Zone1 Explaining Jesus to a Jew

[Woodznutz]

There is no such thing as a card carrying Pharisee. To be a Pharisee is to follow the understanding of Judaism as per the Pharisaic sect. One important hallmark of that group is that it believed in a codified and divine oral law which complemented the written one. People who believed in the existence of that law, studied it and (one would hope) followed it were Pharisees. Jesus had (it seems) a problem with the teachers in the Pharisaic group because they taught things but didn't follow them (making them hypocrites). Jesus told followers to follow the teachings of the Pharisees even though the leaders didn't do what they taught others to do. So this is an endorsement of the Pharisaic way of life. He also taught many of the same things and referenced Pharisaic teachings and legal methodology. This would make him a follower of the Pharisaic approach to Judaism which is as much as anyone can do to "be" a Pharisee. Had he been an Essene or a Sadducee, his message would have been different.

He condemned the Pharisees for their teachings as well as their hypocrisy. He told the people to obey their lawful instructions.

 

[irosie91]

What a load of crap. Our entire entertainment industry and much of our government is run by Jews. Lots of anti-Christian propaganda in our culture and education system.

I am intrigued What is the jewish mediated anti christian propaganda in our
educational system?

 

[rosends]

He condemned the Pharisees for their teachings as well as their hypocrisy.

I know that he objected to certain teachings, but only when he presented HIS teaching on the same matter. So, for example, he criticizes Pharisaic rules about picking grain on the sabbath and cites a biblical passage to support his understanding of how to apply that law and the exceptions to it.

Thing is, the entire law about not picking grain on the sabbath is purely in the oral law. Had he been a Sadducee he would have rejected it altogether. And methodologically, he responded by doing what the oral law does -- citing a verse which supports a different interpretation/application. It just seems that he is operating in a Pharisaic mode, even though he is a dissenting voice within that mode.

 

[irosie91]

He condemned the Pharisees for their teachings as well as their hypocrisy. He told the people to obey their lawful instructions.

what was wrong with their teachings and to what hypocrisy do you refer?

 

[Woodznutz]

what was wrong with their teachings and to what hypocrisy do you refer?

You don't accept the New Testament narrative.

 

[hobelim]

Are you saying you aren't anonymous right now? And if you told me this to my face, I would have a good laugh, knowing that you can't back up what you say.

how can you say that I can't do what I have already done? You are coming undone sweetie.

So, thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for helping me to reveal the wisdom of God in giving the law that prohibits eating the flesh of swine that do not ruminate and for so generously demonstrating live and in living color and in full view of everyone whatever they believe or don't believe, the terrifying and deeply disturbing death consequent for setting that instruction aside.

Well done!

 

[irosie91]

You don't accept the New Testament narrative.

I am asking a specific question related to YOUR interpretation. The NT is a
scriptural writing----a fact which I accept. Are you asking if I accept what it says
as FACTUAL----it is chock full of that for which it was intended which was establishment
of the supremacy of the ROMAN EMPIRE

 

[rosends]

how can you say that I can't do what I have already done?

You called me a liar and a fraud. As neither is true, you can't back that up.

So, thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for helping me to reveal the wisdom of God in giving the law that prohibits eating the flesh of swine that do not ruminate and for so generously demonstrating live and in living color the terrifying and deeply disturbing death consequent for setting that instruction aside.

Well done!

I appreciate that understanding and hope that it serves you well in your pursuit of spirituality and understanding. It isn't how I understand the law and its purpose but if it works for you, I wish you the best following that path.

 

[hobelim]

You called me a liar and a fraud. As neither is true, you can't back that up.

The sun, earth, sky, waters, wind, and all of the celestial powers back me up, so don't piss me off.

You said that the subject of flesh in kosher law is about food not teaching even after being exposed to sound reasoning. That makes you a liar and a fraud, a deliberate deceiver, a murderer.

See genesis 3:14

 

[Woodznutz]

I am asking a specific question related to YOUR interpretation. The NT is a
scriptural writing----a fact which I accept. Are you asking if I accept what it says
as FACTUAL----it is chock full of that for which it was intended which was establishment
of the supremacy of the ROMAN EMPIRE

In Jesus' day the Romans didn't meddle in Jewish religious affairs, unless they (the Jews) wanted to kill someone.

 

[BreezeWood]

there is actual evidence that Jesus was a Pharisee in the NT

how surprising ...

no one in their right mind would believe jesus was a fundamentalist jew, everything they taught was an unraveling of judaism and their false pretenses.

they declared a new church / religion to superseded the fallacies found in jewish documents - hardly an endorsement for the prevailing conditions the 1st century was living under ...

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Nonsense, no. The etymology of the word means uniting, or at one=atone. To be one with God, we repent of (turn away from) sin and turn towards obedience to God.

Getting off the Hook

The "one" here is between Jesus and His Father. No one else. The Church's nonsense is like getting someone else to pay your debts being OK as long as you thank him.

 

[rosends]

You said that the subject of flesh in kosher law is about food not teaching even after being exposed to sound reasoning. That makes you a liar and a fraud, a deliberate deceiver. A murderer.

See genesis 3:14

What I was "exposed" to was your opinion and interpretation. If you think that your opinion constitutes some sort of transcendent proof then you can also believe whatever you want about me. I have shown you that the language in the various section is unconnected and the ideas are unrelated between the snake and the items listed as acceptable in Lev 11. You haven't shown otherwise. But if you need to lash out and call names to reassure yourself that your path is just, then feel free. I'll just turn the other cheek instead of responding in kind.

 

[irosie91]

how surprising ...

no one in their right mind would believe jesus was a fundamentalist jew, everything they taught was an unraveling of judaism and their false pretenses.

they declared a new church / religion to superseded the fallacies found in jewish documents - hardly an endorsement for the prevailing conditions the 1st century was living under ...

read it again ----you are very confused

 

[hobelim]

But if you need to lash out and call names to reassure yourself that your path is just, then feel free. I'll just turn the other cheek instead of responding in kind.

You are what you is bro.

 

[irosie91]

In Jesus' day the Romans didn't meddle in Jewish religious affairs, unless they (the Jews) wanted to kill someone.

In fact---if the jews wanted to kill a jew----that is the issue in which the Romans did not meddle
unless they had a special interest in that particular jew. The Romans did lots of meddling
in Jewish religious affairs----they appointed the HIGH PRIEST of the Temple

 

[irosie91]

how surprising ...

no one in their right mind would believe jesus was a fundamentalist jew, everything they taught was an unraveling of judaism and their false pretenses.

they declared a new church / religion to superseded the fallacies found in jewish documents - hardly an endorsement for the prevailing conditions the 1st century was living under ...

what did Jesus teach that was the "unraveling of Judaism"? Jesus did not declare a
new church----that feat was accomplish with the Constantine sponsored writing
of the book called The New Testament----several hundred years after the Romans
crucified Jesus

 

[irosie91]

The Jews wanted Jesus killed because he came as king seeking peace. They wanted a warlord messiah.

Jesus claimed that he wanted to be KING? you have a citation?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

007?

Turn the Other Cheek

Since when did James Bond preach pacifism to England's enemies?

 

[hobelim]

What I was "exposed" to was your opinion and interpretation. If you think that your opinion constitutes some sort of transcendent proof then you can also believe whatever you want about me.

Wrong. It is not an opinion that serpents cannot speak in any language except human serpents. It is not an opinion that what defiles and contaminates the mind is unclean teaching, not food, fool.

Are you some Neo nazi pretending to be Jewish to make the Jewish people look bad? Damn.