You might be surprised, but I do ask people not to misquote the Talmud. In particular, since people are so anxious to criticize it, I point out that it hurts their case to speak inaccurately about it because it makes them look either uninformed or likely to be shilling to make Talmud hatred look dumb. I say that if one is going to criticize it they should go for its actual excesses, such as excessive superstition about demons, hypercasuistry about life regulation, and extreme insularity; and they should not criticize based on telephone games starting in 19th-century German broadsheets but still echoed in uninformed memes today.
The Talmud and Judaism do not make it an official teaching that Jesus would be a false prophet or illegitimate. The Bible does state that members of Jewish sects held this, and so on rare occasions we have seen individual Jews repeat this; in the whole Talmud there's only one actual negative charge against Jesus given by one person as a minority view (Rabbi Ulla). There are a couple anecdotes about a "Yeshu" character who is an amalgamation of three people named Yehoshua in three different centuries, which includes Jesus, but that framing doesn't constitute teaching.
Nowadays rabbis have recognized, rightly, that it's self-destructive to defame Jesus, and since Judaism has very few official positions there is actually no congregational rabbi or rabbinical org delivering any clear English statement against Jesus as a Jewish doctrine. I've offered the challenge for years of finding any such testimony, and so far we've only turned up one YouTube in Hebrew that might qualify. Rabbis are too cagey to defame Jesus directly, they'd much rather ignore the question entirely and let the Jewish people think what they want. Because I believe in Romans 11 creative evangelism to the Jews about Jesus being their Messiah (and completing the Messianic work that they seek), I ask that no stumbling block be placed so that they have the freedom to hear and work through the good news we have for them after millennia of both sides breaking down the communications. Thank you for asking a good question, I trust you understand.
Judaism is premised on Christ not being the messiah, you know that right? Rabbinical judaism is the tradition of the Pharisees and the Sadducees developed after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and codified in the Oral Torah (the Mishnah and later the Babylonian Talmud). Do you know why they pray at the Western Wall? For the rebuilding of the Temple and the coming of the Messiah who will rule over Israel and the world.
There are two small problem with this plan if you're a Christian:
First, as we mentioned the Messiah already came and they rejected Him and crucified Him. I think every Christian not completely brainwashed by zionist dispensationalist propaganda is aware of that.
Second, the Kingdom of Israel, the Heavenly Jerusalem, is in fact the Church of Christ and not a political entity or an ethnostate. You see that dual covenant theory contradicts the teaching of the Church. Why? Because God's covenant with the jews was fulfilled with the coming of the Messiah.
The whole point of the OT and "the chosen people" was to bring about the Messiah. After that we the Church became the chosen people of God. This is why Christ is called not only the second Adam, but the second Jacob, because His 12 apostles gave rise to the new spiritual "tribes" around the world - not based on biological or ethnic inheritance, but as spiritual adopted children of God. This is why in Romans Paul says our circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit and not of the flesh. And still Protestants circumcise their children according to the jewish law disregarding Romans, as if God hasn't adopted us as His spiritual children. Paul made another allegory in Romans about this - jews are the olive branch that has been cut off and the Church of believers is the wild branch that was grafted and inherits eternal life in the Kingdom, previously promised to the jews.
Does God have a plan for the jews? Some Church Fathers speak of jews converting before the second advent. But there's no "separate dispensation" for the jews - they will either repent and come to the Church or they will be condemned to hell (the same choice stands before any jew or gentile at all times).
Judaism is premised on Christ not being the messiah
Yet.
To evangelize Rabbinical Jews (which is as sensitive as evangelizing Muslims), it's important to thank the historical people for preserving the covenant for thousands of years, among which Jesus and all the Church founders were born. The fact that one group said Jesus has done enough to be judged Messiah now, and the other (eventually) said Jesus hasn't done enough to be judged Messiah now, leads to the bridge-building method of dialoguing with Jews about how we would recognize Messiah before he finishes his work. I don't see a Christian eschatology in which we fail to pray for the coming of the Messiah who will rule over Israel and the world, and if he wants a physical temple as Ezekiel 40-48 hints then I'm sure he'll get one. So the issue is the let the Jews, who seek to keep their theology pure of outside influence, find Jesus in that historical theological testimony, because he's there everywhere. Without stumbling blocks, and also without compromise.
