developed by Paul. of this there is no dispute. the question is, why is Paul given more authority than James the Just and the other Apostles that actually travelled with Jesus, spoke with him and comitted his words to memory and writing?

heck, Paul wasn't even consistent in explaning his "conversion" on the road to Damacus. how have you determined that Paul is not a 5th Column?

metta,

I have a feeling Paul is symbolically shown coming in the book of Jonah in the OT/OC, of which I have a study on.

In either case, Paul explained the Mystery of the Resurrection, and why Jesus chose him for that Divine Mission, I don't know.

But I will not discuss Paul here because his epistles are very hard to "grasp", and is written in the same symbolic/figurative/metaphorical language Jesus spoke, but I believe they are Inspired.

I gained a lot of insight here if you ever have time to peruse it. Peace.

http://ourworld.cs.com/preteristabcs/id84.htm

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]At the moment the dead are raised, i.e., when the enrobed souls receive their glorified bodies, “then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up(arpagèsometha) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air” (4:17). As has been previously observed, there is no precedent in biblical or pseudepigraphical literature for the rapture or assumption of believers in general. “The rapture of all believers is peculiar to Paul.” 46 This makes the common assertions that Paul is using the apocalyptic traditions “sporadically” rather puzzling, for there is nothing in the literature on which Paul may have based such a teaching. The assertion, “the imagery of assumption must have been familiar to Paul, steeped as he was in Jewish apocalyptic thought,” 47 makes no sense, for there is nothing regarding a literal general assumption anywhere in apocalyptic thought.

A rapture is only spoken of in the tradition with reference to exceptional individuals such as Enoch (Gen 5:24), Moses (J. Ant. 4.326), and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11). Unless one is prepared to contend that Paul considered the Thessalonians (and the rest of contemporary Christianity) to be exceptional individuals on a par with Enoch, Moses, and Elijah, there is simply no basis in Paul's Jewish background or the Olivet Discourse for a general assumption of believers. 48[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Given the unique nature of this Pauline doctrine in a letter which is supposed to correct eschatological misconceptions, it must be asked if it is appropriate to assume that Paul is here innovating a completely new teaching. Proper pedagogy elucidates the unclear by the clear, not by the unprecedented. Why would Paul have concocted a “general assumption of all believers,” a doctrine which has no basis in any other Jewish or Christian teaching, in hopes of alleviating misunderstanding among the Thessalonians regarding the fate of their departed? It should rather be supposed that Paul is not teaching a general rapture at all. That this verse involves a literal rapture of believers is far from necessary, particularly in light of 1QM which may well form the conceptual background for much of this pericope. In the 1QM xiv 2-17 hymn of victory of the sons of light over the sons of darkness (cf. 1 Thess 5:4-5), those who have been preserved from death in battle praise God for their own victory over evil using the metaphor of assumption: “raise from the dust for yourself and subdue gods” (vv 14-15). 49

This metaphorical use of a rapture idea is also found in some other peudepigraphical texts. 1 Enoch96:2 asserts, “your children shall be raised high up and be made openly visible like eagles,” and “you shall ascend and enter the crevices of the earth” in authority over sinners. 50 Here “the righteous are assured of reconciliation and miraculous protection” in the judgment upon sinners. TMos 10:8-9 says, “Then will you be happy, O Israel! And you will mount up above the necks and wings of an eagle. Yea, all things will be fulfilled. And God will raise you to the heights. Yea, he will fix you firmly in the heaven of stars, in the place of their habitations.” This is likely an allusion to Israel's exaltation over its enemies. 51 None of the contexts of these pseudepigraphical texts supports the idea of a literal general rapture of believers. Rather, these texts demonstrate the metaphorical use of the assumption motif as divine assurance of protection and victory over evil in eschatological conflict. In his use of harpazò Paul may therefore be describing the protection of his people and the victory which Christ obtains over evil in the figure of a rapture of the sons of light after the manner of 1QM and certain other pseudepigraphical texts. 52 [/FONT]

Judaism · Jul 28, 2006

arunma said:
I assume you mean to tell us that Jews have the proper interpretation of the Bible? In Christianity, most of us do not believe that this is true. A person who does not believe in Christ Jesus will almost never reach an accurate interpretation of the Bible. So if I were looking for the correct interpretation of the Bible, Jews would not be the appropriate resource for me.

