Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Ben Masada

Replacement Theology

168 posts in this topic

REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY

Replacement Theology is as old as Christianity itself, considering that the etimology of the expression acquired its real meaning with the rise of Christianity.

Some people object to the focusing on Christianity for the reason why Replacement Theology originated, because the Jewish People was not the only ancient people with the original claim to be God's chosen People.

It's true that a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.

Christianity became the first religious organization to rise with the claim that a change had occurred in the designs of God, which would

define the rejection of the Jewish People, and resplacement with Christianity.

The classical NT document, which would give rise to this Christian policy is found in Galatians 4:21-31.

Paul would compare God's Covenant with the Jewish People as Hagar, who was Sara's slave girl, and the Jews as her son, who was rejected even to share with Isaac, the inheritance of Canaan. On

the other hand, he compares Christianity to Sara and Christians to her son Isaac.

To conclude, Paul appeals to cast out the slave girl together with her son for the obvious reason that Israel, the Jewish People, would never be an heir with the son of the one born free.

That's the picture of Replacement Theology and not simply a people claiming Divine election. A group of Interfaith Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism.

Ben

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY

Replacement Theology is as old as Christianity itself, considering that the etimology of the expression acquired its real meaning with the rise of Christianity.

Some people object to the focusing on Christianity for the reason why Replacement Theology originated, because the Jewish People was not the only ancient people with the original claim to be God's chosen People.

It's true that a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.

Christianity became the first religious organization to rise with the claim that a change had occurred in the designs of God, which would

define the rejection of the Jewish People, and resplacement with Christianity.

The classical NT document, which would give rise to this Christian policy is found in Galatians 4:21-31.

Paul would compare God's Covenant with the Jewish People as Hagar, who was Sara's slave girl, and the Jews as her son, who was rejected even to share with Isaac, the inheritance of Canaan. On

the other hand, he compares Christianity to Sara and Christians to her son Isaac.

To conclude, Paul appeals to cast out the slave girl together with her son for the obvious reason that Israel, the Jewish People, would never be an heir with the son of the one born free.

That's the picture of Replacement Theology and not simply a people claiming Divine election. A group of Interfaith Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism.

Ben

I realize there are Christians who believe in Replacement Theology; but they have had to ignore a lot of scripture to come up with that falsehood. Just because someone is blind does not mean they are dead. The Jews have been blinded by God until the fullness of the Gentiles have come in. He uses the example of an olive tree which represented the Jews and that the Gentiles are a wild branch that has been grafted in. The main olive tree did not die. The wild stock in living in it.

Abraham's Egyptian slave who bore his first son (according to the Bible) is a symbol of the LAW and how impossible it is to be saved by the LAW. Sarah is a symbol of GRACE. From Moses to Jesus and everybody in between they were under the LAW. None of them were saved by the LAW. They were saved - - - - - - but not by the LAW. (Romans 5: 20) When the LAW entered it only made sin increase. Where sin increased, GRACE did much more abound. They didn't know about this GRACE until Jesus came; but that is the only avenue they were ever saved. When Jesus paid the required price (the shedding of spotless blood of a Lamb) then this GRACE was finished. Jesus was as good as sacrificed (according to Revelations) from the foundations of the world. The actual payment did not come until the Old Testament was filled with fore shadows (prophecy in symbols and events) telling of Jesus' coming to pay for His elect.

The Jews were not replaced. They were blinded so that the Gentiles could be grafted in. When the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, then the Jews will be awakened. (Rom 11:7 & 25) -- concerning the gospel, the Jews are enemies for the Gentiles sake....but as touching the election, the Jews are beloved for the OT fathers' sake. (Romans 11: 1) Paul goes on to say, "Hath God cast away His people (the Jews)? GOD FORBID. FOR I ALSO AM AN ISRAELITE..." An elect number of Jews were blessed to see and understand GRACE. God reserved them for this because they would be writing New Testament scripture. God only dictates divine scripture to Jews.

There are 3 required holy days which have not yet been fulfilled. They are in Revelations. They will be fulfilled through the Jews as the previous 4 were.

God bless us all is my prayer

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize there are Christians who believe in Replacement Theology; but they have had to ignore a lot of scripture to come up with that falsehood. Just because someone is blind does not mean they are dead. The Jews have been blinded by God until the fullness of the Gentiles have come in. He uses the example of an olive tree which represented the Jews and that the Gentiles are a wild branch that has been grafted in. The main olive tree did not die. The wild stock in living in it.

