Are Christians just Jews with different beliefs?

[RoBo1988]

Noamx, I would suggest if you have a Bible to read through the entire New Testament book of Hebrews

Yes. Especially Chapter 8

 

[Clare73]

Galatians 3:26-29 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The above verses connect those who are in Christ through faith and children of God with those who are children of Abraham and heirs to the promise. If you belong to Christ, then you are a child of Abraham, so if you deny being a child of Abraham, then you are also denying belonging to Christ.

Standard deliberate misrepresentation. . .

Biblically stated, that would be: if you belong to Christ, then you are a spiritual descendant of Abraham, not his physical descendant,
so to deny physical descendency from Abrahamm is not to deny spiritual descendency from Abraham.

And you know this. . .or do you?

 

[Soyeong]

Standard deliberate misrepresentation. . .

Biblically stated, that would be: if you belong to Christ, then you are a spiritual descendant of Abraham, not his physical descendant,
so to deny physical descendency from Abrahamm is not to deny spiritual descendency from Abraham.

And you know this. . .or do you?

Standard baseless accusation. Someone denying to be a child of Abraham does not leave room for a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, and if there is a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, then their statement should be amended. Furthermore, someone who is only spiritually a child of Abraham should have the same beliefs as a Jew who believes in Jesus. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, and our works do not change whether we are physically a child of Abraham, so he was speaking spiritually about having the same beliefs.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Standard baseless accusation. Someone denying to be a child of Abraham does not leave room for a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, and if there is a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, then their statement should be amended. Furthermore, someone who is only spiritually a child of Abraham should have the same beliefs as a Jew who believes in Jesus. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, and our works do not change whether we are physically a child of Abraham, so he was speaking spiritually about having the same beliefs.

I think it's safe to say that the poster in question was saying they are not physically, biologically, a descendant from Abraham. Not denying being a child of Abraham through faith.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Soyeong]

I think it's safe to say that the poster in question was saying they are not physically, biologically, a descendant from Abraham. Not denying being a child of Abraham through faith.

-CryptoLutheran

I agree that what they said was likely not what they meant, which is why they should amend their statement. Furthermore, those who not physical children of Abraham, but are only children of Abraham through faith should have the same beliefs as believing Jews.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I agree that what they said was likely not what they meant, which is why they should amend their statement. Furthermore, those who not physical children of Abraham, but are only children of Abraham through faith should have the same beliefs as believing Jews.

Christians, both Jew and Gentile, have shared together in the same faith from the beginning. The one and common faith of the Church catholic. If you mean the new religious movement called "Messianic Judaism", well I don't believe this is an appropriate place to have that discussion.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Clare73]

Standard baseless accusation. Someone denying to be a child of Abraham does not leave room for a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, and if there is a sense in which they are a child of Abraham, then their statement should be amended.

Who made that rule?

There is no need for me to amend to a Burman my denial of being a seed of Abraham.

Furthermore, someone who is only spiritually a child of Abraham should have the same beliefs as a Jew who believes in Jesus. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, and our works do not change whether we are physically a child of Abraham, so he was speaking spiritually about having the same beliefs.

And that would be your personal addendum to NT apostolic teaching, as is so much of what you assert.

 

[Soyeong]

Who made that rule?

There is no need for me to amend to a Burman my denial of being a seed of Abraham.

It violates the law of non-contradiction for someone to be part of a category and not part of it at the same time in the same sense. If there are difference senses in which someone is part of a category or not part of that category, then they need to qualify their statement when claiming not to belong to category, such as saying that they are not a child of Abraham in the sense of being a physical descendant, but they are a child of Abraham in the spiritual sense of doing the same works a him. If someone denies being part of a category without qualification, then there is no sense in which they are claiming to belong to that category, so @chilehed should amend their statement for accuracy, and you should retract your accusation because as usual it is not based on reality.

And that would be your personal addendum to NT apostolic teaching, as is so much of what you assert.

Another accusation that you should retract because it is not bases on reality.

 

[Clare73]

It violates the law of non-contradiction for someone to be part of a category and not part of it at the same time in the same sense.

And my being a seed of Abraham is not the same sense as Isaac and Jacob .

If there are difference senses in which someone is part of a category or not part of that category, then they need to qualify their statement when claiming not to belong to category, such as saying that they are not a child of Abraham in the sense of being a physical descendant, but they are a child of Abraham in the spiritual sense of doing the same works a him. If someone denies being part of a category without qualification, then there is no sense in which they are claiming to belong to that category, so @chilehed should amend their statement for accuracy, and you should retract your accusation because as usual it is not based on reality.

Or is it as usual your addendum.

 

[Soyeong]

And my being a seed of Abraham is not the same sense as Isaac and Jacob .

Indeed, people who are a physical descendants of Abraham and a spiritual descendants of Abraham are both children of Abraham in different senses, while those who are not children of Abraham are not children of Abraham in either sense. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, and he walked it God's way, yet those are the works that you speak against doing.

Or is it as usual your addendum.

When you arbitrarily make up things to accuse me of while refusing to give any support, then there is no good reason to think that they are true.

 

[ralliann]

I will give you that Halal and Kosher are almost the same.

Nope. Muslim prayer requirements are mechanical.

As different as Catholic canon law is from Baptist polity.

Orthodox Jewish practice is almost identical to Catholic practice.

Do You think this because of the operation of "priesthood" in Catholicism/ Orthodox as well? Messianics, in Keeping Rabbinic traditions are Sacramental. Although Rabbinic Judaism does not have a functioning priesthood to administer them.

 

[Clare73]

Indeed, people who are a physical descendants of Abraham and a spiritual descendants of Abraham are both children of Abraham in different senses, while those who are not children of Abraham are not children of Abraham in either sense. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, and he walked it God's way, yet those are the works that you speak against doing.

The work Abraham did was the work of God (Jn 6:29), he believed in the promise (Ge15:5-6, seed; Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16). . . which I speak against no more than you do.

 

[Soyeong]

The work Abraham did was the work of God (Jn 6:29), he believed in the promise (Ge15:5-6, seed; Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16). . . which I speak against no more than you do.

The work of God is to spread the Gospel in accordance with the promise by turning people from their wickedness and blessing them by teaching them how to walk in God's way, which is the way to believe in him who was sent (Acts 3:25-26). Furthermore, this is the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham that spread to those in Haran in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8, Genesis 12:1-5) and this is what you speak against when you speak against following God's way as if had ended.

 

[Clare73]

The work of God is to spread the Gospel

See what Jesus said it was (Jn 6:29).

 

[Soyeong]

See what Jesus said it was (Jn 6:29).

Unlike you, I did not argue against doing the work of God in accordance with John 6:29.

 

[Clare73]

Unlike you, I did argue against doing the work of God in accordance with John 6:29.

Agreed. . .I don't argue against the work of God in Jn 6:29.

 

[Soyeong]

Agreed. . .I don't argue against the work of God in Jn 6:29.

That was obviously a typo. I've demonstrated how you argue against doing the work of God in John 6:29, which you've ignored.

 

[Clare73]

That was obviously a typo. I've demonstrated how you argue against doing the work of God in John 6:29, which you've ignored.

Previously addressed. . .

 

[Soyeong]

Previously addressed. . .

You mean previously ignored.

 

[Clare73]

You mean previously ignored.

More misunderstanding of text. . .