Man, did you ever say a mouthful there! What a sickening history, eh?Scott wrote:I can understand the Jewish point of view with the history of persecution. I can't get my head around why Christians would do this, seems to be contrary to what was taught by Jesus. At least the way I understand it.
Ask about Judaism
-
margin overa
- Posts: 272
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 12:17 pm
Re: Ask about Judaism
Re: Ask about Judaism
Agricola,
Some posts back, you mentioned that a Jew can convert to other religions and still be considered a Jew. I suppose you mean Buddhist, Hindu, etc. But if they convert to Christianity, they lose their Jewishness. Part of the reason seems to be the centuries of Jewish persecution by Christians. (I hope I remember that right--I can't find your post.)
My question now is, can a Jew voluntarily convert to Islam and still be a Jew? Given the current animosity between Israel and Islamic countries, I find it hard to think this conversion would be ok. Just curious.
Some posts back, you mentioned that a Jew can convert to other religions and still be considered a Jew. I suppose you mean Buddhist, Hindu, etc. But if they convert to Christianity, they lose their Jewishness. Part of the reason seems to be the centuries of Jewish persecution by Christians. (I hope I remember that right--I can't find your post.)
My question now is, can a Jew voluntarily convert to Islam and still be a Jew? Given the current animosity between Israel and Islamic countries, I find it hard to think this conversion would be ok. Just curious.
Moogy
NI COC for over 30 years, but out for over 40 years now
Mostly Methodist for about 30 years.
Left the UMC in 2019 based on their decision to condemn LGBT+ persons and to discipline Pastors who perform same-sex marriages
NI COC for over 30 years, but out for over 40 years now
Mostly Methodist for about 30 years.
Left the UMC in 2019 based on their decision to condemn LGBT+ persons and to discipline Pastors who perform same-sex marriages
Re: Ask about Judaism
Well it isn't 'okay' - none of those conversions are OKAY, exactly (actually, you can easily be 'Buddhist' without converting to anything, because Buddhism mostly doesn't work like that....never mind).
However, Islam is - in some ways - a lot closer theologically to Judaism than either is to Christianity, so it isn't difficult in that sense. Politically it is rather 'big' of course. There isn't a whole lot of back and forth conversion between Islam and Judaism, but there's some.
The big deal to get over with that conversion is accepting Muhammad as a prophet, and as a prophet whose message is relevant. It is fairly easy to accept him as a prophet, but he's a prophet to the Ishmaelites, not to the Israelites, so he isn't normally seen as relevant to a Jew at all. We were done with having prophets long before Muhammad.
Muslims, by the way, accept all the prophets of Judaism, plus they accept Jesus as a prophet of God. They don't believe he was resurrected and they don't believe he was divine.
However, Islam is - in some ways - a lot closer theologically to Judaism than either is to Christianity, so it isn't difficult in that sense. Politically it is rather 'big' of course. There isn't a whole lot of back and forth conversion between Islam and Judaism, but there's some.
The big deal to get over with that conversion is accepting Muhammad as a prophet, and as a prophet whose message is relevant. It is fairly easy to accept him as a prophet, but he's a prophet to the Ishmaelites, not to the Israelites, so he isn't normally seen as relevant to a Jew at all. We were done with having prophets long before Muhammad.
Muslims, by the way, accept all the prophets of Judaism, plus they accept Jesus as a prophet of God. They don't believe he was resurrected and they don't believe he was divine.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Ask about Judaism
Muslims, by the way, accept all the prophets of Judaism, plus they accept Jesus as a prophet of God. They don't believe he was resurrected and they don't believe he was divine.
You are 100% right there. We don't even believe he was crucified.
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.----Karl Marx
Re: Ask about Judaism
It is. Wrong headed Christians and Christians that don't understand much are plentiful. Jews were killed for not believing in the virgin birth. The Hebrew word virgin is not in Isaiah 7:14 even though it is translated that way by Hebrew translating Christian scholars. They have a bias and reason it into the text. I am very suspicious of such things. The word tranliterates to "almah."Scott wrote:I can understand the Jewish point of view with the history of persecution. I can't get my head around why Christians would do this, seems to be contrary to what was taught by Jesus. At least the way I understand it.
Meaning young woman or newly married and possibly pregnant. Jews get subjected to bad Christian translations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almah
Even Jesus does not use it as a sign because it is not there.
Matt 12:39 KJV But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
It pays to have God on your side.