First of all, the Hebrew Bible was obviously in it's original Hebrew, not Greek. Mistranslations and misinterpretations can happen with Xians trying to translate it, therefore making it sound like something else when it was not intended for that something else.

That is bolognie when you say a person will not reach accurate interpretations of the Bible if they don't believe in JC. I trust the Jews then I would Xians when it comes to translating because they know Hebrew and know the original context and meanings.

Trust me, LittleLambofJesus is no anti-semite. To be honest, I've never really figured out if he even calls himself a Christian or not. He usually just posts seemingly random quotations from the Bible, and then highlights a few words to show that they really are applicable to whatever issue is being discussed at the time. He's a bit different from your average poster, but he's harmless.

Yes, I was going to say he just randomly picks something to prove his point.

I, on the other hand, might be a bit more difficult to figure out, so I'll give you more information right now. I personally believe that Judaism is an utterly false religion, and that Jews are not a chosen people.

How can it be a false religion when it is one of the oldest religions, especially when it believes in the One, True G-d?

Besides, if Judaism is a false religion, then that means Xianity is false because it sprang forth from Judaism. What do you make of that now?

As a matter of fact, the Jews will always be G-d's Chosen People whether you believe it or not. G-d will never reject the Jews. Don't believe it?

"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 Hashem" (Jeremiah 31:37).

Leviticus 26:44-45 "Yet, even then, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or spurn them so as to destroy them, annulling My covenant with them: for I the L-RD am their G-d. I will remember in their favor the covenant with the ancients, whom I freed from the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their G-d: I, the L-RD."

Deuteronomy 4:31 "For the L-RD your G-d is a merciful G-d; He will not forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them."

Deuteronomy 29:28 "The secret things belong to the L-RD our G-d; but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this Torah."

Judges 2:1 "And an angel of the L-RD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said,[delivering G-d's messege] I made you go out of Egypt, and have brought you to the land which I swore to your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you."

So far I might sound anti-semitic, but I hope you'll bear with me for a moment. As I see it, Judaism and Christianity are entirely separate religions that have no relationship with one another at all.

As a matter of fact, Xianity was a heresy that sprang forth from Judaism.

Yes, we share some common Scripture, but our interpretation of those Scriptures is so vastly different that we might as well be reading different books.

Xians might as well not read the Hebrew Bible then. Jews will never, ever read the Xian bible.

I do not regard Judaism as a false religion because I have a special dislike for Judaism.

You just contradicted yourself. You said that you think it's a false religion now you're saying it's not.

On the contrary I think that all non-Christian religions are false, and Judaism just happens to fall outside of Christianity. That I view non-Christian religions as false does not mean that I believe in showing less respect for non-Christians, or in being unfriendly towards them. In fact I've had many fruitful and enlightening discussions with Jews on this forum, and I've come to respect Judaism on its own terms (and not because I've cooked up some end-times belief in which Jews play a grand role).

Am I an anti-semite? Well, I hope you'll be able to judge that based on my actions themselves.

So you think all non-Xians are in big trouble?

The NT is Anti Jewish?

Active Member

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Diamond Thunderbolt of Indestructable Wisdom

Flaming Calvinist

Senior Contributor

Flaming Calvinist

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Veteran

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Diamond Thunderbolt of Indestructable Wisdom

Flaming Calvinist

Active Member

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Active Member

Flaming Calvinist

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Diamond Thunderbolt of Indestructable Wisdom

Diamond Thunderbolt of Indestructable Wisdom

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Active Member

Similar threads