Christians got it wrong?(Don't get offended, If you do I won't give a F***) :D

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • texasmade
    Member
    • Jan 2009
    • 4159

    Christians got it wrong?(Don't get offended, If you do I won't give a F***) :D

    http://rodneyalways.tumblr.com/post/696988532


    Despite my love affair with literature, I hardly ever find myself on the scribbling end of one of these tools of self-expression that Facebook/Tumblr/Twitter/Blogger has equipped us with for more than the time it takes to post a link and think of an insightful yet ambiguous caption. Suddenly, however, I’ve been urged by some unseen force to denote along this format something, a work very close to me. A document I spent nearly the entire first semester working on, for the sole purpose of elucidating my beliefs that, to some, seem complicated. I am not a Christian. I don’t know why I feel the urge to apologize for this fact, maybe because the system in place here in America raises eyebrows at the puppets whose limbs aren’t juggled as easily as the other more flexible patrons of this Christian nation. Contrary to popular opinion, I am no Jewish (verbatim). I exercise and hold fast to many beliefs of the biblical Israelites. Some may figure, ‘well so do the Jews, no?’ You’ve answered your own question, inquisitors. No. Modern-day Judaism, yes, makes an attempt to pattern their belief system based on the faith and practices of the Hebrews, however they also rely heavily on the teachings of the Talmud, a post-babylonian captivity compilation of oral tradition, commentary and bastardized hybrid mythologies, the Midrash, a series of analysis that view the Word of the Most High as a merited piece of literature comparable to “similar” ancient works such as the Iliad or the Epic of Gilgamesh, and in many unfortunate cases, the Kabbalah, Babylonian-Khazarian-Jewis h mysticism that is contrary to the Hebrews’ aversion of the Dark Arts and unholy practices of questionable origin. I worship the Most High. Period. I in no way make shameless attempts, characterized by Christian, Jews and Muslins, to convert others whose opinions differ into my line of existence. I attempt to enlighten others, but for the most part, I’ve designated myself a shepherd to those who inquire, those who seek, and those whose beliefs are revealed to me. Nevertheless, in an attempt to shed light on what it is I understand, not believe for belief assumes unfaltering, unquestioning dedication, I have created this note. And if you have the time, which many of you may not, please, seek in what I have posted, your own ENHANCED understanding.

    as always,
    Peace, Love and Humanity
    rodneyalways



    It is important to understand why I don’t believe in Jesus. The purpose is not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify my position. The more data that’s available, the better-informed choices people can make about their spiritual path. I do not accept Jesus as the messiah because: 1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies. 2) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah. 3) Biblical verses “referring” to Jesus are mistranslations. 4) Jewish belief is based on national revelation. At the end of this article, we will examine these additional topics: 5) Christianity contradicts original theology6) Jews and Gentiles7) Bringing the Messiah

    1) JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES: what is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will: A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28). B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6). C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: “God will be King over all the world — on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One” (Zechariah 14:9). The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled none of these messianic prophecies. Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright, and no concept of a second coming exists.

    2) JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH:
    A. MESSIAH AS A PROPHET: Jesus was not a prophet. Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry. During the time of Ezra (circa 300 BCE), when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets — Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Jesus appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended. B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID: the Messiah must be descended on his father’s side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father — and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father’s side from King David!
    C. TORAH OBSERVANCE: the Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvoth remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)THROUGHOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT, JESUS CONTRADICTS THE TORAH and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (See John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37)

    3) MISTRANSLATED VERSES “REFERRING” TO JESUS: biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text — which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.
    A. VIRGIN BIRTH: the Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an “alma” as giving birth. The word “alma” has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as “virgin.” This accords Jesus’ birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.
    B. CRUCIFIXION: The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: “Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet.” The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word “gouged.” Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: “They pierced my hands and feet.”
    C. SUFFERING SERVANT: Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the “suffering servant.” In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews (“Israel”) are regarded as one unit. The Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun. Ironically, Isaiah’s prophecies of persecution refer in part to the 11th century when Jews were tortured and killed by Crusaders who acted in the name of Jesus. From where did these mistranslations stem? St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, wrote: “A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire.”

