So Jews do not believe Jesus the Christ was the messiah.

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
What you are quibbling about are the definitions of cultural identifiers vs. ethnic identifiers. The thing about Judiasm, it was once a single nation of people, and then they went into a broad diaspora, but they kept with them a lot of cultural and even in many cases (but certainly not all) racial traits that got passed along, this is why it can still be seen as an ethnicity, as well as a religion and a culture.

Yes, these racial traits just so happen to be European, Mediterranean etc. not Judaic. And I agree, it can be seen as an ethnicity. Quibbling? I could care less about all the Judaic cultures' characteristics your filling your rebuttals with,such as what color the Khazars' hair was and how they've come to identify themselves. I am arguing about ethnic self identity with contradicting religious identity,which is I am referring to the occurrence in present day.

The word Ethnic is defined as: "pertaining to or characteristic of a people, esp. a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like." (Dictionary.com) It's not just a matter of race, it's about common heritage and a point of view about life and the world, etc. Religion, race, all of that can be a part of it, but it's not always the case. For example, there are black Hispanics, white Hispanics and Amer-Indian Hispanics, but they all share Hispanic culture/ethnicity in common. Go to Puerto Rico, Cuba or the Dominican Republic and you'll see what sort of mix I mean, yet all of them identify culturally in the same way.

Thanks you for defining a word you thought I did not understand, but maybe you didn't understand my context. I was not comparing race to ethnicity, but religion.

Possibly. (I'm part Irish, too, btw.) Do you share, as a Muslim, a cultural affinity to Muslims from other places? Presumably, if you are practicing, you know Arabic. There might be certain traditions you grew up with that come out of your religion that are pretty second nature to who you are, and that will be familiar to any Muslim. It's possible there is a strong Muslim ethnicity, if it is a big enough part of how a person defines himself; a shared heritage with deep familial roots. I honestly don't know, it depends to a great degree on how Muslims define themselves.

I am not Muslim, but Agnostic. I was using an example so maybe you could step outside a bias, that is your Jewish upbringing. What I was hoping would resonate with you, is a confused distinction between religion and ethnicity, which can go hand and hand, but can also contradict itself if one practices their heritage culture and supposed religion.

I know that many groups of Muslims came via conversion (well, ultimately all, really), so local national cultural ties are possibly still stronger. It simply may just not be the same for Muslims. Judiasm doesn't seek converts, there is no proselytizing, so with some notable exceptions (especially the Khazars, possibly the Queen of Sheba's Kingdom, if she was even real)...

Talk about quibble. The argument in hand is a reference to these ages.

It's not contradictory, that's precisely what ethnicity is. Ultimately, it is very much about self-identity, how you perceive and define yourself. But it's not so much what you choose, as what you are steeped in your whole life. What you come out of, what you were surrounded with as a child.

Just because you say it isn't contradictory, doesn't make it true. I agree, ethnicity is entirely self-identity, but if you really read what I was saying,you would respond to what I am talking about, an ignorant comparison between ethnicity and religion. I could cite many examples but they are all around you and this debate has gone stale, lets agree to disagree.

Originally posted by Rich Man

Originally posted by Tribe27

Originally posted by Rich Man

A: He will bring world peace, bring universal knowlege of God, reign over the whole world, rule for 1,000 years, and beat all swords into plowshares during his FIRST coming. Jesus did not do this and is said to have a second coming.

A: He will be born in Bethlehem and will not have an agenda.

How do you know?

Because it's in the Hebrew Bible. Sorry once again Christians.

Because man wrote something in a book it must be true?

reply to post by Theone2000
OP,

Your thread title is grossly in error. There are millions of Jews who are Christians and believe that Jesus Christ is their messiah.

reply to post by Theone2000


First off, many of us are mutts, like myself, welsh, german, english, spanish

The clues are here;

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275323481&sr=8-2

AND

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275323630&sr=1-1


I have a Jewish friend, but he is non practicing so that don't really count.....anyways, the Jews are only a remnant of the original Israelite, but the Irish are exactly like the original Israelites!!!! Believe it or not. And the difference between the Irish/Brits/Welsh/Scots and the Jews are quite obvious....because of Esau, Idumeans, Edomites etc...this is fairly common knowledge tho.

