theophilus

I'm sure you overstated your case here. Since the Pentatuch is "part" of the OT, how can it not be "in any way" part of Judiasm. If you really meant what you said, then what is the foundaiton of your belief system: personal revelation; the Talmudic tradition?

theophilus

I'm always amused when one group is held to be ignorant of the views of another 'de facto' but the other group is sure of being perfectly knowledgeable of the first group; in fact, more knowledgable of the first group than the first grou is of itself.

It's like whites cannot understand any other racial group but every other racial group knows what it is to be white, even better than whites do and can discourse on it indefinitely.

And, of course, any Jews who believe in Jesus are not really Jews because real Jews don't believe in Jesus, don't you know.

sharon45

No, you are refering to the Torah, the Tanach has many of the same books as the OT including the first five books(Torah) within.

theophilus

[QUOTE]Originally posted by sharon45
With the quotes, they refer to anytime the Jews are without a Temple, its meaningless for why this was, that's beside the point, prayer is to replace the blood sacrifice.

This is nonsense. Why would Israel be without a temple? Only because they had been unfaithful and had been banished from the land as an act of divine judgement. There is NO basis for the idea that prayer was "to replace" blood sacrifice. Since sacrifices could ONLY be offered at the temple/tabernacle, of course they would not be able to offer sacrifices IN EXILE.
The prayer indicated in these verses is a prayer of repentance for the offenses which led to their captivity, not prayer of atonement as a replacement of the sacrifices.

I did not say sacrifices started with Israel.

You argued that Christ's death could not be a legitimate sacrifice because it did not conform to the pattern of the sacrifices established in the covenant with Israel which was NOT the origin of the concept of sacrifice.
You might consider the symbolic significance of the account of God "providing a sacrifice" when Abraham was about to offer Isaac.

And yes, not only are you attacking Judaism in your rash statements, but also all the other religions to follow it that used and abused its teachings. You can keep this up as long as you like, but if you are of any of these beliefs, its very self defeating.

No, I'm simply showing you that the OT is not immune from the kinds of criticisms you are directing at the New Testament. In case you haven't noticed, the unbelievers here are not particularly impressed with the OT record.

theophilus

Well then, your earlier statement that "the OT plays NO part" in Judiasm is completely inexplicable. If you mean (your brand of)Judiasm does not accept all the books of the OT, then that becomes a different issue. If you mean that NO Jews accept all the books of the OT, I'm sure you are incorrect. After all, the OT was not written by Christians.

If you mean that you do not use the term Old Testament or accept that there is a New Testament, I understand that.

sharon45

Not at all, the OT is a corruption of the Tanach with even added books making this not accepted by Judaism. Just because they have a lot of similar passages, only the Tanach is accepted.

Magus55

I get that incessantly on this board. Despite being born a Jew under the blood line of Abraham, being circumsized under the convenant of God, studying the Torah and Hebrew since I was five, participating in all the feasts and holidays, I'm not a Jew because I believe in Jesus as the promised Messiah. Irritates me to no end, but ignorance and hate is abundant I guess.

Magus55

Only accepted by orthodox Jews maybe, but there are more than one group of Jews you know.

sharon45

Again, not at all. When it comes to the different races, yes you are right, but when referring to Judaism, no.

Its not like Judaism has some kind of 'force field'. But when it comes to the beliefs that were created after Judaism, using and abusing its teaching for their own religious needs, it as protected as anything else in a similar attack, such as mathematics or spelling.

Ex.

Judaism is 5+5=10

christianity is 5+5=12

Just because christians don't understand Judaism, you can't change facts just by thinking so, just the same as you can't change mathematics to suit your liking.

sharon45

[QUOTE]Originally posted by theophilus

Quote:

Originally posted by sharon45 With the quotes, they refer to anytime the Jews are without a Temple, its meaningless for why this was, that's beside the point, prayer is to replace the blood sacrifice. This is nonsense. Why would Israel be without a temple? Only because they had been unfaithful and had been banished from the land as an act of divine judgement. There is NO basis for the idea that prayer was "to replace" blood sacrifice. Since sacrifices could ONLY be offered at the temple/tabernacle, of course they would not be able to offer sacrifices IN EXILE. The prayer indicated in these verses is a prayer of repentance for the offenses which led to their captivity, not prayer of atonement as a replacement of the sacrifices. I did not say sacrifices started with Israel. You argued that Christ's death could not be a legitimate sacrifice because it did not conform to the pattern of the sacrifices established in the covenant with Israel which was NOT the origin of the concept of sacrifice. You might consider the symbolic significance of the account of God "providing a sacrifice" when Abraham was about to offer Isaac. And yes, not only are you attacking Judaism in your rash statements, but also all the other religions to follow it that used and abused its teachings. You can keep this up as long as you like, but if you are of any of these beliefs, its very self defeating. No, I'm simply showing you that the OT is not immune from the kinds of criticisms you are directing at the New Testament. In case you haven't noticed, the unbelievers here are not particularly impressed with the OT record.

Israel has had two Temples destroyed, it can be said through their own fault of not being faithful enough. No matter how large the Temple was, it was a sign of center of Jewish power to others groups, destroy that center, and the people scatter.

Christ's death was not a blood sacrifice because it did not follow the rules created by Judaism. What happen before these laws were created are in history, but those before these laws were not Jews. Your christ is not trying to convert people from before Jewish history, he is trying to convert Jews. If christ really was the true Messiah, he would have followed what was prophesied in the Tanach.
It was part of Jewish belief that the Messiah would come after the second Temple was destroyed, that did not happen until around 40 years after christ's death.

And yes I fully realize that Judaism is not new to criticism, that is very clear to most. What you don't understand is having something against a belief is fine, thinking it adds to your own belief, is not.