Christians: why do you think Jews don’t accept the Christian Testament?

[Avoice]

Why do you think Jews reject the teachings of the church?

If you could pick one passage to convince them to believe Jesus is their anointed one (messiah) what would it be?

[Clownboat]

This statement is telling as well....Clearly you don't know that the way the Jews worship today is nothing like the way Moses did.

I challenge you to show that you know how Moses, who may not have even existed, worshipped. Your not going to deceive me!

That's easy. Read the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Why those books? Because Moses wrote them. Also, the Bible can't be challenged as to if it is true or not in this forum. If it says Moses existed, then he did and I don't have to prove that he did.

I'm sorry, but those books do not appear to have been written by one person, much less one person being the Moses person you would like it to be.
Just imagine a Muslim telling you just how impressed they are by the Qu'ran. Imagine how convincing that would be for you. Right now... you are that Muslim.

You have failed to show that you know how Moses worshipped and I have not been deceived. What is obvious is that there is no god concept helping you to write your replies.
Be well.

[Clownboat]

Slander is saying something that is false about someone else. What said about you lacking knowledge about the Bible isn't false.

Yes, it is false. In fact, there is a solid chance that I know the Bible better than you do, but that is irrelevant to this debate.

Otherwise you wouldn't ask such questions such as, 'How did Moses worship God?'

non se·qui·tur
noun
a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

How illogical are you willing to be?
I know why you fail to answer the question and I believe most of our readers see it as well. You're not deceiving us with this pretend knowledge you display. "You will know them by their fruits".

You're asking questions that you should already know the answer to if you knew the Bible.

You actually think so? Put me in my place then! I don't have a spirit of fear and will not be deceived by you.

Let's be honest, you're as sure about Moses parting the Red Sea or how he worshipped as you are that Harry Potter has a wand and can cast spells.
Reality is not what one reads in a book I'm afraid. Pretend it is at your own risk, but please don't talk down to me because I acknowledge that this Moses character might not have even existed and likely didn't write the Torah.

Moses aside though... there is no evidence for the Exodus and the Jews don't accept the Christian Testament because the Jesus character is not their Messiah. What would the Jews know about their own Messiah anyway?

[2timothy316]

This statement is telling as well....Clearly you don't know that the way the Jews worship today is nothing like the way Moses did.

I challenge you to show that you know how Moses, who may not have even existed, worshipped. Your not going to deceive me!

That's easy. Read the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Why those books? Because Moses wrote them. Also, the Bible can't be challenged as to if it is true or not in this forum. If it says Moses existed, then he did and I don't have to prove that he did.

I'm sorry, but those books do not appear to have been written by one person, much less one person being the Moses person you would like it to be.
Just imagine a Muslim telling you just how impressed they are by the Qu'ran. Imagine how convincing that would be for you. Right now... you are that Muslim.

You have failed to show that you know how Moses worshipped and I have not been deceived. What is obvious is that there is no god concept helping you to write your replies.
Be well.

In this forum the Bible is accepted as true. If you don't accept that then you don't have to debate here. Head back to the C&A board where it can better accommodate you.
Below is the purpose of this forum.
viewtopic.php?t=3168
"Criticism of sources, authorship, or redaction with the intent to discredit the authority of the canon are more appropriate for the Christianity and Apologetics subforum."
viewtopic.php?t=11496

[Clownboat]

In this forum the Bible is accepted as true.

What does that have to do with the fact that the books you referenced don't appear to have been written by the person you claimed wrote them? You can still pretend they are true because they are biblical, you know, like how a good Muslim considers their holy book, but the fact still remains and brings to question the truthfulness of your claim that Moses wrote them.

If you don't accept that then you don't have to debate here. Head back to the C&A board where it can better accommodate you.

That is where I generally spend my time. Want to understand why? Could you imagine debating a Muslim on a forum that regarded the Qu'ran as true without question? I know, right!

[2timothy316]

That is where I generally spend my time. Want to understand why? Could you imagine debating a Muslim on a forum that regarded the Qu'ran as true without question? I know, right!

Whatever makes you feel better, go with that. I wish you well.

[Clownboat]

That is where I generally spend my time. Want to understand why? Could you imagine debating a Muslim on a forum that regarded the Qu'ran as true without question? I know, right!

Whatever makes you feel better, go with that. I wish you well.

There must be a reading comprehension issue going on, no?
"Whatever makes you feel better" in no way is a reply to a 'why' question.

Readers, what was quote mined out:
What does that have to do with the fact that the books you referenced don't appear to have been written by the person you claimed wrote them? You can still pretend they are true because they are biblical, you know, like how a good Muslim considers their holy book, but the fact still remains and brings to question the truthfulness of your claim that Moses wrote them.

Be well.

[2timothy316]

That is where I generally spend my time. Want to understand why? Could you imagine debating a Muslim on a forum that regarded the Qu'ran as true without question? I know, right!

