Question for Christians: What if Judaism is correct?

« why do cats like to stay high up? | Is This Accurate? »

Question for Christians: What if Judaism is correct?

by SeasideMan ^Pro @ 2008-07-13 – 20:27:17

There are 6 basic "Messianic criteria" , but study of the Old Testament reveals more. The basic 6 are these:

The Messiah must:

1. have the correct genealogy by being descended from King David and King Solomon,
2. be anointed King of Israel,
3. return the Jewish People to Israel,
4. rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem,
5. bring peace to the world and end all war,
6. bring knowledge of God to the world.

http://forums.jewsforjesus.org/showthread.php?tid=170

So all you Christians: what if the Jews are right and you are wrong?

Cheers, Tom.
Options:
Tags:
- christianity
- judaism

53 Comments to Question for Christians: What if Judaism is correct?

Hide subcomments

- joebangles
- 2008-07-13 @ 20:33:11
A cracking good question Tom, I await with interest for the comments and replies.
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-13 @ 22:11:52
  I also await the replies with interest. It's a hard one, so I don't expect a very immediate response.
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- hebburndelboy
- http://hebburndelboy.blog.co.uk
- 2008-07-13 @ 20:39:53
they're all wrong. I am the messiah, this is the antichrist http://www.bushisantichrist.com/
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-13 @ 22:10:39
  Amen to that!
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- - safriz
  - http://www.conspiror.blog.co.uk
  - 2008-07-15 @ 03:01:51
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- philghodg
- 2008-07-13 @ 22:06:21
He not the Messiah!!

He's a very naughty boy!!
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-13 @ 22:16:45
  Ah, that made me laugh out loud :-) What a brilliant film. The bit with the shoe always gets me. "He has taken off his right shoe, so we must all do the same"...or something like that.
  
  Tom.
  - - philghodg
    - 2008-07-13 @ 22:17:45
    No, it is a sign that we must gather shoes!!
    - - SeasideMan ^Pro
      - 2008-07-13 @ 22:35:42
      Damn, you know it well!
      
      Tom.
      - philghodg
        
        2008-07-13 @ 22:40:27
        
        Verbatim!
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        SeasideMan ^Pro
        
        2008-07-13 @ 22:55:40
        
        I bow down to your expertise :-)
        
        Tom.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        philghodg
        
        2008-07-15 @ 22:43:14
        
        )
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- MarikaSunSeeker
- 2008-07-13 @ 22:41:28
You say "cheers Tom" so lightheartedly, having opened a big fat can of worms. I had a brief look at the stuff on the link, and I reckon they're a bit too keen to emphasise the "Empiracal" facts of their belief system. I thought that religion was based on faith not facts
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-13 @ 22:48:16
  It's a serious business but if I can lighten the tone, I will.
  
  Faith is of course important, but if there are two similar faiths, one of which reckons it can prove the other one wrong, then surely that needs talking about? Jewish scripture appears to show that Jesus isn't "The Messiah". That must be significant, whatever your faith says.
  
  Cheers, Tom.
  - - Kibitz
    - 2008-07-14 @ 10:31:07
    The Messianic Criteria ...
    
    I think you'll find they're in the Old Testament.
    
    And .. since the Old Testament’s part of the Christian Bible.
    
    It's perhaps a tad misleading to say ...
    
    One group reckons it can prove the other wrong.
    
    Adam ...x
    - - SeasideMan ^Pro
      - 2008-07-14 @ 11:02:31
      If you could suggest a wording that you think isn't "misleading", that would be most helpful.
      
      Not all Christian sects accept the OT.
      
      Tom.
      - Kibitz
        
        2008-07-14 @ 11:46:45
        
        Lol .. True.
        
        Sometimes ... I'm not sure I do either.
        
        Alternative wording .. Mmmm ..
        
        I wouldn't be so presumptuous.
        
        The way I see it .. Two faiths - Two opinions.
        
        After that - I go quiet.
        
        Adam ... x
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        SeasideMan ^Pro
        
        2008-07-14 @ 11:49:36
        
        OK, if you don't want to rock the boat, that's cool.
        
