Proselytizing

[rreppy]

No Buddhist monk has ever come to my door on a Sunday morning and confronted me about whether or not I was "saved". I like that. I feel if you are confident that your religion is worthwhile, then you should have faith that people will find it and be convinced on its own merits, without the need of a bunch of pushy salespersons trying to "close a deal".
I admire the fact that the Dalai Lama, in almost every speech he makes to westerners, exhorts them to stay in the religion of their upbringing and merely explore whether Buddhism might have some tools and insights they may find useful. I could never imagine in a million years the Dalai Lama doing what Christian missionaries have done, going into foreign cultures and blasting their native religions as lies and blasphemies, destroying their works of art, burning their books, and telling them tales about how they will "burn in torment forever" if they don't convert.
Islam, of course, is even worse; the first 500 years of its history was "convert or die by my sword, infidel scum!".
I say, let a person find their own path and make up their own mind. Don't insult me by calling my beliefs inferior to your own and then shoving yours down my throat. A worthy religion shouldn't have to proselytize. Don't demean spirituality to the level of a popularity contest.

[cnorman18]

By Jewish standards, Jesus wouldn't be the Messiah... nor would Mohammed be a prophet. (Don't know about how much profit he made though)/

Maybe not by Jewish standards but by old testament standards he would be. His countless miracles, sinless life, fulfilled prophecy, and God's rescue from the grave would trump any philosophy, religion or book though. Muhammad cannot make this type of claim and would have to rely on some other criteria. Just curiosity could you list a couple specific reasons that the Jews reject Jesus as messiah, but I agree that the don't.

I don't think Goat will mind if I drop in a link to an earlier conversation on this subject. You will find a long and detailed answer to your question here, in one of my first posts to this forum almost five years ago.

[1robin]

By Jewish standards, Jesus wouldn't be the Messiah... nor would Mohammed be a prophet. (Don't know about how much profit he made though)/

Maybe not by Jewish standards but by old testament standards he would be. His countless miracles, sinless life, fulfilled prophecy, and God's rescue from the grave would trump any philosophy, religion or book though. Muhammad cannot make this type of claim and would have to rely on some other criteria. Just curiosity could you list a couple specific reasons that the Jews reject Jesus as messiah, but I agree that the don't.

I don't think Goat will mind if I drop in a link to an earlier conversation on this subject. You will find a long and detailed answer to your question here, in one of my first posts to this forum almost five years ago.

I am well aware or well maybe somewhat aware of the reasons that Jewish people don't think that Christ is the messiah, I can't remember why I asked him for some examples. I don't think as that is a matter of opinion or contention (for lack of a better word) it is relevant for the reason I mentioned it. However thanks and I will attempt to find time to look at your link.

[cnorman18]

I am well aware or well maybe somewhat aware of the reasons that Jewish people don't think that Christ is the messiah, I can't remember why I asked him for some examples. I don't think as that is a matter of opinion or contention (for lack of a better word) it is relevant for the reason I mentioned it. However thanks and I will attempt to find time to look at your link.

Personally, I would think the fact that a person thinks that Jesus even COULD have been the Jewish Messiah pretty conclusively indicates that he or she doesn't know the reasons why he wasn't. The office of Messiah in Judaism and that of the Christ in Christianity are two radically different and mutually exclusive things.

That Jesus was, or may have been, the Christ I do not dispute, but then the topic is of little interest to me; that is not my religion, and I neither judge it nor condemn it. But that Jesus was NOT the Jewish Messiah is a matter of established and indisputable fact. Jews get to make that determination, and we did, two thousand years ago, for the reasons you will find on the thread linked. There has been no reason to alter that judgment since.

[dianaiad]

The ones that mostly go from door to door proselytizing are Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons. They consider themselves to be Christians, but they are not Biblical Christians. They are a strange hybrid form of Christianity that is not orthodox and more in the category of cults.

Was that necessary?

............never mind, of course it was. you just HAD to get in a shot at the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses for doing what you spend several paragraphs attempting to justify when 'real' Christians do it.

When I back up and look at the beliefs of 'real' Christians...the concept of transubstantiation, for instance, or the virgin birth, or the visions seen by prophets of both old and new testaments, the concept of original sin, the controversy over baptism, predestination and other things believed in by 'real' Christians, I can't see that they are any less weird, wonderful and wild than anything the 'hybrid' groups do that you so disparage.