Abraham's Egyptian slave who bore his first son (according to the Bible) is a symbol of the LAW and how impossible it is to be saved by the LAW. Sarah is a symbol of GRACE. From Moses to Jesus and everybody in between they were under the LAW. None of them were saved by the LAW. They were saved - - - - - - but not by the LAW. (Romans 5: 20) When the LAW entered it only made sin increase. Where sin increased, GRACE did much more abound. They didn't know about this GRACE until Jesus came; but that is the only avenue they were ever saved. When Jesus paid the required price (the shedding of spotless blood of a Lamb) then this GRACE was finished. Jesus was as good as sacrificed (according to Revelations) from the foundations of the world. The actual payment did not come until the Old Testament was filled with fore shadows (prophecy in symbols and events) telling of Jesus' coming to pay for His elect.

The Jews were not replaced. They were blinded so that the Gentiles could be grafted in. When the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, then the Jews will be awakened. (Rom 11:7 & 25) -- concerning the gospel, the Jews are enemies for the Gentiles sake....but as touching the election, the Jews are beloved for the OT fathers' sake. (Romans 11: 1) Paul goes on to say, "Hath God cast away His people (the Jews)? GOD FORBID. FOR I ALSO AM AN ISRAELITE..." An elect number of Jews were blessed to see and understand GRACE. God reserved them for this because they would be writing New Testament scripture. God only dictates divine scripture to Jews.

There are 3 required holy days which have not yet been fulfilled. They are in Revelations. They will be fulfilled through the Jews as the previous 4 were.

God bless us all is my prayer

I agree with the grafting of Gentiles into the tree of Judaism, but only through conversion, according to Isaiah 56:1-8. Any other method, for instance, the one of Paul's, is vandalism of Judaism by Christianity.

This rationalization of yours about being saved by grace or by the Law, is too theoretical. Let us bring it down to reality in an example. Let us assume that you are saved by grace and I am saved by the Law. Since I have in mind to be saved by the Law, I have it in my heart not to transgress against it. Since you trust that you are saved by grace, you are not under the Law. Assuming that, one day, you break it. You are taken to Court and tell the judge that you have been saved by grace. Since I did not transgress the Law, I don't even have to be taken to Court. Now, tell me, how do you think will the verdict by the judge be, to justify or to condemn you for the transgression of the Law? Probably, you expect to be justified because, according to your religious preconceived notions, you are not under the Law but grace. You may think again but in jail. Why? Because grace has no chance where the Law must be observed. Since there is no society without law, grace becomes obsolete.

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben. I am probably not going to reply to any more of you posts because I find them deliberatley, and unecessarily, confrontationist (my perception, i realise) but i would like to say this.

Neither god, nor I, are interested in whether you (or anyone else) is jewish, christian, muslim or of any other belief form or religion. God is "interested" in you as a human being. How you are, inside and out. How you think, feel and, especially, act.

He wants you to be aware of him and to be connected to him, but only because he loves you and wants the best oucomes in life for you. I have no evidence from god that he particularly cares if you are; christian, jew, etc., as long as this allows you to really be one with him.

Only belief constructs which deny god and separate him from us by our conscious intent are inhernlty limiting to a human being. Of course some are more creative and libersting than others and some work better in a practical sense but there is little to chose in this regard between the basic tenets of jusdaism and christianity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the grafting of Gentiles into the tree of Judaism, but only through conversion, according to Isaiah 56:1-8. Any other method, for instance, the one of Paul's, is vandalism of Judaism by Christianity.

This rationalization of yours about being saved by grace or by the Law, is too theoretical. Let us bring it down to reality in an example. Let us assume that you are saved by grace and I am saved by the Law. Since I have in mind to be saved by the Law, I have it in my heart not to transgress against it. Since you trust that you are saved by grace, you are not under the Law. Assuming that, one day, you break it. You are taken to Court and tell the judge that you have been saved by grace. Since I did not transgress the Law, I don't even have to be taken to Court. Now, tell me, how do you think will the verdict by the judge be, to justify or to condemn you for the transgression of the Law? Probably, you expect to be justified because, according to your religious preconceived notions, you are not under the Law but grace. You may think again but in jail. Why? Because grace has no chance where the Law must be observed. Since there is no society without law, grace becomes obsolete.

Ben

Isaiah 64:6

6 We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment.

We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Romans 3:9-31

9What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10as it is written:

“None is righteous, no, not one;

11 no one understands;

no one seeks for God.

12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;

no one does good,

not even one.”

13 “Their throat is an open grave;

they use their tongues to deceive.”

“The venom of asps is under their lips.”

14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”

15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;

16 in their paths are ruin and misery,

17 and the way of peace they have not known.”

