When you have no counter, just repeat what the opponent says. Do you think that works?
I'm sorry you got exposed for being full of shit. Christianity comes from the Abrahamic tradition which is jewish. Jesus was part of that tradition. Judaism being a heretical phariseical sect that rejects Christ doesn't change that.
The Scriptures speak for themselves when not shouted out by obfuscation, and have already been analyzed separately.
Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927): Admits "very entangled facts" that have had more developments ever since. We now know that the Nazarenes, Way, or Messianics was a new sect of Judaism in its time just like the other sects. Chamberlain means to say Jesus was Jewish by race but not by religion; but the DSS and Acts 21:20 show that Messianism was a valid Jewish religion and one destined to incorporate all nations. At least he encourages us not to distort or hide facts, which I always agree.
Judahite: The graphic agrees Jesus is Judahite and Judean and Ioudaios, but argues we cannot call him Jew because that means Edomite. The problem is that there's no evidence that Edom survived and the Jewish race died instead of the Edomites disappearing except for the few that intermarried into a continuing Jewish polity that loses no Jewish rights thereby.
Benjamin Freedman (1890-1984): The word "Jew" in various spellings (KJV uses "Iewe") goes back to the 1200s and translates the French "Jeu" or "Ju" (attested 900s), which simply elides Latin Judaeus or Iudaeus. The statement that there is no reference to "Jews" is flatly wrong, as if the French were the ones to invent an Edomite "Ju" people at the same time as there was an extant Judahite "Judaeus" people. The Jews have a continuous existence and the two variant names always have meant the same thing. It's not a mistranslation. Freedman carries the idea that he and the modern Jews are completely Edomite, therefore if "Jew" refers to Jesus then it cannot refer to Edom, and vice versa. But there is no Edomite takeover, replacement, or supplant in all history. When two nations merge they get to handle the rights of both nations, nobody externally denies them the rights of one of the two nations. (If Americans can say Jews aren't Jews, Jews can say Americans aren't Americans, so your saying the first participates in destroying the very borders you claim to defend.)
Roger Rusk (1906-1994): 'The word "Hebrewism" is the modern invention; it only exists as a later variant of "Hebraism", a word first attested 1570 with linguistic rather than religious meaning. If Jesus can be said to have a religion at all, it would have been that translated as "the Jews' religion" in Gal. 1:13-14, "Ioudaismos" or literally just Judaism. If we retroactively apply "Hebrewism" to the Israelite religion before 586 BC, and include all Hebrews (descendants of Eber), it would include Edomites too, because Edom son of Isaac was descended from Eber too! Though the Hebrews/Hapiru (including many peoples besides Israel) were noted for separatist monotheism, very few of them besides Israel picked up the Mosaic religion of the Tanakh (Old Testament). If any "ism" were to be applied retroactively to this period and practice, it would be best called Yahwism, worship of Yahweh; but I hesitate to say what the original worshippers would've called it.'
Talmudic Judaism: It is true that Talmudic Judaism is the continuation of the Judaism of the nonbelieving Pharisees (while thousands of believing Pharisees simply became Christian). The development of Talmudic Judaism has two known phases, the Mishna (the oral tradition that informed both Jesus's Christianity and ben Zakkai's Talmudism) and the Gemara (which the Talmudists built upon the Mishna for another 500 years). Thus Talmudic Judaism is a branch of pre-Messianic Judaism that remained pre-Messianic, but because it traces its past to Moses just like Christians do it is not modern. "Hebraism" was (above) not used as the name of a religion, in BC the common (covenantal, mishnaic, pre-Messianic) faith was just called "Jewish tradition" or Ioudaismos. Nor is the Talmud Scripture, but commentary that is used for areas Scripture doesn't cover.
Pini Dunner (1970-): Like many statements comparing Torah and Talmud, it's easily misunderstood. Torah is God-inspired, perfect, and broad. Talmud is human, contains contradictory opinions, and is laser-focused. So Torah is uniquely revered and Talmud is primary in consultation, and the word "important" applies differently to both. Talmud is not allowed to contradict Torah just like Statutes are not allowed to contradict Constitution; yet we count American statutes, which are subsidiary, as "primary" when we ask what American law is because of their breadth, even though the Constitution is "supreme".
Jewish Encyclopedia: 'Claim: The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 5, p. 41, says "Esau-Edom is modern Jewry." No, the image of this page is public and does not contain this text. The closest to the alleged quote is the historically accurate statement, "The Edomites ... by John Hyrcanus ... were then incorporated with the Jewish nation," far different from that claimed. It appears that the version above is a corruption of vol. 5, p. 208, which says, "'Esau' (=Edom) later represents Rome." I saw intermediate links suggesting that this short form evolved into the form allegedly quoted, via the unproven idea that Rome is controlled by modern Jewry; and this original stylizing explains the oddity of phrasing when punctuation is simplified.' This is just a telephone-game misquote.