Actually, in Acts 3-4 the very Jews who called for Jesus's death became hundreds out of the first 5,000 members of your Orthodox Church. I've posted the exegetical proof but I trust you see it on plain reading (I don't think Tradition would interpret it differently than plainly).
Yes, dual covenant is contradictory and I've never taught it; Jews are only saved by accepting Jesus, just as the Old Testament Jews were saved by believing in a Messiah to come before his name had been revealed. There are no two covenants of salvation. However, many nations have various national covenants for good or ill in the Bible, and the Jewish people have some of the best and the worst of the covenantal promises, and their preservation is pretty good evidence that they have a national promise from God to remain a people forever just like Egypt has the same national promise from God to remain forever. In fact, Egypt is told by Zechariah that if they reject the Messiah they will get drought, which is similar to what Israel is told. National covenants are not related to salvation by faith proven by works.
So the "chosen people" (not a Biblical phrase), the people of God, were a mixed multitude for two millennia, then mostly Jewish for two, then mostly Gentile for two, which Paul tells us in Romans 9-11 is a brilliant and balanced plan for the world. He concludes with how much greater it will be to see Jews evangelized en masse again (like they were in his day, when Acts 2021:20 says many myriads in Jerusalem alone were Messianic Jews): he says in fact it means the time of eschatological resurrection is here when that happens.
Side point, circumcision doesn't disregard Romans unless it is used as a work for independent merit. The good works we do, whether they look like Jewish law (e.g. baptism) or not, can only be done in gratitude for what we have received by grace and Christ's merit. There's a lot tied to that but it's tangential to your point.
Overall, you've got it pretty well right, and the issue is only that there are additional facts that open up the context of what is happening. I'm confident Orthodox would agree with evangelism to the Jews of the message of Jesus being God, Christ, and Savior, but those who have been working through this issue closely for the last ~150 years have recognized that much of the work is pre-evangelism, removing the rocks (and stumbling blocks) and watering and plowing up the hard ground. That also includes getting the church "more adequate explanation" as to how we can facilitate what Paul says will happen.
Actually, in Acts 3-4 the very Jews who called for Jesus's death became hundreds out of the first 5,000 members of your Orthodox Church. I've posted the exegetical proof but I trust you see it on plain reading (I don't think Tradition would interpret it differently than plainly).
I never said all jews crucified and rejected Him. Obviously the great majority of the first Christians were jewish and many of those probably went against Christ at first (like Paul did). By "them" I'm referring to the pharisees and the sadducees who later consolidated the hebrew sect that we now call Judaism. As far as the Church goes, those people are heretics and don't worship the same God as Christians do.
However, many nations have various national covenants for good or ill in the Bible, and the Jewish people have some of the best and the worst of the covenantal promises, and their preservation is pretty good evidence that they have a national promise from God to remain a people forever just like Egypt has the same national promise from God to remain forever.
Yes, it seems that jews will be there until the end. But most of today's jews are what Scripture calls false jews. The ashkenazi are not even semitic and have nothing to do with the jews of the Bible. This delves into a very complex question of what makes one a jew and how is this proven. In the OT we see that jews had to present written geneology. Even by the time of Jesus jews have already lost their records and the genealogies of Matthew and Luke serve as proof that He was the Messiah.
Side point, circumcision doesn't disregard Romans unless it is used as a work for independent merit. The good works we do, whether they look like Jewish law (e.g. baptism) or not, can only be done in gratitude for what we have received by grace and Christ's merit. There's a lot tied to that but it's tangential to your point.
The problem is not that circumcision is jewish in origin - all Christian sacraments are because the tradition itself is jewish. The problem is that physical circumcision, just like baptism, was transformed in the NT. Same goes for laws pertaining to cleanliness and dietary laws. Continuing the jewish tradition is ignoring the fulfilling and transformation of the law and traditions brought by Christ. It's not putting things in their right place and order. An extreme case of this is observing the Sabbath as the holyday when Christ was resurrected in the first day of the week. After the Church was established at Pentecost, circumcising your children is denying the circumcision of the Spirit basically. This could even be red as blaspheming the Spirit... Imagine sacrificing a lamb at the Church altar in accordance with OT law? Would that be appropriate after Christ gave us the ultimate sacrifice? This is what circumcision is in essence.