18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

19Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20For by works of the law no human beingc will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

21But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

27Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

The Law does not create righteous men, it serves to demonstrate our unrighteousness, for what man has upheld the law, completely and utterly, all his life without once falling to sin?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY

Replacement Theology is as old as Christianity itself, considering that the etimology of the expression acquired its real meaning with the rise of Christianity.

Some people object to the focusing on Christianity for the reason why Replacement Theology originated, because the Jewish People was not the only ancient people with the original claim to be God's chosen People.

It's true that a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.

Christianity became the first religious organization to rise with the claim that a change had occurred in the designs of God, which would define the rejection of the Jewish People, and resplacement with Christianity.

Interesting OP Ben

Can you provide more information on the bolded parts of your post? IE - More about the other ancient people with the original claim to be Gods chosen...and more info on the rejection of the Jewish people... I feel this is true...

Thanks

Edited by Beckys_Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting OP Ben

Can you provide more information on the bolded parts of your post? IE - More about the other ancient people with the original claim to be Gods chosen...and more info on the rejection of the Jewish people... I feel this is true...

Thanks

There is a significant part of the modern Christian church that adhere to this doctrine. I believe it is un Biblical and dangerous. God made an irrevocable contract with Abraham and I don't think He breaks His word. The Jews/Israel are still in God's plans for the end times and the world to come. They are His chosen and have paid dearly for the privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a significant part of the modern Christian church that adhere to this doctrine. I believe it is un Biblical and dangerous. God made an irrevocable contract with Abraham and I don't think He breaks His word. The Jews/Israel are still in God's plans for the end times and the world to come. They are His chosen and have paid dearly for the privilege.

Thats nice thanks.. but I will wait and see what info Ben posts on Gods chosen.. It was him that raised it.. But hey thanks for the above and showing what you too beleive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben. I am probably not going to reply to any more of you posts because I find them deliberatley, and unecessarily, confrontationist (my perception, i realise) but i would like to say this.

Neither god, nor I, are interested in whether you (or anyone else) is jewish, christian, muslim or of any other belief form or religion. God is "interested" in you as a human being. How you are, inside and out. How you think, feel and, especially, act.

He wants you to be aware of him and to be connected to him, but only because he loves you and wants the best oucomes in life for you. I have no evidence from god that he particularly cares if you are; christian, jew, etc., as long as this allows you to really be one with him.

Only belief constructs which deny god and separate him from us by our conscious intent are inhernlty limiting to a human being. Of course some are more creative and libersting than others and some work better in a practical sense but there is little to chose in this regard between the basic tenets of jusdaism and christianity.

Mr. Walker, the point here is not from God to us but from us to God. The best way to serve God is to serve one another. What we are doing here is discussing what we think about God and how to live in harmony among ourselves. Perhaps, you are frustrated with and how the Bible speaks about the Jewish People. The men who wrote the Bible were inspired, but it was written in the human language. The problem is that you take the Scriptures literally, which becomes the reason for the contension between peoples. The problem between Judaism and Christianity was raised by Christianity which

rose after Judaism. It was not there before.

Ben

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Isaiah 64:6

6 We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment.

We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Romans 3:9-31

9What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10as it is written:

None is righteous, no, not one;

11 no one understands;

no one seeks for God.

12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;

no one does good,

not even one.

13 Their throat is an open grave;

they use their tongues to deceive.

The venom of asps is under their lips.

14 Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.

15 Their feet are swift to shed blood;

16 in their paths are ruin and misery,

17 and the way of peace they have not known.

18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

19Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20For by works of the law no human beingc will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

21But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show Gods righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

27Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since God is onewho will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

The Law does not create righteous men, it serves to demonstrate our unrighteousness, for what man has upheld the law, completely and utterly, all his life without once falling to sin?

There is an enormous difference between sin and insurrection. Sin is a mistake. We sin, and if we repent and obey, even if our sins are scarlet red they will become as white as snow. (Isa. 1:18,19) All we have to do is to repent and return to obedience of God's Law. Now, insurrection is to reject God' Law. That's what dooms one to separation from God. That's when we break God's Covenant. Every one sins, but not every one quits about God.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you might misunderstand the relationship between the Law and grace. The following statements are made out of my understanding of Scripture.

This rationalization of yours about being saved by grace or by the Law, is too theoretical.

The Law exists to demonstrate that no man can obey all of the Law all the time. The Law doesn't bring salvation; it only brings condemnation for which sacrifices had to be made. Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice, satisfying the condemnation of the Law for all time. The sacrifice of Jesus was made through grace.

Let us bring it down to reality in an example. Let us assume that you are saved by grace and I am saved by the Law. Since I have in mind to be saved by the Law, I have it in my heart not to transgress against it. Since you trust that you are saved by grace, you are not under the Law.