In fact, the only real difference is that the Mormons (I'm not sure about the Jehovah's Witnesses, since I don't happen to be as familiar with them) actually have the temerity to think that God wasn't done talking to us after the last NT author stopped writing stuff. Certainly nothing that Mormons claim about their own origins is any wilder than that which is claimed for Christianity as a whole.

It's just more....current. I'm of the opinion that main-stream, orthodox Christians have this slight distaste for real miracles; it's permissible to believe in the ones that happened long ago; we can read about 'em, then put 'em on the shelf. However, believing in stuff happening within one's own lifetime? Declasse', m'dear. Those sort of things simply are not DONE, y'know.

I am glad to see that you are OK with 'real' Christians going door to door, though, since in the last year I have had two Jehovah's Witness visits and the Baptists come two or three times a month.

As to the Mormons? (grin) They come every single day. In fact, I have a Mormon enter my door every time I come inside, so I can't really count them.

[1robin]

I am well aware or well maybe somewhat aware of the reasons that Jewish people don't think that Christ is the messiah, I can't remember why I asked him for some examples. I don't think as that is a matter of opinion or contention (for lack of a better word) it is relevant for the reason I mentioned it. However thanks and I will attempt to find time to look at your link.

Personally, I would think the fact that a person thinks that Jesus even COULD have been the Jewish Messiah pretty conclusively indicates that he or she doesn't know the reasons why he wasn't. The office of Messiah in Judaism and that of the Christ in Christianity are two radically different and mutually exclusive things.

That Jesus was, or may have been, the Christ I do not dispute, but then the topic is of little interest to me; that is not my religion, and I neither judge it nor condemn it. But that Jesus was NOT the Jewish Messiah is a matter of established and indisputable fact. Jews get to make that determination, and we did, two thousand years ago, for the reasons you will find on the thread linked. There has been no reason to alter that judgment since.

Just for clarification, let me say I may have used the term messiah incorrectly. None of these details are really all that important to me either. The only question that needs an answer is not even if Christ is God, it is is he necessary for salvation. I have answered that question personally and I was born again which confirms the fact for me. I understand some of the controvercies surrounding things like Isaiah, while I can see why jews believe what they do I do not agree. I will not bother with trying to talk a jewish person out of his interpretations as I am not qualified, I do however have a general concern for the consequences for them.

[cnorman18]

Just for clarification, let me say I may have used the term messiah incorrectly. None of these details are really all that important to me either. The only question that needs an answer is not even if Christ is God, it is is he necessary for salvation.

This is one of the points upon which Judaism and Christianity differ, and which make them wholly different, though related, religions. "Salvation" in the Christian sense -- that is, of going to Heaven -- is not a Jewish concern. It's not a secondary concern or a peripheral concern; it is not a concern at all. We have no formal teaching on an Afterlife, and we leave all such matters to God. We speculate upon the question like anyone else, but we have no doctrine or dogma, and conclusions are very much up to the individual. One thing is certain; in Jewish belief, one's "beliefs," aka thoughts, could never be grounds for either reward or condemnation. We believe that peole shall be judged on their actions, not their thoughts or beliefs. "Salvation by faith" is wholly absent from Jewish tradition and teaching, Paul's claims notwithstanding.

I have answered that question personally and I was born again which confirms the fact for me. I understand some of the controvercies surrounding things like Isaiah, while I can see why jews believe what they do I do not agree. I will not bother with trying to talk a jewish person out of his interpretations as I am not qualified...

And I, for one -- and very few, if any, Jews that I know -- would try to talk you out of your own beliefs. I have said this many times; we Jews claim only to know how God spoke to US, in the language of our tradition. If He chose to speak to other peoples in some other fashion, that is none of our business. We have no warrant to say that He did not.

...I do however have a general concern for the consequences for them.

If you mean Hell, rest easy. If there is a Hell -- few Jews believe that there is; it does not appear in our Bible -- the Old Covenant is still in place, and Jews obtain forgiveness through prayer, repentance, and deeds of lovingkindness. I should add, though, that in our belief there are sins which even God has no power to forgive. Sins against other people must be forgiven by those we have sinned against or not at all. On the other hand, we have no teaching on what the consequences of unforgiven sins might be, either. That, too, we leave to God's perfect justice, whatever it may be, and we do not feel qualified to speak for Him.