I think you'll get more out of these two books that may convince you to find a good pastor, I have a link for audio from a pastor who does teach properly, chapter by chapter and verse by verse so the listener gets understanding, not just a sermon.

Because what we really desire is, understanding is it not?

shepherdschapel.com...

Arnold Murray is the only Pastor who mentioned the three earth ages....and we're in the 2nd earth age....once I heard him talk about that, he most def had my attention, and I never regretted a moment of it.

Just a quick comment, God's chosen people, the Israelites [ not the same thing as the Jews which is only a remnant of one tribe and disregards the other tribes entirely ] was for specific reasons, to bring His sheep back to Him and to have His sheep spread the Gospel.

Any questions?

reply to post by Tribe27


I disagree, there are a few Jews that have become Christians, they are no longer adherents of Judaism, but they are still Jews.

Judaism

Thus a Jew who claims to be an atheist or converts to another religion is still considered by traditional Judaism to be Jewish.

As to the OP, remember that the Jews tried to make Jesus king at one point and he rejected their offer, that was not his destiny.

The Jews of the 1st century understanding of the Messiah was one of liberator warrior, freeing them from Roman rule, restoring a fully independent nation of Israel, and being it`s earthly King.
When Jesus refused to fulfill that role the Jewish clergy maneuvered his death at the hands of the Romans.

As to what modern day Judaism is still waiting for I am not so sure, different groups have different idea`s within the general umbrella of Judaism, just like Christendom has different groups within it. But since the nation of Israel is well established, maybe they will view somebody who restores Jerusalem to full Israeli control could be viewed that way.

But this comment says alot

Emet Ve-Emunah, the Conservative movement's statement of principles, states the following: Since no one can say for certain what will happen in the Messianic era each of us is free to fashion personal speculation.

So basically they don`t even know themselves.

reply to post by Theone2000




I'm not sure how much this will help you,

As far as I know, their "messiah" shows up in the fall of 2012

but their calender sez something different, so a search may uproot some odd numbers.

What is funny is to see all those Jesus loving Christians adoring the flag of Israel, a nation that basically do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.

Talk about ignorance.

Thanks for the thread.

Originally posted by gagol
What is funny is to see all those Jesus loving Christians

adoring the flag of Israel

, a nation that basically do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.

Ummm, you find it humorous that we CAN READ????

"I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you, I will curse. Through you every family on earth will be blessed." Genesis 12:3

Talk about ignorance.

Epitome of ironic statements....

Some people say I have a jew-ffro



[edit on 2-8-2010 by ChickenPie]

Originally posted by Tribe27

Originally posted by Theone2000

I'm, Jewish, German and Irish, (An American mutt!) but I got no clue on this stuff.

[edit on 12-5-2010 by Theone2000]

I always get a kick out of this, when people say they are part Jewish. You do know it is a religion right?

As for your question, it is uncertain. Just like every other mystery and uncertainty that religion and the religious dismiss with a passage from an ignorant man just like ourselves.

Actually, it really depends on you you ask!

Ask a Jew and they'll tell you one thing, ask a Christian, and if he's done his homework, he'll say both. [ race and religion, and it's not the religion of the OT either! ]

There are very sloppy teachings all over.

If one is a Christian and has read and understood the scriptures, he knows all the tribes collectively were never Jews, they were Israel, those who believed in Him and followed His laws...break His laws and you were no longer His! It was just that simple. Later the tribes split, [ House of Israel, the ten lost tribes, and the House of Judah, who went into babylonian captivity and only remants returned to Jerusalem, due to such fierce disagreements that the tribes were at sword point! Scribes had been imported [ non tribal members ] to help write scriptures...I only point that out, as Christ did not condemn scribes and pharisees without good reason.

Jews were never mentioned til II Kings....and according to Josephus, a respected Judagite historian, those returning to Jerusalem were remnants. The tribes were punished for disobeying the Law on more than one level....and were no longer pure blooded peoples of Jacob Israel.

If one studies enuf, he can tell the difference between a Judahite and a Jew...and I'll guarantee a Jew will disagree with that opinion every time.

So, who ya gonna believe, the scriptures or someone else?

The truth lays in the omissions, find the omissions and now you have a clue.

How many know there were three Adams listed in the definition in the concordances, now only one is used.....only weak excuses exist to try to explain why two were omitted, but there is yet, more omissions!