Hyrcanus: Yes, Hyrcanus converted (naturalized) Edomites so that they were no longer of the (separate) province of Idumaea but of the province of Iudaea. They had to circumcise and become Judeans (Hebrews). They did not somehow remain Idumaeans and cause the Judean people to lose Judean (Jewish) identity. They certainly didn't contribute to the Mishna, which had been developing among the Judeans for hundreds of years and which is the basic for the Talmudic Judaism branch. So we cannot argue that modern Judaism merely "sounds" Hebrew via borrowing into some hypothetical Edomite religion; rather, modern Judaism descends from the same Hebrew Mishna religion that Jesus used and showed proper interpretation of.
Jewish Almanac: This is the first sentence of the book meant to shock readers into reading more, therefore is useless out of context. Its intent is that Israelites included 12 tribes and not just the Jewish tribe (or tribes); and that the old terms "Hebrew" and "Israelite" were not in continuous usage so (they think) shouldn't technically apply today when "Jew" and "Judahite" forms were in continuous usage. I would disagree, saying Judah is from Israel and Eber so "Jews" are "Israelites" and "Hebrews": but it's a complete semantic game, and here it's being derailed as if to prove the idea of Edom contributing to a discontinuity that doesn't historically exist.
"Gerald Soman" (n. d.): 'Quote from a "Gerald Soman" of a 1935 "World Jewish Federation" (the reality was called the World Jewish Congress) is nonexistent outside its own echoes; I've tracked such quotes before to their fictional rabblerouser origins, so I'm not inclined to do this one today, thanks.' (Didn't find anything to add today either.)
Alexander McCaul (1799-1863): Correctly notes that Edomites cannot essentially exist anywhere except by the fraction of the Jews that carry their heritage. (It's still possible that a people might be found that also carry Edomite heritage though.) This doesn't prove the Jewish people lost their Jewishness.
Practicing Judaism: Jesus practiced Judaism under that name. There was no Hebrew or Koine Greek word translatable as "Hebrewism" or "Hebraism", which are modern names from Late Greek. That Judaism was the elders' tradition, the oral Mishna. The Edomites never followed the Mishna (Pharisaic or Sadducaic), unless they became full Jews; and they could not have followed the Talmud since it took 500 more years to complete.
James Stalker (1848-1927): Simply emphasizes two religious aspects calling them "Israelite" and "Jewish", which obviously means the OT distinction between Israelite and Judahite practices. These were not in conflict nor did they relate to Edom at all; they simply emphasize the popular and ecclesiastic elements of the same religion with the same text. If this distinction is templated onto the "Edomite" idea it fails, because the temple Judaism and priesthood was run by the Sadducees, which disappeared, so they could not be the supposed extant "Edomite" religion sought for in the narrative.
Charles E. "Chuck" Carlson (1939-): Rightly says that Judaism continues Pharisaism. And Pharisaism continues the Zugoth Nasi tradition through Rabbi Hillel, who met Jesus and gave him the saying "What is hateful to yourself, do not to others." That is, Pharisaism is an ordinary Judahite tradition.
Conclusion: "Judaism" is majority Rabbinical and Talmudic and is thus Pharisaic, but there is no Edomite takeover in history at which it ceased its continuation from the oral tradition Jesus accepted. A minority position within Judaism is Messianism (Hebrew Christianity), which has a million adherents according to a Lifeway survey. Therefore it's possible for the rest of the Jews to find the Jewish Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures just as Jesus's first thousands of followers did. They just need to overcome Talmudic encrustations.
Jesus was of the tribe of Judah. Case closed.
No, he wasn't.
Based on what? On you liking Jesus but not the jews and struggling with the cognitive dissonance?
Don't project. There's nothing that proves he's jewish.
Benjamin Freedman explained it in 1961.
Yeah, send me an hour plus long video instead of a straight answer to a simple question.
Scripture and Church tradition is nothing? Where do you get your knowledge of the person Jesus Christ? What kind of a cult are you in?
Btw, your last panel literally says what I commented. At least read the stuff you post.
As soon as you mentioned cognitive dissonance, I knew you'd be guilty of it. And here you are 🤣
When you have no counter, just repeat what the opponent says. Do you think that works?
I'm sorry you got exposed for being full of shit. Christianity comes from the Abrahamic tradition which is jewish. Jesus was part of that tradition. Judaism being a heretical phariseical sect that rejects Christ doesn't change that.
Until you listen to that speech, you have no argument as the hypocrite you are.