Jews were often killed because they killed Jesus. I find this a moot point because the death of Jesus is the path to salvation. I should write a story with Jesus dying of old age and condemn everyone to Hell. But that would be too CoC.Re: Ask about Judaism
Well the link to that definition does say virgin but regardless I don't think Jesus taught to murder people for disagreement.
In fact I thought he taught the opposite of that. It's hard for me to actually view these people as Christian, I think it's more of a label than anything else. They call themselves Christian but then go around doing the exact opposite thing that their leader has taught.
In fact I thought he taught the opposite of that. It's hard for me to actually view these people as Christian, I think it's more of a label than anything else. They call themselves Christian but then go around doing the exact opposite thing that their leader has taught.
Re: Ask about Judaism
Here's the Hebrew word for 'virgin': b'tulah (or betulah). Isaiah was aware of that word because he used it elsewhere. He did not use it in the famous (to Christians) passage 'behold....'
Instead he used the word 'almah'. An almah might be a virgin, or she might not. The word doesn't specify. It isn't 'virgin', it is 'young woman'. Some young women are virgins and some aren't. Calling a person a young woman specifies age and gender, but not sexual experience.
An early GREEK translation of Isaiah uses the Greek word 'parthenos'. Again - a young woman, BUT it is a word that at least IMPLIES lack of sexual experience - that is, a young woman who isn't married. Presumably a Greek made the translation, and chose that particular word, who knows why. there is really nothing in the sheer context of that part of Isaiah that would make one think of a virgin. Really. Read the story straight without preconceptions. Isaiah is telling the king about a sign that is going to happen SOON: 'the young woman IS with child and before the child can tell right from wrong, the kings who are attacking you will be gone....' whatever child Isaiah is talking about there was born, grew up and died of old age, centuries before the birth of Jesus.
Just to back up a bit: THERE IS AND WAS NEVER ANY EXPECTATION WITHIN JUDAISM THAT 'THE MESSIAH' WOULD HAVE A 'VIRGIN MOTHER'. In a Jewish context, that's so weird as to be - well, weird. Stupid. Irrelevant. Ridiculous...whatever. The only thing being a virgin would get you in Jewish life was a higher bride price and a fancier wedding.
Virgin mothers impregnated by gods in various forms (bulls, swans, showers of gold) were, however, COMMON in Greek and Roman mythology. The sons born that way were all 'heroes' and demi-gods - Hercules, Theseus, and I forgot a few. Romans, especially, put so much value on 'virginity' that they had groups of sacred holy virgins, who were killed quite horribly if they ever slipped at virgin-ness.
The best answer I ever heard a Jew give to a Christian who accused Jews of killing Jesus was this one:
"So what? It didn't TAKE" (the resurrection, you know).
Instead he used the word 'almah'. An almah might be a virgin, or she might not. The word doesn't specify. It isn't 'virgin', it is 'young woman'. Some young women are virgins and some aren't. Calling a person a young woman specifies age and gender, but not sexual experience.
An early GREEK translation of Isaiah uses the Greek word 'parthenos'. Again - a young woman, BUT it is a word that at least IMPLIES lack of sexual experience - that is, a young woman who isn't married. Presumably a Greek made the translation, and chose that particular word, who knows why. there is really nothing in the sheer context of that part of Isaiah that would make one think of a virgin. Really. Read the story straight without preconceptions. Isaiah is telling the king about a sign that is going to happen SOON: 'the young woman IS with child and before the child can tell right from wrong, the kings who are attacking you will be gone....' whatever child Isaiah is talking about there was born, grew up and died of old age, centuries before the birth of Jesus.
Just to back up a bit: THERE IS AND WAS NEVER ANY EXPECTATION WITHIN JUDAISM THAT 'THE MESSIAH' WOULD HAVE A 'VIRGIN MOTHER'. In a Jewish context, that's so weird as to be - well, weird. Stupid. Irrelevant. Ridiculous...whatever. The only thing being a virgin would get you in Jewish life was a higher bride price and a fancier wedding.
Virgin mothers impregnated by gods in various forms (bulls, swans, showers of gold) were, however, COMMON in Greek and Roman mythology. The sons born that way were all 'heroes' and demi-gods - Hercules, Theseus, and I forgot a few. Romans, especially, put so much value on 'virginity' that they had groups of sacred holy virgins, who were killed quite horribly if they ever slipped at virgin-ness.
The best answer I ever heard a Jew give to a Christian who accused Jews of killing Jesus was this one:
"So what? It didn't TAKE" (the resurrection, you know).