Christians are not under the condemnation of the Law. However, the guidelines for living a holy life, which are given in the New Testament, fulfill many of the requirements of the Law. The Law emphasizes a holy life; so does Christianity.

Assuming that, one day, you break it. You are taken to Court and tell the judge that you have been saved by grace. Since I did not transgress the Law, I don't even have to be taken to Court.

How are you defining the Law in these statements? The Laws found in the Old Testament, given to Moses by God for Israel; or the laws which the governments of our nations enforce? Salvation by grace does not give freedom to break governmental law; instead, Christians are told to obey the laws of the government.

Now, tell me, how do you think will the verdict by the judge be, to justify or to condemn you for the transgression of the Law?

This sentence particularly confuses me, since our judges do not look to the Old Testament Law; they look to governmental law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Mr. Walker, the point here is not from God to us but from us to God. The best way to serve God is to serve one another. What we are doing here is discussing what we think about God and how to live in harmony among ourselves. Perhaps, you are frustrated with and how the Bible speaks about the Jewish People. The men who wrote the Bible were inspired, but it was written in the human language. The problem is that you take the Scriptures literally, which becomes the reason for the contension between peoples. The problem between Judaism and Christianity was raised by Christianity which

rose after Judaism. It was not there before.

Ben

"My problem" is that you see a conflict between judaism and christianity. I do not. I see christianity as an extension/evolution of judaism, which allowed god to develop a relationship with a much larger number of people, via a more "inclusive" theology and religion.

Judaism is a very difficult religion to live by, without a good cultural heritage in it to motivate one, but anyone from any background can convert to christianity, and live by its basic precepts, and that is why, historically, so many did so. it is perhaps the most accesible religion ever created. But more than that, both of these religions are just two of many ways for a person to come to god.

I do not even see the problem which preoccupies your mind. I could as easily have chosen judaism as christianity for my relationship with god (or muslim or buddhism ) but 95% of people where i live are christians, and the other 5% atheists, so i nominated/chose christianity.

But i live by the bible, both old and new testaments, adapting the old "rules" into the 21st century. Eg i freed my slaves long ago :innocent: but i dont eat pork, shell fish etc or any of the other proscribed food because medical science tells me they are not as healthy as a biblical diet. In addition i dont smoke drink or take drugs, in order to enhance my physical relationship with god. I keep the sabbath from sunset fri to sunset sat, both as a day of rest and spiritual renewal and as a sign of my personal covenant with god.

Judaism's pre-eminent position, historically, is a matter of record and of pride. The jews transformed humanity and human history One of my favourite books is "The gifts of the jews. How a tribe of desert nomads changed the way every one thinks and feels." by Thomas Cahill

I have no problem with that. Christ was a jew. All the first christians were jews. That form of christianty is the most pure and uncorrupted form. But he was also a human being, and it is our humanity which counts in our relationship with god, not our relgion.

I just think your tone suggests anger born from something like envy or frustration a thow christianity, in your mind, has usurped the role of judaism.

I can understand that. My chosen form of christianity is followed by very few christians. It would be easy to get angry at catholics or even other protestant denominations who have changed the original biblical truths.

Easy, but pointless and non productive. What I have works for me, and enables a close interpersonal relationship with a real, powerful, and loving god. How can i be envious of any other form of faith. It is not my place to make judgements on how others live with god. That is between them and god.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A group of Interfaith Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism.

Buddhism which is a replacement theology of Hinduism does not dictate that Hindus be hated any more than Christianity as a replacement theology of the former pilgrimage based sects of ancient Israel require them to hate modern Jews (which is a replacement theology of the Hebrew beliefs of the ancient Pharisees).

I can only conclude that any scholars that determined Christianity is the practice of antisemitism were either consumed themselves with hatred towards Christians or consumed with politically correct appeasement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think that you might misunderstand the relationship between the Law and grace. The following statements are made out of my understanding of Scripture.

The Law was given by the grace of God. Read Psalm 119.

The Law exists to demonstrate that no man can obey all of the Law all the time. The Law doesn't bring salvation; it only brings condemnation for which sacrifices had to be made. Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice, satisfying the condemnation of the Law for all time. The sacrifice of Jesus was made through grace.

I disagree with you. IMHO, the Law exists to demonstrate that we cannot coexist peacefully in society without the Law.

Christians are not under the condemnation of the Law. However, the guidelines for living a holy life, which are given in the New Testament, fulfill many of the requirements of the Law. The Law emphasizes a holy life; so does Christianity.