[Goat]

I will give you the benifit of the doubt about the earlier comments. You don't seem to have a competent grasp on the context of many of those verses and yes we have to remember that it was Jesus (God) saying those things. Allah might get the same pass but Muhammad and his 68 wars and countless raids shouldn't.

But if prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is a prophet of God, doesn't that warrant him a 'pass'?

That is one big "If." I say that because Muhammad hasn't received any confirmation for prophet hood. I doubt that he is a descendant of Ishmael, but even if I were to give you that, there were no prophets that came out of Ishmael. Ishmael and his mother Hagar were rejected by God and Abraham as the seed of promise from which Christ Jesus comes. You can find it in Gen 21:12 of the Bible.

In order for someone to be a prophet, he has to be of the correct ancestral line; he must have given some prophecy that has come to pass; He must have done some miracle and he must know the name of God; and he "must" be confirmed by other prophets.

Muhammad doesn't pass this test in my book. Deut 18 doesn't speak of Muhammad; it speaks of Jesus! Muhammad cannot be used as a usurper of Christ and then call him a prophet. Moreover, there is no documentation that Muhammad considered himself a prophet at the time he walked the earth.

I concur with this evaluation. By biblical standards Muhammad can't be considered a profit. Even in absence of the biblical standards I see no proof of any prophecy worthy of the use of the term issued by Muhhamad. Islam is sometimes referred to as "A non prophet enterprise" while that is admittedly disrespectful there is a truth behind it. If it could be proven that he was a profit and it could be shown that each example of violence was the result of a devine command then his given a pass could be considered.

By Jewish standards, Jesus wouldn't be the Messiah... nor would Mohammed be a prophet. (Don't know about how much profit he made though)/

Maybe not by Jewish standards but by old testament standards he would be. His countless miracles, sinless life, fulfilled prophecy, and God's rescue from the grave would trump any philosophy, religion or book though. Muhammad cannot make this type of claim and would have to rely on some other criteria. Just curiosity could you list a couple specific reasons that the Jews reject Jesus as messiah, but I agree that the don't.

Well.. no... By the Jewish scriptures, if you read it in context, with an accurate translation, Jesus did not fullfill prophecy. He also destroyed peoples personal property, disrupted the High Holidays, said 'you have to hate your parents if you are to become a true disciple', and did all sorts of things that are sins.

As for miracles.. there are warning in the old testament about frauds who do miracles

Jer 14:14 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.

[Burninglight]

I will give you the benifit of the doubt about the earlier comments. You don't seem to have a competent grasp on the context of many of those verses and yes we have to remember that it was Jesus (God) saying those things. Allah might get the same pass but Muhammad and his 68 wars and countless raids shouldn't.

But if prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is a prophet of God, doesn't that warrant him a 'pass'?

That is one big "If." I say that because Muhammad hasn't received any confirmation for prophet hood. I doubt that he is a descendant of Ishmael, but even if I were to give you that, there were no prophets that came out of Ishmael. Ishmael and his mother Hagar were rejected by God and Abraham as the seed of promise from which Christ Jesus comes. You can find it in Gen 21:12 of the Bible.

In order for someone to be a prophet, he has to be of the correct ancestral line; he must have given some prophecy that has come to pass; He must have done some miracle and he must know the name of God; and he "must" be confirmed by other prophets.

Muhammad doesn't pass this test in my book. Deut 18 doesn't speak of Muhammad; it speaks of Jesus! Muhammad cannot be used as a usurper of Christ and then call him a prophet. Moreover, there is no documentation that Muhammad considered himself a prophet at the time he walked the earth.

I concur with this evaluation. By biblical standards Muhammad can't be considered a profit. Even in absence of the biblical standards I see no proof of any prophecy worthy of the use of the term issued by Muhhamad. Islam is sometimes referred to as "A non prophet enterprise" while that is admittedly disrespectful there is a truth behind it. If it could be proven that he was a profit and it could be shown that each example of violence was the result of a devine command then his given a pass could be considered.