        Tom.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- Kibitz
- 2008-07-14 @ 06:34:01
No comment ...

Shalom.

Adam ... x

P.S.

I would say more ... but ...

Since only Christian opinion is sought ... I won’t.

P.P.S.

It's okay. I know my place.
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-14 @ 09:09:56
  I would guess that as a Jew this has no significance for you. But if I'm wrong about that or if you would like to say anything, your comments would be most welcome :-)
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- - safriz
  - http://www.conspiror.blog.co.uk
  - 2008-07-15 @ 15:34:08
  shalom?
  Since this word sound familiar to me,and this is the first time i read/heard it,i was tempted to Google it.
  The meaning and use of this word is exactly the same as we muslims do.There is a little difference in pronunciation,as we say "salam" and that means peace,so does Shalom
  
  cheers,
  saf
  - - SeasideMan ^Pro
    - 2008-07-15 @ 16:00:55
    Arabic is a Semitic language, and has close links with Hebrew. It's not surprising that some words are similar.
    
    Tom.
    - - loiswakeman
      - http://lois.co.uk
      - 2008-07-18 @ 11:28:56
      And I also read that Palestinian Jews and Arabs are genetically indistinguishable.
      
      Shame that culture (for which read tribalism) has been used as the justification to divide them in such a bloody way.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink
  - - Kibitz
    - 2008-07-16 @ 06:50:43
    Salam Saf ...
    
    It’s nice to hear from you.
    
    I’m constantly amazed and delighted ...
    
    Just how much I’ve learnt from blogging.
    
    Adam.
    - Reply to comment
    - Permalink
- DominicGee
- 2008-07-14 @ 10:09:38
The discussion in the forum you linked seems to offer pretty decent answers.
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-14 @ 11:03:01
  Do you have a personal view on this?
  
  Tom.
  - - DominicGee
    - 2008-07-14 @ 11:46:47
    If someone wants to convert to Christianity, presuming they already believe in God, the first questions they ask are not going to be what Prophecies he fulfilled. You ask this question as an empiricist looking for evidence etc. For Christians, they believe in Jesus because of his teachings, the miracles he and his followers supposedly performed and the philosophy that he taught. He is also said to have fulfilled many other prophecies in the OT that are not mentioned here.
    The Jews who did not convert did not believe in Jesus for a variety of reasons (as I understand it), namely:
    1. They wanted a general/statesman messiah to physically expel the Romans, free Israel and get all the Diaspora to return to Israel.
    2. They wanted a man who was 'famous', known for his greatness and could be recognised as a king, to be honoured.
    3. Jesus' actions and teaching went against the Orthodoxy at the time, flying in the face of the High Priests, both the Saducees and Pharisees. Without their support many other Jews would have also rejected Jesus as a blasphemer/false prophet. This is perfectly understandable.
    
    Personally I think that the discussion in the link, although interesting is not important to most Christians or Jews. Christians don't believe in Jesus based on his fulfillment of the prophecies and the Jews I presume have their own take on what the Messiah is meant to be, though I don't know what that is.
    
    The discussion is purely academic, useful to those of us who like to study religion, but I don't think it offers a real case for a 'de-conversion' from Christianity.
    - - SeasideMan ^Pro
      - 2008-07-14 @ 11:54:23
      Thanks for your thoughts. The only comment I will make is the same as I said to Kibitz elsewhere: there are sectarian differences. Some Christian's accept the Old Testament, the first few books of which are according to Judaism the "literal word of god", and some don't. For those that do, the "literal word of god" proves that Jesus was not the messiah. That has got to be a bit of a problem. If you are a Christian who sees the Old Testament as a bunch of fairy tales, then this won't be an issue.
      