The Law does not condemn. We condemn ourselves by transgressing the Law. The problem with the NT about the Law is that, since the Law was given to the world through the Jewish People, Paul had to replace the Law in order to replace the People. That's what we call, Replacement Theology. (Gal. 4:21-31)

How are you defining the Law in these statements? The Laws found in the Old Testament, given to Moses by God for Israel or the laws which the governments of our nations enforce? Salvation by grace does not give freedom to break governmental law; instead, Christians are told to obey the laws of the government.

There is no difference. Laws, in general, are given for the common good of all peoples.

This sentence particularly confuses me, since our judges do not look to the Old Testament Law; they look to governmental law.

The general pattern of the laws is based in the Law given in the Tanach. In many countries, it is still a custom to swear with one's hand on the Bible, under penalty of perjure, "to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth; so help me God."

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul did not replace the law. Instead, Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the law.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." (Jesus speaking in Matthew 5:17)

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. (Galatians 3:10-14)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"My problem" is that you see a conflict between judaism and christianity. I do not. I see christianity as an extension/evolution of judaism, which allowed god to develop a relationship with a much larger number of people, via a more "inclusive" theology and religion.

What about if it was the other way around? I mean, if Judaism decided to replace Christian Theology with the Jewish Theology? No conflict? Do you have any idea how many thousands of Jews have been murdered by the Church throughout History because the majority of us have refused to adopt the Christian Theology? Still no conflict? But you see Christianity as an extension of Judaism. Can you quote for me in the Tanach about a Jew who is claimed to have been born of God with an earthly woman? I don't think so. Why? Because this is possible only in Greek Mythology, and not in Judaism, the Faith of Jesus. No reason for conflict, right?

Judaism is a very difficult religion to live by, without a good cultural heritage in it to motivate one, but anyone from any background can convert to christianity, and live by its basic precepts, and that is why, historically, so many did so. it is perhaps the most accesible religion ever created. But more than that, both of these religions are just two of many ways for a person to come to god.

Judaism is for the Jews. Therefore, instead of difficult, it is a joy to live by. But according to you, Christianity is a "good cultural heritage." I agree with you but for Christians and not for the Jews. But those from us who have deserted Judaism for Christianity, have placed themselves within the prophecy of Hosea 4:6. "My People perish for lack of knowledge."

I do not even see the problem which preoccupies your mind. I could as easily have chosen judaism as christianity for my relationship with god (or muslim or buddhism ) but 95% of people where i live are christians, and the other 5% atheists, so i nominated/chose christianity.

It means that you have chosen Christianity because of the sheer number; 95%? I thought you were seeking on the basis of the Truth, which is not always with the majority.

But i live by the bible, both old and new testaments, adapting the old "rules" into the 21st century. Eg i freed my slaves long ago :innocent: but i dont eat pork, shell fish etc or any of the other proscribed food because medical science tells me they are not as healthy as a biblical diet. In addition i dont smoke drink or take drugs, in order to enhance my physical relationship with god. I keep the sabbath from sunset fri to sunset sat, both as a day of rest and spiritual renewal and as a sign of my personal covenant with god.

So, you "freed your slaves long ago?" My gosh! You must be quite an old person! Almost 200 years old! The commandment to keep the Sabbath holy is not part of the Noahide Covenant. What covenant are you talking about?

Judaism's pre-eminent position, historically, is a matter of record and of pride. The jews transformed humanity and human history One of my favourite books is "The gifts of the jews. How a tribe of desert nomads changed the way every one thinks and feels." by Thomas Cahill

Thank you for that acknowledgement but... why did you choose Christianity? Oh, yes, for being Christians 95%. Amazing!

I have no problem with that. Christ was a jew. All the first christians were jews. That form of christianty is the most pure and uncorrupted form. But he was also a human being, and it is our humanity which counts in our relationship with god, not our relgion.

Yes, Jesus was a Jew, but why would Paul make of him a Greek demigod if there is no such a thing in Judaism? Hence, Replacement Theology. Christianity started with Paul in the city of Antioch, about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. Read Acts 11:26. Therefore, Jesus never even dreamed that Christianity would ever rise.

I just think your tone suggests anger born from something like envy or frustration a thow christianity, in your mind, has usurped the role of judaism.

Envy!!! What is there to envy in a religion that has murdered millions of Jews throughout History by way of pogroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition and the Holocaust? And you can't see any need for conflict here, right?

I can understand that. My chosen form of christianity is followed by very few christians. It would be easy to get angry at catholics or even other protestant denominations who have changed the original biblical truths.

Christianity is Christianity. There is no difference between one denomination and the other. No Christian can open his or her mouth from the pulpit without preaching Replacement Theology. I can see this on TV Evangelism.

Easy, but pointless and non productive. What I have works for me, and enables a close interpersonal relationship with a real, powerful, and loving god. How can i be envious of any other form of faith. It is not my place to make judgements on how others live with god. That is between them and god.