By Jewish standards, Jesus wouldn't be the Messiah... nor would Mohammed be a prophet. (Don't know about how much profit he made though)/

Maybe not by Jewish standards but by old testament standards he would be. His countless miracles, sinless life, fulfilled prophecy, and God's rescue from the grave would trump any philosophy, religion or book though. Muhammad cannot make this type of claim and would have to rely on some other criteria. Just curiosity could you list a couple specific reasons that the Jews reject Jesus as messiah, but I agree that the don't.

Well.. no... By the Jewish scriptures, if you read it in context, with an accurate translation, Jesus did not fullfill prophecy. He also destroyed peoples personal property, disrupted the High Holidays, said 'you have to hate your parents if you are to become a true disciple', and did all sorts of things that are sins.

As for miracles.. there are warning in the old testament about frauds who do miracles

Jer 14:14 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.

Jeremiah was never speaking of Jesus; Muhammad yes. Jesus has already fufilled over 300 prophecies, but yes, not all of them. He will though every single one will be fufilled!

[Burninglight]

The ones that mostly go from door to door proselytizing are Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons. They consider themselves to be Christians, but they are not Biblical Christians. They are a strange hybrid form of Christianity that is not orthodox and more in the category of cults.

Was that necessary?

............never mind, of course it was. you just HAD to get in a shot at the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses for doing what you spend several paragraphs attempting to justify when 'real' Christians do it.

When I back up and look at the beliefs of 'real' Christians...the concept of transubstantiation, for instance, or the virgin birth, or the visions seen by prophets of both old and new testaments, the concept of original sin, the controversy over baptism, predestination and other things believed in by 'real' Christians, I can't see that they are any less weird, wonderful and wild than anything the 'hybrid' groups do that you so disparage.

In fact, the only real difference is that the Mormons (I'm not sure about the Jehovah's Witnesses, since I don't happen to be as familiar with them) actually have the temerity to think that God wasn't done talking to us after the last NT author stopped writing stuff. Certainly nothing that Mormons claim about their own origins is any wilder than that which is claimed for Christianity as a whole.

It's just more....current. I'm of the opinion that main-stream, orthodox Christians have this slight distaste for real miracles; it's permissible to believe in the ones that happened long ago; we can read about 'em, then put 'em on the shelf. However, believing in stuff happening within one's own lifetime? Declasse', m'dear. Those sort of things simply are not DONE, y'know.

I am glad to see that you are OK with 'real' Christians going door to door, though, since in the last year I have had two Jehovah's Witness visits and the Baptists come two or three times a month.

As to the Mormons? (grin) They come every single day. In fact, I have a Mormon enter my door every time I come inside, so I can't really count them.

Hi,\Thanks for your response. I like your avatar. Was that necessary you asked? You answered it for me. Yes, it was necessary. Transubstantiation is not Scriptural. Biblical Christians go by what can be backed up by Scriptures or can be clearly inferred from them. Mormonism is on another planet; it is alien to Scriptures. Every thing I have shared could be backed up with Scripture. Now, whether someone accepts that, well, that's another story. Joseph Smith plagarized from the KJV to write the book of Mormon, I know, because he copied the translational errors from it.

[Goat]

Jeremiah was never speaking of Jesus; Muhammad yes. Jesus has already fufilled over 300 prophecies, but yes, not all of them. He will though every single one will be fufilled!

That's the claim. However, when you look at each prophecy in context, in a historical and cultural context.. then.. well, no.. .Jesus didn't full fill ANY.

Some prophecies were written TO. Others.. well, they are not prophecies, but phrases taken out of context.. shoe horned into place, and mistranslated.

For example.. Isaiah 7:14, used to say that Jesus was predicted to have a "Virgin Birth' Alamah means 'Young woman', and if you read Isiaiah 7 /8 IN CONTEXT, it shows that Isaiah was writing about his own wife and son being a sign to King Ahaz.


And, if you read it in context, the 'suffering servant' in Isaiah 53 is not Jesus, but the nation of Israel.

We can go out to show how the 'prophecy' 'Out of Bethlehem' was showing that the Messiah would be from a tribe, not a city... (specifically from the House of David", and since that follows the MALE line, not the woman's line, that would eliminate Jesus, since the bloodline follows the biological father, and Joseph was allegedly not Jesus' father.

We could go on and on about that, and see, well, no, Jesus didn't full fill any of the prophecies.