      Tom.
      - DominicGee
        
        2008-07-14 @ 12:36:51
        
        Semafu has a similar discussion on his theology blog. Very early on in the Christian church there was an ecumenical council at Antioch where they decided whether or not to continue the Jewish traditions into Christianity. Understandably there were many gentiles who didn't want to get circumcised, stop eating pork and didn't want to have to follow all the rules that dictated an othodox Jew's life. In the end they decided against it. For most moderate Christians this still holds true - the New Testament almost replaces the old. However I don't think it is as black and white as that. Christians do not have to reject the OT wholesale, I am sure there are ways of interpreting both Testaments that makes them compatible - the New Testament was of course written by people who were well versed in the Septuagint and Jewish teachings. I am not qualified to explain it though, I don't know the prophecies well enough.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        SeasideMan ^Pro
        
        2008-07-14 @ 13:08:34
        
        The AD341 Antioch council was non-ecumenical, rather than ecumenical. It was composed of mainly Eastern bishops, and of course emperor Constantius II. This is the trouble that Christianity has had since almost it's start: the sectarianism is staggering and mostly based on differences of interpretation and on how much of the OT is accepted.
        
        Did you know that there are at least 1500 different Christian sects?
        
        As far as I am aware, the 2 testaments cannot be reconciled, and that is why dismissing much of the OT is necessary for Christians. If it weren't necessary, it wouldn't be done.
        
        Tom.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- grumpus ^Pro
- http://bobmblack.blog.co.uk
- 2008-07-14 @ 16:00:31
Too deep for me. As an atheist I "know" Christians and Jews are both wrong in many fundamental beliefs. However, the question prompted me to dig out my Bible and re-read the first five chapters of Genesis.

I gave up when I got to the bit where Adam and Eve's son Cain took a wife. Where did the wife come from?? And Adam lived 930 years before he died??

Then I skimmed the four Gospels to compare them and remind myself how different they are. So which one is the "gospel truth"? And if one particular one is true, to what extent are the others false?

All religions raise more questions than answers, which is why I rate them all alongside Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and Goldilocks.
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-14 @ 16:21:53
  We have exactly the same view on this.
  
  There is actually more evidence for santa claus and the tooth fairy than there is for god or gods.
  
  Tom.
  - - grumpus ^Pro
    - http://bobmblack.blog.co.uk
    - 2008-07-14 @ 18:22:01
    Not sure I agree with that entirely, Tom. Santa Claus only exists in the minds of children, and while originating from folklore about a real person, St Nicholas, is perpetuated in a few white lies by adults to entertain children at Christmas and threaten bad behaviour.
    
    The Tooth Fairy is a total fiction created by adults to soften a natural and slightly distressing childhood experience. When children grow up they realise Santa and the Tooth Fairy don't exist but use the same little white lies to keep their own children in order.
    
    All gods are inventions of the leaders of early man to keep the rabble in order and instill discipline through fear. Fear of eternal punishment was thinly disguised as love and worship. One excellent side effect was good social behaviour among the common people. Religion didn't stop the leaders, usually self-appointed, from committing any sin including, mass murder, rape and pillage, whenever it suited them. They simply twisted the lies even further to convince the peasants it was all the will of the gods.
    
    The sad thing is that, even in these enlightened days, those who wish to control persist with the lies and many people cling to their childish beliefs, or claim they do, out of that same sheep-like irrational fear.
    - - SeasideMan ^Pro
      - 2008-07-14 @ 18:29:24
      I was slightly tongue in cheek there. The tooth fairy and Father Christmas both bring presents to children - at least that's what children think anyway. God brings....well...nothing.
      
      Marx was right that religion is a means of control. If your reward comes once you are dead, then you are just waiting for death, and can be manipulated by those who seek to do so.
      
      Tom.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink
- - Kibitz
  - 2008-07-14 @ 16:23:07
  Er .. One could perhaps argue ..
  
  The Universe itself raises more question than answers.
  
  To therefore dismiss its existence ...
  
  Wouldn't necessarily be the logical conclusion.
  