    4) JEWISH BELIEF IS BASED SOLELY ON NATIONAL REVELATION: of the 15,000 religions in human history; only Judaism bases its belief on national revelation — i.e. God speaking to the entire nation. If God is going to start a religion, it makes sense He’ll tell everyone, not just one person. Judaism, unique among all of the world’s major religions, does not rely on “claims of miracles” as the basis for its religion. In fact, the Bible says that God sometimes grants the power of “miracles” to charlatans, in order to test Jewish loyalty to the Torah (Deut. 13:4). Maimonides states (Foundations of Torah, ch. 8): The Jews did not believe in Moses, our teacher, because of the miracles he performed. Whenever anyone’s belief is based on seeing miracles, he has lingering doubts, because it is possible the miracles were performed through magic or sorcery. All of the miracles performed by Moses in the desert were because they were necessary, and not as proof of his prophesy. What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others… as it says, “Face to face, God spoke with you…” The Torah also states: “God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us — who are all here alive today.” (Deut. 5:3)Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.
  • texasmade
    Member
    • Jan 2009
    • 4159

    #2
    5) CHRISTIANITY CONTRADICTS JEWISH THEOLOGY: the following theological points apply primarily to the Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination, and the one most familiar to the Western world.
    A. GOD AS Three? The Catholic idea of Trinity breaks God into three separate beings: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19). Contrast this to the Shema, the basis of Jewish belief: “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE” (Deut. 6:4). Jews declare the Shema every day, while writing it on doorposts (Mezuzah), and binding it to the hand and head (Tefillin). This statement of God’s One-ness is the first words a Jewish child is taught to say, and the last words uttered before a Jew dies. In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry — one of the three cardinal sins that a Jew should rather give up his life than transgress. This explains why during the Inquisitions and throughout history, Jews gave up their lives rather than convert.
    B. MAN AS GOD? Christians believe that God came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). Maimonides devotes most of the “Guide for the Perplexed” to the fundamental idea that God is incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. God is Eternal, above time. He is Infinite, beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: “God is not a mortal” (Numbers 23:19). Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, and will not possess supernatural qualities. In fact, an individual is alive in every generation with the capacity to step into the role of the Messiah. (See Maimonides - Laws of Kings 11:3)
    C. INTERMEDIARY FOR PRAYER? The Catholic belief is that prayer must be directed through an intermediary — i.e. confessing one’s sins to a priest. Jesus himself is an intermediary, as Jesus said: “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” In Judaism, prayer is a totally private matter, between each individual and God. As the Bible says: “God is near to all who call unto Him” (Psalms 145:18). Further, the Ten Commandments state: “You shall have no other gods BEFORE ME,” meaning that it is forbidden to set up a mediator between God and man. (See Maimonides - Laws of Idolatry ch. 1)
    D. INVOLVEMENT IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD: catholic doctrine often treats the physical world as an evil to be avoided. Mary, the holiest woman, is portrayed as a virgin. Priests and nuns are celibate. And monasteries are in remote, secluded locations. By contrast, Judaism believes that God created the physical world not to frustrate us, but for our pleasure. Jewish spirituality comes through grappling with the mundane world in a way that uplifts and elevates. Sex in the proper context is one of the holiest acts we can perform. Jewish rabbinical schools teach how to live amidst the bustle of commercial activity. Jews don’t retreat from life, we elevate it.

    6) JEWS AND GENTILES: Judaism does not demand that everyone convert to the religion. The Torah of Moses is a truth for all humanity, whether Jewish or not. King Solomon asked God to heed the prayers of non-Jews who come to the Holy Temple (Kings I 8:41-43). The prophet Isaiah refers to the Temple as a “House for all nations.” The Temple service during Sukkoth featured 70 bull offerings, corresponding to the 70 nations of the world. Jews have never actively sought converts to Judaism because the Torah prescribes a righteous path for gentiles to follow, known as the “Seven Laws of Noah.” Maimonides explains that any human being who faithfully observes these basic moral laws earns a proper place in heaven.

    7) BRINGING THE MESSIAH: Maimonides states that the popularity of Christianity (and Islam) is part of God’s plan to spread the ideals of Torah throughout the world. This moves society closer to a perfected state of morality and toward a greater understanding of God. All this is in preparation for the Messianic age. Indeed, the world is in desperate need of Messianic redemption. War and pollution threaten our planet; ego and confusion erode family life. To the extent we are aware of the problems of society, is the extent we will yearn for redemption. How can we hasten the coming of the Messiah? The best way is to love all humanity generously, to keep the mitzvoth of the Torah (as best we can), and to encourage others to do so as well.