The Bible says in 42 places that Jesus was born King of the Jews, was the Jewish Deliverance out of Elsewhere, was the Jew held by the nations, was in Jewish jurisdiction, kept Jewish customs, was a citizen of the Jewish nation, identified as a Jew, was called a Jew, was ruled in court as a Jew, died a Jew, was the Jewish Messiah, had myriads of Jewish believers, led a Jewish sect, followed Jewish law, and was a spiritual Jew too. See my separate comments herein.
Weird, just weird...
Worship the One Jew. The real Jesus is a Jew and King of the Jews. You deny Jesus every time you deflect from him.
I took that title to prevent anyone else from it. It's worked.
You deny Jesus any time you don't make pornos!
OP hates jews and promotes Hitler.
Now, he uses a "former jew" to promote his idea, because I exposed Hitler as a non-Christian. (And many other users in here did that!)
Now, he is willing to promote a former jew, so he can still promote his nazi posts... Just check his activity...
If Jesus wasn't a jew, then why are his apostles all jews?
I bet you 1000$ that OP can't answer that.
You're pretty obsessed with jews... 🤔
You should give me 1000$ now.
You can't even place the dollar sign correctly.
You still owe me 1000$.
Or do you prefer $1000?
It's all the same to me.
The Scriptures speak for themselves when not shouted out by obfuscation, and have already been analyzed separately.
Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927): Admits "very entangled facts" that have had more developments ever since. We now know that the Nazarenes, Way, or Messianics was a new sect of Judaism in its time just like the other sects. Chamberlain means to say Jesus was Jewish by race but not by religion; but the DSS and Acts 21:20 show that Messianism was a valid Jewish religion and one destined to incorporate all nations. At least he encourages us not to distort or hide facts, which I always agree.
Judahite: The graphic agrees Jesus is Judahite and Judean and Ioudaios, but argues we cannot call him Jew because that means Edomite. The problem is that there's no evidence that Edom survived and the Jewish race died instead of the Edomites disappearing except for the few that intermarried into a continuing Jewish polity that loses no Jewish rights thereby.
Benjamin Freedman (1890-1984): The word "Jew" in various spellings (KJV uses "Iewe") goes back to the 1200s and translates the French "Jeu" or "Ju" (attested 900s), which simply elides Latin Judaeus or Iudaeus. The statement that there is no reference to "Jews" is flatly wrong, as if the French were the ones to invent an Edomite "Ju" people at the same time as there was an extant Judahite "Judaeus" people. The Jews have a continuous existence and the two variant names always have meant the same thing. It's not a mistranslation. Freedman carries the idea that he and the modern Jews are completely Edomite, therefore if "Jew" refers to Jesus then it cannot refer to Edom, and vice versa. But there is no Edomite takeover, replacement, or supplant in all history. When two nations merge they get to handle the rights of both nations, nobody externally denies them the rights of one of the two nations. (If Americans can say Jews aren't Jews, Jews can say Americans aren't Americans, so your saying the first participates in destroying the very borders you claim to defend.)
Roger Rusk (1906-1994): 'The word "Hebrewism" is the modern invention; it only exists as a later variant of "Hebraism", a word first attested 1570 with linguistic rather than religious meaning. If Jesus can be said to have a religion at all, it would have been that translated as "the Jews' religion" in Gal. 1:13-14, "Ioudaismos" or literally just Judaism. If we retroactively apply "Hebrewism" to the Israelite religion before 586 BC, and include all Hebrews (descendants of Eber), it would include Edomites too, because Edom son of Isaac was descended from Eber too! Though the Hebrews/Hapiru (including many peoples besides Israel) were noted for separatist monotheism, very few of them besides Israel picked up the Mosaic religion of the Tanakh (Old Testament). If any "ism" were to be applied retroactively to this period and practice, it would be best called Yahwism, worship of Yahweh; but I hesitate to say what the original worshippers would've called it.'
Talmudic Judaism: It is true that Talmudic Judaism is the continuation of the Judaism of the nonbelieving Pharisees (while thousands of believing Pharisees simply became Christian). The development of Talmudic Judaism has two known phases, the Mishna (the oral tradition that informed both Jesus's Christianity and ben Zakkai's Talmudism) and the Gemara (which the Talmudists built upon the Mishna for another 500 years). Thus Talmudic Judaism is a branch of pre-Messianic Judaism that remained pre-Messianic, but because it traces its past to Moses just like Christians do it is not modern. "Hebraism" was (above) not used as the name of a religion, in BC the common (covenantal, mishnaic, pre-Messianic) faith was just called "Jewish tradition" or Ioudaismos. Nor is the Talmud Scripture, but commentary that is used for areas Scripture doesn't cover.
Pini Dunner (1970-): Like many statements comparing Torah and Talmud, it's easily misunderstood. Torah is God-inspired, perfect, and broad. Talmud is human, contains contradictory opinions, and is laser-focused. So Torah is uniquely revered and Talmud is primary in consultation, and the word "important" applies differently to both. Talmud is not allowed to contradict Torah just like Statutes are not allowed to contradict Constitution; yet we count American statutes, which are subsidiary, as "primary" when we ask what American law is because of their breadth, even though the Constitution is "supreme".
Jewish Encyclopedia: 'Claim: The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 5, p. 41, says "Esau-Edom is modern Jewry." No, the image of this page is public and does not contain this text. The closest to the alleged quote is the historically accurate statement, "The Edomites ... by John Hyrcanus ... were then incorporated with the Jewish nation," far different from that claimed. It appears that the version above is a corruption of vol. 5, p. 208, which says, "'Esau' (=Edom) later represents Rome." I saw intermediate links suggesting that this short form evolved into the form allegedly quoted, via the unproven idea that Rome is controlled by modern Jewry; and this original stylizing explains the oddity of phrasing when punctuation is simplified.' This is just a telephone-game misquote.
Hyrcanus: Yes, Hyrcanus converted (naturalized) Edomites so that they were no longer of the (separate) province of Idumaea but of the province of Iudaea. They had to circumcise and become Judeans (Hebrews). They did not somehow remain Idumaeans and cause the Judean people to lose Judean (Jewish) identity. They certainly didn't contribute to the Mishna, which had been developing among the Judeans for hundreds of years and which is the basic for the Talmudic Judaism branch. So we cannot argue that modern Judaism merely "sounds" Hebrew via borrowing into some hypothetical Edomite religion; rather, modern Judaism descends from the same Hebrew Mishna religion that Jesus used and showed proper interpretation of.
Jewish Almanac: This is the first sentence of the book meant to shock readers into reading more, therefore is useless out of context. Its intent is that Israelites included 12 tribes and not just the Jewish tribe (or tribes); and that the old terms "Hebrew" and "Israelite" were not in continuous usage so (they think) shouldn't technically apply today when "Jew" and "Judahite" forms were in continuous usage. I would disagree, saying Judah is from Israel and Eber so "Jews" are "Israelites" and "Hebrews": but it's a complete semantic game, and here it's being derailed as if to prove the idea of Edom contributing to a discontinuity that doesn't historically exist.
"Gerald Soman" (n. d.): 'Quote from a "Gerald Soman" of a 1935 "World Jewish Federation" (the reality was called the World Jewish Congress) is nonexistent outside its own echoes; I've tracked such quotes before to their fictional rabblerouser origins, so I'm not inclined to do this one today, thanks.' (Didn't find anything to add today either.)
Alexander McCaul (1799-1863): Correctly notes that Edomites cannot essentially exist anywhere except by the fraction of the Jews that carry their heritage. (It's still possible that a people might be found that also carry Edomite heritage though.) This doesn't prove the Jewish people lost their Jewishness.
Practicing Judaism: Jesus practiced Judaism under that name. There was no Hebrew or Koine Greek word translatable as "Hebrewism" or "Hebraism", which are modern names from Late Greek. That Judaism was the elders' tradition, the oral Mishna. The Edomites never followed the Mishna (Pharisaic or Sadducaic), unless they became full Jews; and they could not have followed the Talmud since it took 500 more years to complete.
James Stalker (1848-1927): Simply emphasizes two religious aspects calling them "Israelite" and "Jewish", which obviously means the OT distinction between Israelite and Judahite practices. These were not in conflict nor did they relate to Edom at all; they simply emphasize the popular and ecclesiastic elements of the same religion with the same text. If this distinction is templated onto the "Edomite" idea it fails, because the temple Judaism and priesthood was run by the Sadducees, which disappeared, so they could not be the supposed extant "Edomite" religion sought for in the narrative.
Charles E. "Chuck" Carlson (1939-): Rightly says that Judaism continues Pharisaism. And Pharisaism continues the Zugoth Nasi tradition through Rabbi Hillel, who met Jesus and gave him the saying "What is hateful to yourself, do not to others." That is, Pharisaism is an ordinary Judahite tradition.
Conclusion: "Judaism" is majority Rabbinical and Talmudic and is thus Pharisaic, but there is no Edomite takeover in history at which it ceased its continuation from the oral tradition Jesus accepted. A minority position within Judaism is Messianism (Hebrew Christianity), which has a million adherents according to a Lifeway survey. Therefore it's possible for the rest of the Jews to find the Jewish Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures just as Jesus's first thousands of followers did. They just need to overcome Talmudic encrustations.
u/scoredinternal spam account ⚠️🚨