Here, I agree with you. If Christianity ever decides that Jesus was not a Jew but a Greek, I'll have no longer need to go on with this discussion.

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhism which is a replacement theology of Hinduism does not dictate that Hindus be hated any more than Christianity as a replacement theology of the former pilgrimage based sects of ancient Israel require them to hate modern Jews (which is a replacement theology of the Hebrew beliefs of the ancient Pharisees).

I can only conclude that any scholars that determined Christianity is the practice of antisemitism were either consumed themselves with hatred towards Christians or consumed with politically correct appeasement.

Jews do not hate Christians. We just resent the millions of Jews we have lost to Christianity because of the false accusations of "deicide."

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul did not replace the law. Instead, Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the law.

Of course not! But he promoted a change in the Law. Read Hebrews 7:12. He also preached freedom from the Law. Read Romans 7:1-12.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." ( Matthew 5:17)

How about verses 18 and 19? Jesus continued and said that the fulfilling of the Law was upon every Jew. Just as he did.

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. (Galatians 3:10-14)

The Law was given by the grace of God, so that we could live in peace with each other in society. If we break the Law, but want to set things right with God, all we have to do, according to Isaiah 1:18,19, is to repent and obey. Then, our sins, from scarlet red will become as white as snow. No one needs to die for another.

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Jews do not hate Christians. We just resent the millions of Jews we have lost to Christianity because of the false accusations of "deicide."

Ben

I can only laugh at this. Don't you realize that christians never blamed the Jews for THAT?

Oh many used it as an excuse, but I doubt you would find one who actually believed it, their intents were uniquely material. They wanted the wealth of the Jewish people. They wanted to destroy what they percieved as a secret socity of individuals who maniplulated the world through politics and finance. It was never about Judaism vs christianity. It was always about power and greed.

Let me ask you a straightforward question... Of the 265 Popes christianity has had over the ages (according to their numbers, not mine), how many were real christians and not power hungry, money grabbing warmongers?

Edited by Jor-el
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Masada,

What is your interpretation of Isaiah 53:6?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What about if it was the other way around? I mean, if Judaism decided to replace Christian Theology with the Jewish Theology? No conflict? Do you have any idea how many thousands of Jews have been murdered by the Church throughout History because the majority of us have refused to adopt the Christian Theology? Still no conflict? But you see Christianity as an extension of Judaism. Can you quote for me in the Tanach about a Jew who is claimed to have been born of God with an earthly woman? I don't think so. Why? Because this is possible only in Greek Mythology, and not in Judaism, the Faith of Jesus. No reason for conflict, right?

Judaism is for the Jews. Therefore, instead of difficult, it is a joy to live by. But according to you, Christianity is a "good cultural heritage." I agree with you but for Christians and not for the Jews. But those from us who have deserted Judaism for Christianity, have placed themselves within the prophecy of Hosea 4:6. "My People perish for lack of knowledge."

It means that you have chosen Christianity because of the sheer number; 95%? I thought you were seeking on the basis of the Truth, which is not always with the majority.

So, you "freed your slaves long ago?" My gosh! You must be quite an old person! Almost 200 years old! The commandment to keep the Sabbath holy is not part of the Noahide Covenant. What covenant are you talking about?

Thank you for that acknowledgement but... why did you choose Christianity? Oh, yes, for being Christians 95%. Amazing!

Yes, Jesus was a Jew, but why would Paul make of him a Greek demigod if there is no such a thing in Judaism? Hence, Replacement Theology. Christianity started with Paul in the city of Antioch, about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. Read Acts 11:26. Therefore, Jesus never even dreamed that Christianity would ever rise.

Envy!!! What is there to envy in a religion that has murdered millions of Jews throughout History by way of pogroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition and the Holocaust? And you can't see any need for conflict here, right?

Christianity is Christianity. There is no difference between one denomination and the other. No Christian can open his or her mouth from the pulpit without preaching Replacement Theology. I can see this on TV Evangelism.

Here, I agree with you. If Christianity ever decides that Jesus was not a Jew but a Greek, I'll have no longer need to go on with this discussion.

Ben

Some problem with the new site is making it impossible to break up your post and address each point separately, so I'll start at the top.

I am not interested in human history in regards to a relationship with god A lot more protestants and other sects have been killed by catholics than jews, but i dont get uset about that either. Those are human mistakes They do not connect to a person's relationship with god.

Christianity IS an historical evolution from judaism,however you feel about that. Judaism was itself an historical evolution of huma theology, and a great step forward in mans relationship with god, itself. It grew out of earlier historical experiences and reflects the hebrews captivity in babylon and egypt. My point was that, along with ALL religions, the point is to become one with god. There is no conflict in that point, aim, or desire. A person can become one with god as jew, a muslim, a christian, or just about any form of belief.