    And just in case the above is not clear enough:
    Exodus 4:22, 23 “… Thus says the Most High: Israel is My first-born son.”
    Exodus 20:3 “… You shall have no gods before me.”
    Deuteronomy 6:4 “… The Most High is our God, the Most High alone.”
    Deuteronomy 24:16 “… Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”
    1st Kings 8:60 “… The Most High alone is God, there is no other.”
    2nd Kings 14:6 “… Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”
    2nd Kings 19:19 “… All the kingdoms of the earth know that You alone, O Most High, are God.”
    2nd Chronicles 25:4 “… But every man shall die for his own sin.”
    Job 14:14 “… If a man die, shall he live again?”
    Psalms 68:4 “… Extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name, YAH.”
    Proverbs 3:31 “… Envy not your oppressor and choose none of his ways.”
    Isaiah 2:11 “… And the Most High alone shall be exalted in that day.”
    Isaiah 9:16 “… For the leaders have caused them to err.”
    Isaiah 14:12 “… O Shining One, Son of the Morning.”
    Isaiah 33:22 “… The Most High is our judge… He will save us.”
    Isaiah 42:8 “… My glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.”
    Isaiah 43:1, 3 “… I, the Most High am your Savior.”
    Isaiah 43:10, 11 “… Before Me, no god was formed, and after me none shall exist.”









    KEEP IT CIVIL.


    What are your thoughts?

    Comment

    • Ainkor
      Member
      • Sep 2008
      • 1144

      #3
      Very interesting read you have there and I will surely source check your quotes and versus :P

      Having grown up in a non-christian home, later a jewish home and being around other christians, I typically categorize myself as a Christian, more for convenience rather than belief.

      Christianity is an interesting concept that is bastardized daily by most people who claim they are one, IMO. I have always been amazed at how a preacher can weave together a tale from bits and pieces of the bible here and there and put it together in a convincing argument. I think I fall into the camp that I don't feel comfortable saying that I don't believe in Jesus, but I guess in the end that is the fact. I certainly believe in God, in some form or fashion.

      Thanks for sharing! It will be interesting to ponder this over the weekend and see where I come out at

      Comment

      • Monkey
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2009
        • 3290

        #4
        There is only one God.

        Comment

        • texasmade
          Member
          • Jan 2009
          • 4159

          #5
          Maybe I should say that the title is a little sarcastic. Just in case.

          Comment

          • justintempler
            Member
            • Nov 2008
            • 3090

            #6
            Originally posted by Monkey View Post
            There is only one God.

            Raised Catholic... born again atheist.

            Comment

            • lxskllr
              Member
              • Sep 2007
              • 13435

              #7
              Interesting that as science and general intelligence increased over time, god sightings decreased. Where'd he go? We must be perfection incarnate, since obviously we no longer need instruction as demonstrated by god's absence.

              Comment

              • NonServiam
                Member
                • May 2010
                • 736

                #8
                Just glanced at your thread. It appears very well written and researched. I'll have to come back to this one later when I have more time to read it and put some thought into it.

                Comment

                • Jwalker
                  Member
                  • May 2010
                  • 1067

                  #9
                  The guy made up rules like the one about prophecy. Point 1 is that the messiah will fulfill all these points immediately not later on when he comes back. This is based off of what? For most of point 5 he bases it off of his belief in Jewish theology (Malmoides whoever says this and that) and exaggerates catholic doctrine. He doesn't understand the theology of the trinity that God is three in one not three Gods. 5c that priests are intermediaries is is a specifically catholic belief so I can't comment. In 5d that christians believe everything in the world is evil when it's that everything is fallen, but they don't say everything in the world is evil since God created the world. The bible says to be in the world but not of it. Point 6 is true if random.

                  Comment

                  • MojoQuestor
                    Member
                    • Sep 2009
                    • 2344

                    #10
                    For some reason, the first bit of verse that springs to mind is, "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

                    Like a wise rabbi once said, "that which is hateful to you, do not do to another. All else is commentary. Go and learn."

                    I believe Jesus is on record as saying something similar.