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Ask about Judaism
Like it or not, the behavior of every person who claims to be a Christian is going to be taken as a representative action of what 'Christians' as a group believe, say and do. You aren't allowed to kick out all the ones you don't agree with and define 'Christian' according to what's left over in the 'perfectly wonderful' bin.
Maybe 'Christians' are in fact called to be perfectly wonderful, but that doesn't make it true unless becoming a Christian actually DOES turn ordinary people into sweetness and light - and it clearly doesn't.
You can say someone isn't behaving CORRECTLY for a good Christian, but you can't just deny that he's a Christian altogether - especially when he can point to supporting verses just as well as anybody.
and why can't you? Because Christianity has defined Christians as people with certain beliefs about Jesus. Period - not people with a particular set of behaviors regardless of belief. Both Christianity and Islam claim membership based on a declaration of intellectual assent to particular belief statements - one, that Jesus is the son of God who died and was resurrected etc., or that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is Allah's prophet.
Both religions go on to make behavioral standards something for the membership to adhere to, but the definition of Christian and the definition of Muslim each sit solely on a belief statement - a creed, if you will.
Maybe 'Christians' are in fact called to be perfectly wonderful, but that doesn't make it true unless becoming a Christian actually DOES turn ordinary people into sweetness and light - and it clearly doesn't.
You can say someone isn't behaving CORRECTLY for a good Christian, but you can't just deny that he's a Christian altogether - especially when he can point to supporting verses just as well as anybody.
and why can't you? Because Christianity has defined Christians as people with certain beliefs about Jesus. Period - not people with a particular set of behaviors regardless of belief. Both Christianity and Islam claim membership based on a declaration of intellectual assent to particular belief statements - one, that Jesus is the son of God who died and was resurrected etc., or that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is Allah's prophet.
Both religions go on to make behavioral standards something for the membership to adhere to, but the definition of Christian and the definition of Muslim each sit solely on a belief statement - a creed, if you will.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Ask about Judaism
So when did the whole prophet thing end and how was that determined?
I have been told that most of the Prophets were generally ignored or persecuted while they were living, true?
I have been told that most of the Prophets were generally ignored or persecuted while they were living, true?
Re: Ask about Judaism
Prophecy is held to have ceased around the time of the Babylonian exile (shortly after) and you can quite accurately place it right at the time the scriptures were written down, read aloud, and accessible by (essentially) everyone - so around 440 BCE.
And why? First you have to understand that 'prophet' in Hebrew doesn't mean 'predicts the future'. Instead, a prophet conveyed a message FROM God TO the people (the ones standing right there). Any and all 'future predictions' are invariably along the lines of 'if you keep doing X, then Y will happen' or else they are comfort promises 'this will end and peace will be restored/we will return to Jerusalem/ whatever'.
After the Jews returned to Israel from Babylon, the Torah began to be read in public three times weekly. And people started getting together in groups to read it FOR THEMSELVES and to read certain of the scrolls of the prophets, and to read OTHER 'uplifting works' as well (books like Ruth, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and so forth). There was no more need for 'prophets'.
In the time of the Judges and the Kingdoms, there were plenty of prophets. There were SCHOOLS where you could go and study to be a prophet, even (mentioned in the story of Saul). In those days, there was no synagogue, no 'teachers' and probably no real written 'scriptures'. There were just priests (who probably DID have some written stuff - mostly for priests (like the book of Leviticus)) and prophets.
Once you have a text to consult, you don't need a prophet any more.
And why? First you have to understand that 'prophet' in Hebrew doesn't mean 'predicts the future'. Instead, a prophet conveyed a message FROM God TO the people (the ones standing right there). Any and all 'future predictions' are invariably along the lines of 'if you keep doing X, then Y will happen' or else they are comfort promises 'this will end and peace will be restored/we will return to Jerusalem/ whatever'.
After the Jews returned to Israel from Babylon, the Torah began to be read in public three times weekly. And people started getting together in groups to read it FOR THEMSELVES and to read certain of the scrolls of the prophets, and to read OTHER 'uplifting works' as well (books like Ruth, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and so forth). There was no more need for 'prophets'.
In the time of the Judges and the Kingdoms, there were plenty of prophets. There were SCHOOLS where you could go and study to be a prophet, even (mentioned in the story of Saul). In those days, there was no synagogue, no 'teachers' and probably no real written 'scriptures'. There were just priests (who probably DID have some written stuff - mostly for priests (like the book of Leviticus)) and prophets.
Once you have a text to consult, you don't need a prophet any more.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.