  Adam ... x
  - - SeasideMan ^Pro
    - 2008-07-14 @ 16:58:06
    Ah, but the universe doesn't claim to give answers for everything :-)
    
    Tom.
    - Reply to comment
    - Permalink
  - - grumpus ^Pro
    - http://bobmblack.blog.co.uk
    - 2008-07-14 @ 18:32:56
    Sorry, Adam. Comparing religion with the Universe is like comparing an idea with an apple. The Universe is tangible. We can explore our tiny corner of it and gather a few fragments of solid evidence. There is much we do not, and perhaps never will understand, but there is scientific proof for most things we put forward as facts. Not so for religion.
    - Reply to comment
    - Permalink
- lucreziaborgia ^Pro
- 2008-07-14 @ 20:38:13
Tom,

I am a Christian, believe it or not.

My quick response (without having researched any of this but relying on memory) is this:

1. The synoptic gospel genealogies indicate that Jesus comes from the required blood lines.

2. No king of Israel is king merely by the anointing of a human being, but by God – so tough one to ‘prove’, but that is in part what the resurrection is about.

3 – 5 these are what the second coming is about. There are a lot of other conditions/prophecies that also need to be taken into account. I believe I have heard somewhere the figure of some 300 prophecies about the Messiah that were fulfilled in Jesus. (but I would need to check this out to be sure)

6. I should think it pretty obvious that Jesus has fulfilled this one!

Finally, not all of the prophecies of the Messiah are of the ‘victor’ type, some others include the ‘suffering servant’. Again this is in part why the Christian understanding of a first and second coming of the Messiah make sense.

Josh McDowell’s “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” would be a good book to check out.

xxLux
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-14 @ 20:56:13
  Thanks for your response.
  
  On your point 1, that's not what it says on the Jewish websites I checked on. The OT is very specific about the bloodline, and Jesus ain't it.
  
  On 3-5, did you look at the link I gave?
  
  And 6 is clearly false again as it says in the link "Ironically, whenever a Christian missionary proselytizes a non-believer he proves that the Messiah ben David has not yet come".
  
  But I'm certainly neither a Hebrew scholar, nor an Old Testament one, so I am entirely reliant on those who are on this. Jewish scholars have been studying this stuff for over 5000 years.
  
  Cheers, Tom.
  
  P.S. Nothing to do with this discussion, but does commandment 7 trouble you at all? (feel free to tell me to mind my own business if you like!)
  - - lucreziaborgia ^Pro
    - 2008-07-14 @ 21:19:09
    On your P.S. : of course it does. And it is your business as you read my blog. If I shunned comments and opinions I'd be a hypocrite to have a public blog in the first place.
    - - SeasideMan ^Pro
      - 2008-07-14 @ 21:30:07
      Thanks, then would it be fair to say that your religion is less important to you than enjoying yourself?
      
      Tom.
      - lucreziaborgia ^Pro
        
        2008-07-14 @ 22:35:50
        
        If you think I am enjoying myself, then you are not reading my blog and we should part company.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        SeasideMan ^Pro
        
        2008-07-14 @ 23:25:49
        
        Your blog says very clearly that you are seeking enjoyment and excitement elsewhere because you aren't getting enough of those from your marriage. So when I ask "would it be fair to say that your religion is less important to you than enjoying yourself?", the question refers to what you are trying to achieve, not what your state of mind is.
        
        It's very clear that your need for adultery outweighs your religious beliefs. I was just trying to find out a little more, but if you don't want to explain that's up to you.
        
        Tom.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        lucreziaborgia ^Pro
        
        2008-07-14 @ 23:55:55
        
        Tom, I am writing a book online. Emma, necessarily, will adopt some of my traits; I am separated from the story by two degrees, Emma herself and whoever is writing the diary in the book, i.e. Lucrezia. Christianity is an integral part of me so it will shine through the two layers. I challenge you to find a Christian, or Muslim or anybody with religious beliefs who does not, at times, feel the pull of personal fulfilment going the opposite direction as their core values. After all, that's how it all started, with A & E, didn't it?
        That's what I meant by 'read the blog' - where it is explained. You talk about 'outweighing' as if it were a question of balancing scales. Emma is having a inner dialogue with her conscience and spirit about adultery as much as everything else. Nowhere does she say that she feels an absolute 'need' for adultery. Perhaps a wider angle of interpretation is required from you. After all, you are not exactly my target audience, so I'll tell you what we do. I am going to delete you from my network; of course you are welcome to read and comment as usual, but you'll have to ask me to be your friend if you want to. I am not trying to fire up morality cruisades.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        SeasideMan ^Pro
        
        2008-07-15 @ 00:06:44
        
        Outweigh was the right word, and the "need" is very clear even if you can't admit it.
        