                    Comment

                    • Snusdog
                      Member
                      • Jun 2008
                      • 6752

                      #11
                      Guys if you want to be a skeptic then that is fine but don’t be a dumb ass skeptic.

                      This is bad scholarship and would be absolutely destroyed by any serious debate on the topic by scholars from either side of the issue.

                      I will choose but one of the points the Author makes to demonstrate this fact. As I do so, let me preference my remarks by saying that two of the six languages that I know just happen to be Hebrew and Greek. Therefore, I will be dealing directly with the original language.

                      The author states:

                      The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: “Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet.” The Hebrew word kiari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word “gouged.” Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: “They pierced my hands and feet.”

                      Whoever wrote this should really learn the language he intends to build his case on prior to trying to build his case. There is so much stupid about this I don’t know where to begin. So let’s start with the text itself

                      The actual word in the Hebrew text = cari (sounds like car-ee)
                      The Hebrew phrase as a lion = ciari (sounds like sky-ree but without the s….ky-ree)
                      Hebrew phrase “they pierced me” = karui (sounds like car-ee)

                      Notice neither of the options (lion or pierced) appears in the text. As it stands the word in the text is nonsensical (not a word)

                      A translator and textual scholar will then attempt to reconstruct the text as it read originally. To do so they will look for the normal culprits that are very often a play when a text is transcribed through oral transmission (i.e. is copied by scribes as someone reads it aloud).

                      In this case the most plausible explanation is phonetic similarity (one word that sounds like another is copied down by mistake. Thus I read “meet”…..but you copy “meat”).

                      Consider the word as it is in the text………….cari
                      Now consider the word "to pierce"…………...karui (the u is silent- the two words sound exactly the same)
                      Now consider the phrase “young lion”……….ciari (there is a significant phonetic difference and thus it is less likely that a scribe would have heard this word).

                      The reading “to pierce” then is the preferred reading in a textual reconstruction.

                      However, “to pierce” has made it into the translations not on a wishfull guess, or some desire to import one brand of theology back onto the text, or even on the plassibility of the reconstruction. None of the points above are sufficient enough to settle the matter.

                      Rather, “to pierce” is chosen on the strength of another more ancient manuscript tradition. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls the oldest Hebrew manuscript that we had in existence dated from the 1100s. It is the Masoretic Text. (This is the Hebrew text to which your author refers in his article)

                      However the oldest manuscript tradition is that the LXX (~200BC- way before those naughty text changing Christians came along). And this text unaqivocoly reads wpuεav- “they pierced”

                      So notice the results

                      Translate the phonetic Hebrew reconstruction =They peirced my hands and my feet”
                      Translate the actual and more ancient LXX = "They peirced my hands and my feet"
                      Translate the varient your author wishes to assume = “as a lion my hands and my feet”

                      In fact notice that he has had to add a major portion to the text just so it will make sense “as a lion they are at my hands and feet” (the words “they are at” appear nowhere in the text. We could as eaisliy say that the text reads “as a lion they are riding bikes beside my hands and feet” and be as ligitimate as the author’s reading.

                      No textual scholar worth his beans would suggest such a sloppy reconstruction. This is just bad scholarship. He tells us the Christians changed the text and yet the reading is found 240 years before the first Christians ever existed. On top of that he blatently changes the text to make it fit his notion of what theology should be (the very thing he is accusing others of doing). Finally, his reading does violence to any sane measure of scholarship. Follow his method, apply it in other places, and you won't even have an intelligable text of a DR Zeus book. I’d fail any first year, mid semester student who brought me crap like this

                      And guys………………of all the points the author makes, I chose this one because it was his best…………….and it is bad………………..the rest of his points are even worse.


                      Be a skeptic if you want………………..I would just choose different books to read to help me build my case
                      When it's my time to go, I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle did....... Not screaming in terror like his passengers

                      Comment

                      • mrmynd
                        Member
                        • Apr 2010
                        • 101

                        #12
                        nice thread. very well researched. i personally dont practice any religion and have no desire to. For me there are too many other scientific explinations out there that state were not created by a devine entity. but there is one thing i do believe in and that is each person has the right to belive whatever they want to belive in.

                        Comment

                        • texasmade
                          Member
                          • Jan 2009
                          • 4159

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Snusdog View Post
                          Guys if you want to be a skeptic then that is fine but don’t be a dumb ass skeptic.

