Religion II

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Why are you so pompous and proud of your spiritual ignorance?

Right back at ya'

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Light

My understanding is that the Jews split from Jesus as their messiah around 70 AD when their 2nd temple fell to the Romans. They expected Jesus to save them from the Romans even though Jesus predicted what would happen.

Jews looked to a political messiah rather than a spiritual one. Jesus warned his followers not to take part in that method of bringing in God's kingdom. The destruction in 70 AD was not God's judgment as much as it was the natural result of human beings seeking salvation through their own political and military might. Jesus' method was the opposite of such an approach.

Jesus's methods for peace are still revolutionary today because it requires a higher degree of consciousness to implement. Christians today make the same mistake as the Jews back in 70 AD by looking to Jesus in military conquests. That has nothing to do with what Jesus was talking about.

Are you saying that Christianity was the religion of most Jews in 70 AD?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Right back at ya'

Yeah...spoken by the one who admits he has no answers.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Yeah...spoken by the one who admits he has no answers.

You're not looking for answers, so what does it matter.

All I was looking from you was an opinion in your own words...not more scripture thrown at me from a book that isn't even the topic of discussion.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Why are you so pompous and proud of your spiritual ignorance?

Ad hominem attack!

Also an instance of the pot calling the kettle black.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

You're not looking for answers, so what does it matter.

He has plenty of answers. What he's looking for is a market for them.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Actor

Are you saying that Christianity was the religion of most Jews in 70 AD?

I'm not sure of the percentage, but 1st century "Jewish Christians" differed from other Jews only in their acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah.

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

For your info, the Jews "split from Jesus" the day they crucified him which was their ultimate expression of hostility toward their Covenant God and the covenant he made with them at Sinai through Moses.

Those "High Priest" Jews who may have been partly responsible for his crucifixion ,never accepted Jesus as the messiah in the first place. So you can't say that's when the Jews split from Jesus.

Without Jesus's presence, there was splintering and a lack of direction in the movement. As I mentioned, many Jews politicized Jesus as their savior for conquering the land of Israel not their souls. When Jesus did not deliver Israel to them, and their defeats to the Roman army mounted, they became less and less open to the idea that he was the messiah because they were looking for a more political messiah not a spiritual one.

[ReplayRandall]

THE THIRD TEMPLE - WHEN AND WHERE? - APR 17, 2017

YouTube (Short URL)

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Light

Those "High Priest" Jews who may have been partly responsible for his crucifixion ,never accepted Jesus as the messiah in the first place. So you can't say that's when the Jews split from Jesus.

Without Jesus's presence, there was splintering and a lack of direction in the movement. As I mentioned, many Jews politicized Jesus as their savior for conquering the land of Israel not their souls. When Jesus did not deliver Israel to them, and their defeats to the Roman army mounted, they became less and less open to the idea that he was the messiah because they were looking for a more political messiah not a spiritual one.

but that's what the prophecy has basically said all along, has it not? A political messiah...not a God in the flesh...someone who will unite and bring peace, not someone who will perform miracles (although uniting the world and bringing peace would be some kind of miracle for sure).

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

You're not looking for answers, so what does it matter.

All I was looking from you was an opinion in your own words...not more scripture thrown at me from a book that isn't even the topic of discussion.

No, I'm not looking for answers on the Trinity because I know what the entire bible teaches on the subject. But neither are you, you phony. You start a topic dogmatically and emphatically stating that the doctrine of the Trinity isn't in the OT (which is a book but now you suddenly don't want it be the topic of conversation as you originally did!), and then tell me afterward, after asking you a couple of questions, that you have no answers. But after this truthful admission, you badger me to look at a vid by a Rabbi who I will never get to meet online to debate one-on-one; and neither are you equipped to sit in as his self-appointed surrogate to defend his position, being ignorant as you are of the Talmud,other Jewish works and most especially the OT.

You should find a speed control device for your big mouth to give it a fighting chance to catch up with your brain, and keep you from driving headlong into brick walls.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

Those "High Priest" Jews who may have been partly responsible for his crucifixion ,never accepted Jesus as the messiah in the first place. So you can't say that's when the Jews split from Jesus.

Without Jesus's presence, there was splintering and a lack of direction in the movement. As I mentioned, many Jews politicized Jesus as their savior for conquering the land of Israel not their souls. When Jesus did not deliver Israel to them, and their defeats to the Roman army mounted, they became less and less open to the idea that he was the messiah because they were looking for a more political messiah not a spiritual one.

The nation as a whole rejected their messiah. (Read the OT and NT someday). Scripture teaches that the Jews delivered up Jesus up to Rome so that Rome would kill him -- something the Jews legally, under Rome, could not do. Capital punishment wasn't within Israel's purview.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

No, I'm not looking for answers on the Trinity because I know what the entire bible teaches on the subject. But neither are you, you phony. You start a topic dogmatically and emphatically stating that the doctrine of the Trinity isn't in the OT (which is a book but now you suddenly don't want it be the topic of conversation as you originally did!), and then tell me afterward, after asking you a couple of questions, that you have no answers. But after this truthful admission, you badger me to look at a vid by a Rabbi who I will never get to meet online to debate one-on-one; and neither are you equipped to sit in as his self-appointed surrogate to defend his position, being ignorant as you are of the Talmud,other Jewish works and most especially the OT.

You should find a speed control device for your big mouth to give it a fighting chance to catch up with your brain, and keep from driving headlong into brick walls.

You lack reading comprehension. It's the NT that isn't the topic conversation, but that you keep throwing scripture at me from...the OT is totally the topic of conversation....maybe time to get those eyes checked again.

The only ignorant one here is the one telling us the Jews embrace the concept of the Trinity in the Torah...which is basically what you're telling them.

I'm sure they'll all be surprised to hear this, sage scholar of the Torah that you are, compared to them...

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

You lack reading comprehension. It's the NT that isn't the topic conversation, but that you keep throwing scripture at me from...the OT is totally the topic of conversation....maybe time to get those eyes checked again.

The only ignorant one here is the one telling us the Jews embrace the concept of the Trinity in the Torah...which is basically what you're telling them.

I'm sure they'll all be surprised to hear this, sage scholar of the Torah that you are, compared to them...

I "threw" the text in Matthew 22 at you because it was relevant to the OT discussion since Jesus based his argument on Ps 110:1 which is in the OT.

And by the way, you need reading lessons or wash your mouth out for telling a bald-faced lie. Quote me where I said that the Jews embraced the Trinity in the Torah. I never made any statement about what unbelieving Jews embrace. I did state that the Trinity finds its theological underpinnings in the OT -- that the Trinity is grounded in OT theology. Big difference.

In closing....yeah, I do know the OT much better than any unbelieving Jew does. Get the Rabbi, who you are so enamored with, over here and I'll prove it to you.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

In closing....yeah, I do know the OT much better than any unbelieving Jew does.

Since the topic IS the OT, what the Jews believe or don't believe in the NT does not apply...and thus your little dig "unbelieving Jew" makes absolutely no sense, but was likely made for other, unChristian-like reasons. Shame on you.