Whatever makes you feel better, go with that. I wish you well.

There must be a reading comprehension issue going on, no?
"Whatever makes you feel better" in no way is a reply to a 'why' question.

Readers, what was quote mined out:
What does that have to do with the fact that the books you referenced don't appear to have been written by the person you claimed wrote them? You can still pretend they are true because they are biblical, you know, like how a good Muslim considers their holy book, but the fact still remains and brings to question the truthfulness of your claim that Moses wrote them.

Be well.

You broke the rules in the forum in post 51 and 54 thus forfeit the debate.
"Biblical books have theological authority because they are contained within the canon, regardless of any purportedly false claims to authorship and regardless of redactional interpolations."
"Wholesale dismissals of entire books of the Bible are not considered valid here."
viewtopic.php?t=11496

The Bible sums it up perfectly, Jesus said to the Jews, "In fact, if you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe what I say?” (John 5:46. 47) These words still stand true today and since this is from the Bible, if you challenge it as not true, your forfeit stands.

[Clownboat]

You broke the rules in the forum in post 51 and 54 thus forfeit the debate.
"Biblical books have theological authority because they are contained within the canon, regardless of any purportedly false claims to authorship and regardless of redactional interpolations."
"Wholesale dismissals of entire books of the Bible are not considered valid here."
viewtopic.php?t=11496

I note that there is no issue with you thinking that the books are true because they are biblical and that is acceptable in this section of the forum. You know, like what a good Muslims/Hindu does about their holy book (not very impressive reasoning, but what can we expect?). I still call in to question your claim that a Moses wrote the books though. You seem to prefer to not want to discuss that and instead want to pretend I'm dismissing entire books of the Bible by pointing out that your claim to authorship is being questioned.

Read the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Why those books? Because Moses wrote them.

The Bible sums it up perfectly, Jesus said to the Jews, "In fact, if you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe what I say?” (John 5:46. 47) These words still stand true today and since this is from the Bible, if you challenge it as not true, your forfeit stands.

Now consider the claimed words of Jesus (who authored nothing) from John 5 and then realize what that would mean if Moses didn't write the Torah. I acknowledge the Torah and acknowledge that Moses likely wasn't involved with it being written, because the truthful claim is that we don't know who wrote them. I do not dismiss the books as you pretend and realize as to why you had to quote mine my words out that made this clear.

What you quote mined out was - Copy/paste: "What does that have to do with the fact that the books you referenced don't appear to have been written by the person you claimed wrote them? You can still pretend they are true because they are biblical, you know, like how a good Muslim considers their holy book, but the fact still remains and brings to question the truthfulness of your claim that Moses wrote them.
You don't seem to like to be held accountable so you pretend I am dismissing books of the Bible instead of calling in to question your authorship claim that Moses wrote them. Are your claims really beyond reproach here? I would think we should still care to show that our claims are truthful, but your mileage may vary it seems.

I reject your claim that Moses wrote the books you claim he wrote. I am not dismissing their theological authority, just YOUR claim about the author and now what that would mean about John 5:46 as you brought up.

You can still believe in the truthfulness of the books even if we don't know the authors. This is made obvious by the beliefs in the gospels when we don't know who wrote them or when. Such things do not matter when faith is the mechanism behind belief. Don't take that personally, again, see your fellow Muslim. It just is what it is.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #58]

Then I accept your forfeit of this debate. If you can't accept the rules then your argument was a loss before you started. Have a good day.

[otseng]

Moderator Intervention

2timothy316 is correct. Any challenge to the authority of the Bible are not allowed in this subforum.

In this subforum the canon of the Bible is considered authoritative with respect to the historical consensus of the canon's content. Therefore, the 66 books contained within all canons are considered more authoritative than deuterocanonical books. The latter may be presented in argumentation, but may also be challenged as authoritative. Furthermore, theological analysis should focus primarily on the level of canonical analysis. Criticism of sources, authorship, or redaction with the intent to discredit the authority of the canon are more appropriate for the Christianity and Apologetics subforum. However, such tools may be used to trace historical developments of doctrine or other subjects pertinent to theology. In other words, the Biblical books have theological authority because they are contained within the canon, regardless of any purportedly false claims to authorship and regardless of redactional interpolations. Therefore, wholesale dismissals of entire books of the Bible are not considered valid here. However, certain verses can be dismissed that are considered inauthentic by Biblical scholars and supported by Biblical criticism (such as the Johannine Comma) since such verses may be considered only spuriously canonical.

No single translation trumps another, and when differences of opinion arise regarding various translations, Hebrew and Greek sources will have a greater authority. Sticking to a single translation to prove your point, when the majority of translations disagree, is not allowed, and your point must then be proven by deferring to the original language in which it was written.

______________

Moderator interventions do not count as a strike against any posters. They are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels that some sort of intervention is required.