The jews have about 4000 plus years of religious cultural heritage. Christians only a couple of thousand. But both are valid. Same with muslims who have even less, or for older and younger faiths

. Christianity is an inclusive religon both from its origins and from the way it has evolved to encompass many ways of life. Judaism is exclusive and thus more difficult to live by. In both cases one can just go through the motions or actualy live by the religious culture of the faith

My point was, that if christianity had not evolved from judaism there would not be many more jews in the world today than there are now, but a lot of people may never have encountered god.They came to god via the nature of christianity, because christianity made them "welcome" and made god accessible to many races cultures etc. I dont have much time for exclusivist believers, from any religion.

God came to me as he came to moses and abraham. I did not need a religious faith or form to believe in him. I chose christianity as culturally appropriateIif i had lived in an islamic culture i would have followed islam .If I lived in a jewish culture i would have become a jew, God does not require ANY religious form

A man can live with god, alone on a mountain top. But, if i was a jew i would have to travel 400 miles to worship. (and 400 miles return) If i was a muslim only 150.(and 150 to return) As a christian i can if I chose go to anyone of a dozen churches and groups in my town, and walk to them in 5 minutes.

God does not care. He and I are always together. But as a human i enjoy the company and interaction with other people who know, or believe in, god.

My understanding is that jewish believers continue to keep the sabbath as a part of their eternal covenant with god. However, as with christian denominations, there may be differences within judaism. The sabbath was instituted in genesis. before the 10 commandments were written down, I have chosen to think that it applies to all humans including me. I choose to keep ALL the commandments; from love of god, and because of their social good, including the sabbath. It gives a day of rest, reflection, meditation, and time to spend with god without work. It allows me time to interconnect with god and with the natural environment of which god and I are integral parts..

While jesus preached and taught to a small group of jews he SPOKE to any human from then until today. That is clear in his words. They are for anyone who is human. He gives a way of life that works for individuals and societies today. Paul did the world a great favour by extending christs teachings out to the gentiles. It doesnt displace or replace judaism, it adds an evolved dimension to human spirituality. If you think judaism is the only legitimate way to worship god, you are wrong. Nor is christianity. But it seems you are more miffed by the "displacement" of "your" religion by christianity than you are concerned about god's need to connect to people.

History doesnt work like that. The world would never have been "occupied" by people of the jewish faith, even if christianity had not come along. It is possible that a wide range of religions, such as the greco/roman pantheon, might have survived, but given the nature of religious conflict it is more likely that another roman religion would have grown up as part of the roman empire and displaced the minor religions. Christianity acted as a pacifying and unifying force for over a thousand years in europe and many historians acknolwedge it stopped much of the national, racial, and other conflicts of europe in that time.

ANd so another faith would have evolved to do the same job and, being european based, it would have spread out in the period of european colonisation, and taken over the world as christianity did.

No i cant see any need for religious based conflict, ever. ( Unless some cult starts sacrificing babies.)

There is only one universal god. Humans can worship it as they wish. You are ignorant if you do not understand, or know of, the very deep divisions in christianity. You are aware of the centuries of religious based wars in europe? The millions killed within christianity, the hatred and antipathy still felt by some, in places like Ireland? My form of christianity is much closer to judaism than it is to catholicism, for example. Thats because original christianity was almost identical to the judaism of the time. Christ preached the same message as a rabbi from only a generation or two prior to his life, and probalby learned it as a child.

But jesus WAS a jew. Paul, and later the romans, hellenised some of his concepts and teachings but jesus arose from, and was part of, the historical context of judaism. How could he be anything else? I cant be an american. I cant even be a victorian. I am a product of my home town, my culture, society etc/ I am what i am (both circumcised and a believer in parental discipline and the benefit of a stable marriage) because i was born in the time and place I was.

This relates to my comment about slaves The law on slaves never applied to me, because i was born into a time and place where slavery did not exist, but the laws of god DO apply, no matter what time one lives in, because they are laws about the nature of humanity, and that evolves only very slowly, if at all.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I can only laugh at this. Don't you realize that christians never blamed the Jews for THAT?

Oh many used it as an excuse, but I doubt you would find one who actually believed it, their intents were uniquely material. They wanted the wealth of the Jewish people. They wanted to destroy what they percieved as a secret socity of individuals who maniplulated the world through politics and finance. It was never about Judaism vs christianity. It was always about power and greed.