I haven't collected them all and sorted out every detail, but I see omissions, the scribes were cursed, the only thing left to figure out are the answers.

One clue for the missing adam came when I was investigating the term GENTILE...and came upon an article that said originally, "gowy" an early form of gentile in the Hebrew...

[ Hebrew word #1471 gowy (go'-ee); rarely (shortened) goy (go'-ee); apparently from the same root as 1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation; hence, a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: KJV-- Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

"nations" in the New Testament Greek:

Greek word #1484 ethnos (eth'-nos); probably from 1486; a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; specially, a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication, pagan): KJV-- Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

In our Bibles, the New Testament English words: nations, greeks, people, and heathen are all translated from the Greek word 'ethnos' and it is one of the Greek words used in the New Testament for those that are the races of the sixth day creation. ]

was attributed to the 6th day creations....my guess is that would be h119 in strongs....but for students who were convinced there was only adam [ h120 ] as is currently pushed, they can't get past that part and just go away....they refuse to believe they believed a lie or their pastor would lie to them....and they probably don't even know about the other two adams, and probably don't care, because their pastors never made it an issue....most pastors don't make issues of who the kenites are either......[ just to point out another omission, in teaching ]

we live in dangerous times and Christ warned those with ears not to be deceived, as the lies are quite subtle and can suck in almost anyone, and they exist as shadows to hounds like myself who are constantly on the lookout for missing links to the omissions, who are waiting for the light of day to be shone on them!

So, if you want answers about Judaism and know Judaism has nothing to do with Christianity, then go for it, but please don't ask a Jew to explain Christianity....it'll be a waste of your time and theirs.



[edit on 12-8-2010 by toasted]

Originally posted by DragonsDemesne
Just out of curiosity (I'm not trying to annoy anyone) if 'jewish' is only to be used to describe a religion, then what term do you use instead for people who are said to be racially Jewish? The closest I can think of is Israeli, but that doesn't quite capture it in my mind.

I would say that "Semitic" would be the best word to use, although even that would be mixing it up with the Arabs. Wikipedia defines "Jews" as an ethnoreligious group, where "Ethnoreligious communities define their ethnic identity neither exclusively by ancestral heritage nor simply by religious affiliation, but often through a combination of both", which I, personally find to be a cop-out .

The issue is complicated even more by referring to "Anti-Semitism" as being against Jews, and by calling such behaviour "racist" (note that I'm not saying that such behaviour is not wrong, just that it may possibly be labelled incorrectly). That may even be part of the cause of this. For so many centuries stereotypes of what Jews would look like (big nose, etc.), have been propagating, and the hatred of Jews in Europe in the Middle Ages (and earlier?) resulted in them being ostracised, separated, and barely tolerated, so much so that they basically kept to themselves, inter-married, and really strengthened the physical attributes of the people of the area they came from.

In this day and age, however, it shouldn't really matter, since there are Jews from many different backgrounds, and there really isn't a stereotypical Jewish "look". As mentioned by a previous poster, they can be black, asian, european, whatever.

I suppose it is all part of the bigger question- In the Hebrew bible, was God's covenant ONLY to Abraham and his bloodline (racial), or did blood not matter (as can be demonstrated by EVERYONE in Abraham's group being circumcised, regardless of relation to Abraham, i.e. religious).

My understanding is more in line with Tribe27's. You wouldn't call an American from who is ancestrally from India "half hindu, half italian", or "half indian, half catholic", you'd say "Indian-Italian" (or Hindu-Catholic if you were trying to be funny), if they don't follow any religion, even if they may still follow some customs of their Indian heritage.

Anyhow, if you ask me, all this stuff about "testing for blood" and such is somewhat disingenuous (ESPECIALLY when used as a reason for stuff like displacing Palestinians in Israel "Because genetically I have a particular genetic marker that is shared with people in the middle east"- and yeah, really sorry for bringing that into this! ). Did you know that 1 in 20 males on earth are DIRECT MALE DESCENDANTS of Genghis Khan? It doesn't matter to me in any way (aside from being a cool thing to know).

[edit on 13-8-2010 by babloyi]

reply to post by Theone2000


is that the truth? what i get from what i hear is that they think moses is the mesiah. is that true?