- Jan 27, 2018
- 244
- 72
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Here's a little brain teaser for you to consider. Let's begin with a little background to my question, is Jesus the anti-Christ.
The following is a thumb nail examination of Jewish ideology as it was in Jesus' time and as it is today.
The gospels record frequent discussions between Jesus and representatives of a Jewish elitist group called the pharisees. The root of the debate was that Jesus taught one must obey the Torah/Tanakh (Old Testament Law) rather than the traditions of man. Specific traditions He referred to were numerous rules and regulations and re-interpretations called the Talmud.(*)
Talmudic traditions could change with the wind, or whatever a majority of rabbis thought it might be. For example, it was said that even if Moses and Elijah appeared for a debate a mere three pharisaic rabbis could out vote them and win. In another example, the Talmud falsely records YHWH saying, "I have been defeated by my sons" because the opinion of a majority of pharisaic rabbis supersedes even YHWH Himself. Jesus taught that these traditions of man were wrong. He made Himself very unpopular with the pharisees when He said these things.
Another key point for the Christian reader to consider is that modern Orthodox Rabbis are the continuation of the ancient Pharisees (it says so in the Talmud). In the two thousand years that have passed since they argued with Jesus there have been a few changes, but the essentials remain the same.
My final point here is that the basic Rabbinic reasons for rejecting Jesus is that He taught opposition to Talmudic tradition, not because He claimed to be the Son of God (because a mere two pharisaic Rabbis could out vote God Himself). According to Talmudic tradition, if a man opposes Rabbinic interpretations he should be killed. Can you see where I'm going with this?
That being said, here is my question.....
Initial side of the argument;
According to strict interpretation of Daniel's reference in Hebrew and Greek reference in Revelation to 'the abomination of desolation' the anti-christ isn't a man who is opposed to Jesus so much as it is an attitude and a tradition that opposes Torah.
Opposing side of the argument;
Talmudic traditions (as criticized by Jesus) DO oppose Torah, or "the Law" as it says in the New Testament. According to pharisaic tradition any man who opposes Talmudic tradition is anti-messiah (or anti-christ in the Christian vernacular).
In this instance who then is anti-christ? Is it Jesus who opposed Talmudic traditions or is it the pharisees who opposed Jesus' strict interpretation of Torah?
In summation;
Jews are accused of being anti-Christ, but are they really? From the perspective of Jewish ideology, the issue isn't Jesus, its Talmudic tradition.
It's not that easy to identify anti-Christ as you can see.
Opinions and observations? What say you?
and that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
(*) One Talmudic law stated how one must put on their sandals or shoes. The right one first and then the left one. Talmud also said one must wash one's right hand first, then the left one. When Jesus' disciples didn't wash their hands at all they were criticized for their lack of proper ritual etiquette. These 'laws' go on and on with exceptions and tangents multiplying as the Rabbis saw fit to impose.
The following is a thumb nail examination of Jewish ideology as it was in Jesus' time and as it is today.
The gospels record frequent discussions between Jesus and representatives of a Jewish elitist group called the pharisees. The root of the debate was that Jesus taught one must obey the Torah/Tanakh (Old Testament Law) rather than the traditions of man. Specific traditions He referred to were numerous rules and regulations and re-interpretations called the Talmud.(*)
Talmudic traditions could change with the wind, or whatever a majority of rabbis thought it might be. For example, it was said that even if Moses and Elijah appeared for a debate a mere three pharisaic rabbis could out vote them and win. In another example, the Talmud falsely records YHWH saying, "I have been defeated by my sons" because the opinion of a majority of pharisaic rabbis supersedes even YHWH Himself. Jesus taught that these traditions of man were wrong. He made Himself very unpopular with the pharisees when He said these things.
Another key point for the Christian reader to consider is that modern Orthodox Rabbis are the continuation of the ancient Pharisees (it says so in the Talmud). In the two thousand years that have passed since they argued with Jesus there have been a few changes, but the essentials remain the same.
My final point here is that the basic Rabbinic reasons for rejecting Jesus is that He taught opposition to Talmudic tradition, not because He claimed to be the Son of God (because a mere two pharisaic Rabbis could out vote God Himself). According to Talmudic tradition, if a man opposes Rabbinic interpretations he should be killed. Can you see where I'm going with this?
That being said, here is my question.....
Initial side of the argument;
According to strict interpretation of Daniel's reference in Hebrew and Greek reference in Revelation to 'the abomination of desolation' the anti-christ isn't a man who is opposed to Jesus so much as it is an attitude and a tradition that opposes Torah.
Opposing side of the argument;
Talmudic traditions (as criticized by Jesus) DO oppose Torah, or "the Law" as it says in the New Testament. According to pharisaic tradition any man who opposes Talmudic tradition is anti-messiah (or anti-christ in the Christian vernacular).
In this instance who then is anti-christ? Is it Jesus who opposed Talmudic traditions or is it the pharisees who opposed Jesus' strict interpretation of Torah?
In summation;
Jews are accused of being anti-Christ, but are they really? From the perspective of Jewish ideology, the issue isn't Jesus, its Talmudic tradition.
It's not that easy to identify anti-Christ as you can see.
Opinions and observations? What say you?
and that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
(*) One Talmudic law stated how one must put on their sandals or shoes. The right one first and then the left one. Talmud also said one must wash one's right hand first, then the left one. When Jesus' disciples didn't wash their hands at all they were criticized for their lack of proper ritual etiquette. These 'laws' go on and on with exceptions and tangents multiplying as the Rabbis saw fit to impose.