Let me ask you a straightforward question... Of the 265 Popes christianity has had over the ages (according to their numbers, not mine), how many were real christians and not power hungry, money grabbing warmongers?

Hey Jorel, I am aware of that method to try to fit the text according to the context. If the evils of Christianity are pointed out, the champions immediately come to the rescue by denying that those who perpetrated the evil brought to their attention were not real Christians but had a different agenda in mind. If the deed is good, silence is the reaction of approval.

Now, with regarding to your statement above, that Christians NEVER blamed the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, I am much obliged to thank you for the confirmation of my views that the guy who wrote that speech in Acts 2 was not a Jewish person nor a Christian one. Therefore, he was not Peter. And, as you say that Christians have NEVER blamed the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, who was that guy who said: "You who are Jews, indeed all of you in Jerusalem! Listen to what I have to say (Acts 2:14) and then, in verse 36, he charged the Jews with having crucified Jesus. This is a strong evidence that Christians did not at that time existed. That they started with Paul, according to Acts 11:26 in the city of Antioch, when the disciples of Paul were called Christians for the first time.

Of course, you cannot accept such a report, because it would be tantamount to a collapse of Christianity. Well, if Logic won't cause that collapse here, contradiction will. Contradictions serve only to discredit the status of any book which is claimed to have been Divinely inspired.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, with regarding to your statement above, that Christians NEVER blamed the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, I am much obliged to thank you for the confirmation of my views that the guy who wrote that speech in Acts 2 was not a Jewish person nor a Christian one. Therefore, he was not Peter. And, as you say that Christians have NEVER blamed the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, who was that guy who said: "You who are Jews, indeed all of you in Jerusalem! Listen to what I have to say (Acts 2:14) and then, in verse 36, he charged the Jews with having crucified Jesus.

Acts 2:36 isn't "blaming" the Jews or passing judgment on them or finding fault with them. It merely states a fact, that the crucifixion of Jesus was called for by the Jews. In the context of that passage, Peter is proclaiming the divinity of Jesus, not condemning the Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Given how wide the umbrella called "Christianity" is, one would have to be insane to ascertain that "Christians" don't believe that Christianity replaced Judaism. If one looks hard enough one will find "Christians" who believe just about anything one looks for.

Having said that, what I think we can say is that the Bible does not teach that Christianity replaced Judaism. What the Bible does seem to teach is that Israel consistently broke the covenant that had been established between them and God, and although God has never stopped claiming Israel as His people, the people of Israel replaced the true covenant with religion. We see that God esablished a new covenant which is not limited just to Israel, but includes anyone and everyone who will acknowledge that Jesus's death is the only true and complete payment for their sins, and the sacrifice is offered to all as an act of grace by God.

What was "replaced" in the New Testament was religiosity--ritual, dogma and adherence to man-made religious laws and regulations--with true spirituality. We see the religion that had replaced a true adherence to the Law, shown to be the opposite of what God was seeking. Although we see this rejection happen to Judaism, that is only because of the focus on Israel throughout Scripture, but really, what Scripture shows is a rejection of ALL religiosity, a replacement of ALL religiosity with a true and humble spiritual walk.

Edited by IamsSon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ben Masada,

What is your interpretation of Isaiah 53:6?

Here is how I interpret Isaiah 53:6:

"We had all gone astray like sheep, each following his own way; but the Lord laid upon him the guilt of us all." The pronoun "we" here is a reference to the People of Judah. They had all gone astray like sheep when, at the time king Ahaz decided to reject God's Covenant and establish one with Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, so that he could fight Samaria and Damscus that were at the edge of a war against Judah, a war that Ahaz was sure he would lose. With the covenant with Assyria meant also to accept the Baal cult of the Assyrians; so much so that Ahaz would even offer his firstborn son in burning sacrifice to Molech. (Isa. 8:17; 2 Kings 16:7-19) It was a time of confusion among the people of Judah, They would really behave like sheep in panic, each following his own way.

Isaiah was a Judahite prophet with the mission to prophesy to Israel in the North. Hence why he said, "We had all gone astray like sheep." And how about the expression, "But the Lord laid upon him the guilt of us all?" Due to God's promise that, on behalf of David, He would confirm Judah to remain as a lamp forever in Jerusalem, according to I Kings 11:36. The judgment that Judah had been doomed fell upon Israel instead, according to Isaiah 9:7. The doom was that Judah had to be Divinely rejected for having rejected God's Covenant. But Israel was rejected instead, while Judah was confirmed, according to Psalm 78:67-69.Therefore, the guilt of us all (meaning those of Judah) was laid upon him (Israel) so that Judah would remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jer. 31:35-39)

Please, check the quotations for a better understanding of this interpretation. It is kind of hard to understand if you don't.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.