What's that? Do you go engage in apology of the Talmud and judaism as if they don't teach JC is a false prophet born of a whore?
You might be surprised, but I do ask people not to misquote the Talmud. In particular, since people are so anxious to criticize it, I point out that it hurts their case to speak inaccurately about it because it makes them look either uninformed or likely to be shilling to make Talmud hatred look dumb. I say that if one is going to criticize it they should go for its actual excesses, such as excessive superstition about demons, hypercasuistry about life regulation, and extreme insularity; and they should not criticize based on telephone games starting in 19th-century German broadsheets but still echoed in uninformed memes today.
The Talmud and Judaism do not make it an official teaching that Jesus would be a false prophet or illegitimate. The Bible does state that members of Jewish sects held this, and so on rare occasions we have seen individual Jews repeat this; in the whole Talmud there's only one actual negative charge against Jesus given by one person as a minority view (Rabbi Ulla). There are a couple anecdotes about a "Yeshu" character who is an amalgamation of three people named Yehoshua in three different centuries, which includes Jesus, but that framing doesn't constitute teaching.
Nowadays rabbis have recognized, rightly, that it's self-destructive to defame Jesus, and since Judaism has very few official positions there is actually no congregational rabbi or rabbinical org delivering any clear English statement against Jesus as a Jewish doctrine. I've offered the challenge for years of finding any such testimony, and so far we've only turned up one YouTube in Hebrew that might qualify. Rabbis are too cagey to defame Jesus directly, they'd much rather ignore the question entirely and let the Jewish people think what they want. Because I believe in Romans 11 creative evangelism to the Jews about Jesus being their Messiah (and completing the Messianic work that they seek), I ask that no stumbling block be placed so that they have the freedom to hear and work through the good news we have for them after millennia of both sides breaking down the communications. Thank you for asking a good question, I trust you understand.
Judaism is premised on Christ not being the messiah, you know that right? Rabbinical judaism is the tradition of the Pharisees and the Sadducees developed after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and codified in the Oral Torah (the Mishnah and later the Babylonian Talmud). Do you know why they pray at the Western Wall? For the rebuilding of the Temple and the coming of the Messiah who will rule over Israel and the world.
There are two small problem with this plan if you're a Christian:
First, as we mentioned the Messiah already came and they rejected Him and crucified Him. I think every Christian not completely brainwashed by zionist dispensationalist propaganda is aware of that.
Second, the Kingdom of Israel, the Heavenly Jerusalem, is in fact the Church of Christ and not a political entity or an ethnostate. You see that dual covenant theory contradicts the teaching of the Church. Why? Because God's covenant with the jews was fulfilled with the coming of the Messiah.
The whole point of the OT and "the chosen people" was to bring about the Messiah. After that we the Church became the chosen people of God. This is why Christ is called not only the second Adam, but the second Jacob, because His 12 apostles gave rise to the new spiritual "tribes" around the world - not based on biological or ethnic inheritance, but as spiritual adopted children of God. This is why in Romans Paul says our circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit and not of the flesh. And still Protestants circumcise their children according to the jewish law disregarding Romans, as if God hasn't adopted us as His spiritual children. Paul made another allegory in Romans about this - jews are the olive branch that has been cut off and the Church of believers is the wild branch that was grafted and inherits eternal life in the Kingdom, previously promised to the jews.
Does God have a plan for the jews? Some Church Fathers speak of jews converting before the second advent. But there's no "separate dispensation" for the jews - they will either repent and come to the Church or they will be condemned to hell (the same choice stands before any jew or gentile at all times).
Yet.