        Bye.
        
        Tom.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- safriz
- http://www.conspiror.blog.co.uk
- 2008-07-15 @ 03:36:25
A while ago i was slagged off by some numpty bloger and i wowed not to come back here ever again.But here i am

I am a muslim,a born muslim,and will be a muslim for ever.
We too beleive in Jesus,but not as the son of God,but as a human who was God's messenger to the humanity.But we do beleive that he is still alive.He never died and will come back to earth as a beleiver of our Prophet Mohammed(PBUH).
He will be the king of earth and join forces with the last masaih "Imam mehdi".
Isaa(Jesus) as we call him will be the man who will fight and destroy the army of the "Beast" "Anti christ" "Dajjal".
He will eventually kill the anti christ who will be the Masaiah of the jews.
According to the legend,we muslims will be the ones fighting under the leadership of "Jesus",and he will be one leading humanity into a lasting peace.
The digit of "the beast" who will the masaiah the jews had always been waiting for is 666.The root code of our beleif is the number 9.
9 is the code of the the phrase from where our religion starts (Laa ilaaha illallah i.e There is no God except Allah)
The code of the beast is three times the "Upside down" of our code.
Jesus (issa) was definately not the masayyah of the jews,but "the beast" will be.
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-15 @ 09:25:58
  Thanks for your repsonse, and I apologise for restricting the initial question to Christians. Of course, since Islam is an Abrahamic faith, you will have a view on this. But since it's Christians who believe he is literally god, they were my focus.
  
  Lots of stuff there I didn't know, and thanks for it. It came as a surprise to me that you think that Jesus is still alive.
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- grumpus ^Pro
- http://bobmblack.blog.co.uk
- 2008-07-15 @ 06:44:00
And when the pigs fly, the booger man will come and gobble us all up, and his name is Lala or Po or Tinkiewinkie, and his number is 74, which is 666 divided by 9 ...
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-15 @ 09:18:42
  That sounds line something Nostradamus said :-)
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- - safriz
  - http://www.conspiror.blog.co.uk
  - 2008-07-15 @ 11:00:37
  Good maths,my dear sir.Here is some more.6+6+6=18, and 1+8=9,
  But 6X6+6=42 and 4+2=6.
  Tinkiwinkie and many popular characters were created by smart men/women with a knowledge level much higher than our's,and it's quiet possible that the name was actually based on your calculations.
  Papa Google told me that www is equal to 666 in Hebrew.Because the number 6 is attached to the Hebrew word vaw (w).
  The norm is that,whatever is beyond our knowledge is what we reject.But there are things we don't know,and even beyond the scope of current science.
  Although numerology is a very ancient and well developed mathematics,and maths is a part of science.These numbers do tell a lot.
  But then we believe in what we chose to believe,it's always own own choice.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- safriz
- http://www.conspiror.blog.co.uk
- 2008-07-15 @ 15:13:22
My comments about the jewish masayyah may well be offensive for any jewish bloggers,and for that i apologize.I do not mean any offense here.
The world goes by one simple rule "one man's hero can be the other man's villein",and vice versa.
The jewish hero is a villain to both Christians and Muslims,but then there is nobody who is unanimously accepted by all the humanity.All of us get accepted by some,and get rejected by others.

cheers,
saf
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- spiritbird ^Pro
- 2008-07-16 @ 20:59:07
Two things you should never get into a discussion about. Politics and religion.
Since Jesus was most likely born an arab and therefore a Muslim. Where does that put the white christian believers?
- - SeasideMan ^Pro
  - 2008-07-16 @ 22:52:06
  Wise advice for dinner parties you have there.
  
  Perhaps you should avoid history too :-)
  
  Tom.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink