Jesus acknowledged that the Jews were the descendants of Abraham, but that they weren’t the “children of Abraham” or the “children of God” anymore, but the “children of the devil”. Since Abraham is not their father, but the devil is, the promises that God gave to Abraham of those blessing Abrahams children being blessed does not apply to the Jews. They rejected Christ and are the children of the devil and not Abraham.
In John 8:37 Jesus said “I know you are Abraham’s descendants”.
in vs. 38, “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would[c] do what Abraham did.”
In vs 42, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God.
In vs 44, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires.“
Oh, I agree Muslims are children of Abraham, Semites, Hebrews, as to biology. But the Bible records that these terms narrowed in meaning over time, and also that one could be naturalized into the biology. The interlocutor here has a very rigid replacement view of two eras without any connection between them or any era before, so I'm speaking in that context; but you and I understand both meanings without confusion so that's not at issue.
That isn’t even what I’m saying. Im saying the people called “jews” today have no spiritual connection to the “jews” of the Bible. Or atleast, a less than or equal to connection compared with the Muslims of today.
The people you call jews are more accurately called Talmudists.
Talmudism was a rejection of true Judaism.
Thus they are rejected by their Father. According to your own logic.
Well, Talmudic Semites uphold every letter of the OT, while Muslim "Semites" believe it was corrupted. But comparatively the two claims should always be kept in tension and perhaps when being diplomatic there is no need to compare them rashly.
To the degree that Talmudism rejects the Torah Judaism of Messianics (and Christians), it is rejected by the Father. When evangelizing Jews I find it helpful not to lay out what degree that is because while one upholds every letter of the OT there is hope that one will accept the truths there. There is no monolithic rejection of God (nor even of Jesus) across the board in Rabbinical Judaism, I've searched for it and haven't found it. They are still pre-Christian, unlike most other nations being evangelized.
Don’t make me start calling you a lying kike bro, I don’t enjoy it.
https://communities.win/c/Christianity/p/1ARdRJJMpF/an-orthodox-jew-and-a-messianic-/c/4eZBKaQDGuf
And just to pre-empt you, here it is straight from the rabbis mouth
>To the degree that Talmudism rejects the Torah Judaism of Messianics
That “degree” is 100%. Fuck off with that same old diatribe. The monolithic rejection is their holy book saying (in a dozen places and contexts no less) hes an idolatrous sorcerer burning in hell for his sins.
Inb4”itsNOTtheirHolyBook”
Yes it is bitch.
Edit) can’t let this go unreplied to:
> They are still pre-Christian, unlike most other nations being evangelized.
What a load of horse shit. If anything, they’re one of the few “post-Christian” religions/societies on earth. They literally re-formed themselves in opposition to Christianity
Would you agree the Bible in Hebrew-Aramaic-Greek is nothing to a person without understanding of those languages or translation by people who have (orally) transmitted the meaning of those languages?
I answered that video in place and you're quoting my quote of the transcript. (1) It's not a rabbi, it's a rando Orthodox who is open to the Messianic view, which is a positive encounter and should be upheld as such. This is exactly the type of supportive conversation Christians should have with the Orthodox. (2) The "Oral Torah" is not the Talmud because the Talmud is written; it's the living spirit behind written judgments. Stephen believed in it and called it the "living oracles". (3) For a few teachers, Messianics are 100% rejected, but most recognize Messianics must be dealt with more diplomatically; for instance the Israeli Supreme Court recognizes that Messianics have Jewish right of return if they have Rabbinical parents or grandparents. (4) You're getting added to the misquote pile, there's only one Talmudic passage about Yeshu and hell. There's only one clearly about Jesus of Nazareth and it's pretty historical, stating that he was executed as an inciter, that Ulla believed he deserved it, but that the majority ruling was that in any case his rights were upheld. The other dozen passages warn against two other men named Yeshu, or against a "Yeshu" character generically, and give mixed views about the nascent Messianic Jews. There are plenty of passages about idolatry and polytheism, but whether these apply to Christians is always left ambiguous.
It is their holy book, just not their holiest book. For a significant segment it may be the most consulted book, which is a travesty. I remember the Messianic Jew who was so proud of Judaism and his receipt of a big black Scripture for his bar mitzvah. He never looked at it until an adulthood crisis where he wanted the very words of God and then he regarded that the rabbis had lied to him, what he received was only a Siddur (almost entirely human liturgy)! When he looked elsewhere for God he found Jesus. The system does tend to cause people to forget that its foundation and constitution is the Torah (much as Americans forget their Constitution).
Now I could uncharitably adopt your view that all Jews believe hateful things about Jesus, based only on this and other circumstantial evidence. I find it unhelpful to, because I wouldn't judge any person based on circumstantial evidence without hearing him. I can judge demographic likelihood that a particular Jew is against Jesus, but if I hope to see them accept Jesus it's more helpful to that end for me to accept their testimony in their own words and not prejudge it. When you and others draw sweeping inferences from the texts, it shuts down this kind of evangelism by declining to hear what they actually say. To prejudge that a particular non-Christian is unopen to the truth is to say in advance they cannot be reached by God's power and light. Crossing over to the other discussion, God's light is capable of reflecting in any human soul and so I don't close that option out without firm objective reasons.