To evangelize Rabbinical Jews (which is as sensitive as evangelizing Muslims), it's important to thank the historical people for preserving the covenant for thousands of years, among which Jesus and all the Church founders were born. The fact that one group said Jesus has done enough to be judged Messiah now, and the other (eventually) said Jesus hasn't done enough to be judged Messiah now, leads to the bridge-building method of dialoguing with Jews about how we would recognize Messiah before he finishes his work. I don't see a Christian eschatology in which we fail to pray for the coming of the Messiah who will rule over Israel and the world, and if he wants a physical temple as Ezekiel 40-48 hints then I'm sure he'll get one. So the issue is the let the Jews, who seek to keep their theology pure of outside influence, find Jesus in that historical theological testimony, because he's there everywhere. Without stumbling blocks, and also without compromise.
Actually, in Acts 3-4 the very Jews who called for Jesus's death became hundreds out of the first 5,000 members of your Orthodox Church. I've posted the exegetical proof but I trust you see it on plain reading (I don't think Tradition would interpret it differently than plainly).
Yes, dual covenant is contradictory and I've never taught it; Jews are only saved by accepting Jesus, just as the Old Testament Jews were saved by believing in a Messiah to come before his name had been revealed. There are no two covenants of salvation. However, many nations have various national covenants for good or ill in the Bible, and the Jewish people have some of the best and the worst of the covenantal promises, and their preservation is pretty good evidence that they have a national promise from God to remain a people forever just like Egypt has the same national promise from God to remain forever. In fact, Egypt is told by Zechariah that if they reject the Messiah they will get drought, which is similar to what Israel is told. National covenants are not related to salvation by faith proven by works.
So the "chosen people" (not a Biblical phrase), the people of God, were a mixed multitude for two millennia, then mostly Jewish for two, then mostly Gentile for two, which Paul tells us in Romans 9-11 is a brilliant and balanced plan for the world. He concludes with how much greater it will be to see Jews evangelized en masse again (like they were in his day, when Acts
2021:20 says many myriads in Jerusalem alone were Messianic Jews): he says in fact it means the time of eschatological resurrection is here when that happens.Side point, circumcision doesn't disregard Romans unless it is used as a work for independent merit. The good works we do, whether they look like Jewish law (e.g. baptism) or not, can only be done in gratitude for what we have received by grace and Christ's merit. There's a lot tied to that but it's tangential to your point.
Overall, you've got it pretty well right, and the issue is only that there are additional facts that open up the context of what is happening. I'm confident Orthodox would agree with evangelism to the Jews of the message of Jesus being God, Christ, and Savior, but those who have been working through this issue closely for the last ~150 years have recognized that much of the work is pre-evangelism, removing the rocks (and stumbling blocks) and watering and plowing up the hard ground. That also includes getting the church "more adequate explanation" as to how we can facilitate what Paul says will happen.
I never said all jews crucified and rejected Him. Obviously the great majority of the first Christians were jewish and many of those probably went against Christ at first (like Paul did). By "them" I'm referring to the pharisees and the sadducees who later consolidated the hebrew sect that we now call Judaism. As far as the Church goes, those people are heretics and don't worship the same God as Christians do.
Yes, it seems that jews will be there until the end. But most of today's jews are what Scripture calls false jews. The ashkenazi are not even semitic and have nothing to do with the jews of the Bible. This delves into a very complex question of what makes one a jew and how is this proven. In the OT we see that jews had to present written geneology. Even by the time of Jesus jews have already lost their records and the genealogies of Matthew and Luke serve as proof that He was the Messiah.
The problem is not that circumcision is jewish in origin - all Christian sacraments are because the tradition itself is jewish. The problem is that physical circumcision, just like baptism, was transformed in the NT. Same goes for laws pertaining to cleanliness and dietary laws. Continuing the jewish tradition is ignoring the fulfilling and transformation of the law and traditions brought by Christ. It's not putting things in their right place and order. An extreme case of this is observing the Sabbath as the holyday when Christ was resurrected in the first day of the week. After the Church was established at Pentecost, circumcising your children is denying the circumcision of the Spirit basically. This could even be red as blaspheming the Spirit... Imagine sacrificing a lamb at the Church altar in accordance with OT law? Would that be appropriate after Christ gave us the ultimate sacrifice? This is what circumcision is in essence.
u/guywholikesDjtof2024 you may want to read
Not what was said.
Are you capable of being honest?
Did I reply to you? I was referring to the link posted by SwampRangers.
Yes because open forum actually is a private conversation.
Sure, as long as you understand what's being said.