                          This is bad scholarship and would be absolutely destroyed by any serious debate on the topic by scholars from either side of the issue.

                          I will choose but one of the points the Author makes to demonstrate this fact. As I do so, let me preference my remarks by saying that two of the six languages that I know just happen to be Hebrew and Greek. Therefore, I will be dealing directly with the original language.

                          The author states:



                          Whoever wrote this should really learn the language he intends to build his case on prior to trying to build his case. There is so much stupid about this I don’t know where to begin. So let’s start with the text itself

                          The actual word in the Hebrew text = cari (sounds like car-ee)
                          The Hebrew phrase as a lion = ciari (sounds like sky-ree but without the s….ky-ree)
                          Hebrew phrase “they pierced me” = karui (sounds like car-ee)

                          Notice neither of the options (lion or pierced) appears in the text. As it stands the word in the text is nonsensical (not a word)

                          A translator and textual scholar will then attempt to reconstruct the text as it read originally. To do so they will look for the normal culprits that are very often a play when a text is transcribed through oral transmission (i.e. is copied by scribes as someone reads it aloud).

                          In this case the most plausible explanation is phonetic similarity (one word that sounds like another is copied down by mistake. Thus I read “meet”…..but you copy “meat”).

                          Consider the word as it is in the text………….cari
                          Now consider the word "to pierce"…………...karui (the u is silent- the two words sound exactly the same)
                          Now consider the phrase “young lion”……….ciari (there is a significant phonetic difference and thus it is less likely that a scribe would have heard this word).

                          The reading “to pierce” then is the preferred reading in a textual reconstruction.

                          However, “to pierce” has made it into the translations not on a wishfull guess, or some desire to import one brand of theology back onto the text, or even on the plassibility of the reconstruction. None of the points above are sufficient enough to settle the matter.

                          Rather, “to pierce” is chosen on the strength of another more ancient manuscript tradition. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls the oldest Hebrew manuscript that we had in existence dated from the 1100s. It is the Masoretic Text. (This is the Hebrew text to which your author refers in his article)

                          However the oldest manuscript tradition is that the LXX (~200BC- way before those naughty text changing Christians came along). And this text unaqivocoly reads wpuεav- “they pierced”

                          So notice the results

                          Translate the phonetic Hebrew reconstruction =They peirced my hands and my feet”
                          Translate the actual and more ancient LXX = "They peirced my hands and my feet"
                          Translate the varient your author wishes to assume = “as a lion my hands and my feet”

                          In fact notice that he has had to add a major portion to the text just so it will make sense “as a lion they are at my hands and feet” (the words “they are at” appear nowhere in the text. We could as eaisliy say that the text reads “as a lion they are riding bikes beside my hands and feet” and be as ligitimate as the author’s reading.

                          No textual scholar worth his beans would suggest such a sloppy reconstruction. This is just bad scholarship. He tells us the Christians changed the text and yet the reading is found 240 years before the first Christians ever existed. On top of that he blatently changes the text to make it fit his notion of what theology should be (the very thing he is accusing others of doing). Finally, his reading does violence to any sane measure of scholarship. Follow his method, apply it in other places, and you won't even have an intelligable text of a DR Zeus book. I’d fail any first year, mid semester student who brought me crap like this

                          And guys………………of all the points the author makes, I chose this one because it was his best…………….and it is bad………………..the rest of his points are even worse.


                          Be a skeptic if you want………………..I would just choose different books to read to help me build my case
                          Snusdog I just found it interesting, The title of my thread is pretty sarcastic though.

                          This post you made is one of the reasons I hold so much respect for you.
                          You know your stuff and you come at situations prepared and unashamed.
                          I know that I have no knowledge whatsoever of any languages outside of the ones I know and am in no place to attempt any translations.

                          I have nothing against anybody's beliefs.



                          on a side note if I happened to offend anybody my apology is extended.

                          Comment

                          • Jwalker
                            Member
                            • May 2010
                            • 1067

                            #14
                            Nice post Snusdog I figured it would mistranslated but since I haven't taken classes on Hebrew I didn't comment.

                            Comment

                            • tom502
                              Member
                              • Feb 2009
                              • 8985

                              #15
                              Interesting thread. I'll try and comment more later, I just got up.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X