The Jew Problem

[Conversator]

It fascinates me how Christians and Muslims want the religion of the Jews, but without the Jews. They'll write ten thousand books to explain why the Jew is damned, whilst they, the holy exemplars of the Jew's God, are blessed. I simply can't ignore this, as some courtesy to etiquette. Let's actually discuss this. 1st Thessalonians 2:15,16 " ...The Jews killed the lord Jesus and the prophets... they do not please God, and are hostile to ALL men... wrath is upon them to the utmost." Galatians 5:12 " I wish they ( the Jews) would castrate themselves." Surah 5:64 " the Jews...are cursed... they love to make mischief in the Earth." I find it curious. Shouldn't God be the focus of religion? If God's enemy is the focus of religion, should it even be called a religion? ( In fairness, my dear Muslim brothers and sisters have disavowed much of the hateful rhetoric in their Hadiths. And have been a force of good in this world, and will no doubt have a cherished place in the glorious world to come) I've often joked with my Muslim brothers that the only reason their book says bad stuff about us and our book says nothing bad about Muslims, is because they came after us. If they came first, our book would say bad stuff about them, but their book would have nothing bad about us. They know that and we do too

[JehovahsWitness]

Curious as to what this record is and where it resides...

.

I was refering to the bible record.

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.

JW

[tam]

[2ndpillar2]

[Conversator]

I believe Paul, the Pharisee imposter, was arrested in Jerusalem for trespassing the Temple

WAS PAUL A JEWISH IMPOSTER?

That Paul was arrested in the Jewish temple is a matter of record, but that he merely pretended to be Jewish is an entirely outlandish and ludicius idea.

Paul had claimed to have been a Jew, a Pharisee and a student of Gamaliel. These things would have been easy to prove false: Paul was not after all making these claims in some far off land to people that had no living memory of events, he was standing at the center of Jewish religious and academic learning and making these claims to his former associates. If anyone thinks there would not have been an avalanche religious leaders to expose him as a liar, there may be a bridge in Brooklyn with their name on it! Like Jesus, Pauls preaching an and teaching was truly prolific, had he been a mere Jewish wannabe, we should have (or at least have reference) to first century writings of such exposing.

Those that suggest such outlandish ideas are perhaps never asked for actual evidence to support them, in this forum they get no such free rides.

Curious as to what this record is and where it resides, other than as a Bible story of course.

.

New Testament scholars date Acts to the mid 2nd century CE, some the late 1st century. Thus the veracity of its details are open to scrutiny. Paul's consistent spurious quotations of the Old Testament, have long perplexed scholars. Loose paraphrases of the septuagint in some places, completely foreign quotations in others. A pharisee trained by the famed rabbi Gamaliel, would surely be able to competently quote the Hebrew Masoretic text into Koine Greek better than that! One example: Romans 11:26 " the Redeemer will come to Zion and will remove ungodliness..." Isaiah actually says, " the redeemer will come to Zion if they turn away from transgressions...", Isaiah 59:20. Isaiah is about repentance " if they turn away", Paul twists it to mean Jesus will remove ungodliness. Isaiah's is conditional, Paul's is unconditional.
Check Paul yourself. When ever he quotes the Old Testament, check it. You'll be horrified. New Testament scholars generally pardon Paul's ineptitude, by claiming he was a hellenestic Jew unfamiliar with the Hebrew Old Testament. Neither the Pharisees, nor especially Gamaliel would have accepted or even associated with a hellenistic Jew. Paul may have been a hellenistic Jew, but he certainly wasn't a Pharisee. The Pharisees could have cared less what non-Jews believe, but they would have cared a great deal about a hellenistic Jew claiming to be one of them! The Pharisees didn't want guilt by association, with a make-believe Pharisee stirring up trouble with gentiles for crying out loud. The Jews had enough misery with Rome as it was! The nonsense about Jews persecuting Gentile Christians is ridiculous. We don't care what others believe, just leave us out of it.
I find it peculiar that Paul constantly defended ( through the guise of boasting) his Jewish ancestry to Gentiles, such as: " i was circumcised the eighth day, I am of the nation of Israel, I am a Hebrew of Hebrews, and a Pharisee" ( Philippians 3:5, and several other places). Nobody talks like that in Judaism, not now, and not in any of our sacred literature, Talmudic, etc. I am a "Hebrew of Hebrews" etc LOL.

[JehovahsWitness]

New Testament scholars date Acts to the mid 2nd century CE, some the late 1st century. ...

Indeed and glaring in its absence is documented evidence that Paul's claims to his Jewish heritiage were ever exposed as false. One may not like his writings but feelings do not a manuscript make.

[JehovahsWitness]

A pharisee trained by the famed rabbi Gamaliel, would surely be able to competently quote the Hebrew Masoretic text into Koine Greek better than that!

DOES PAUL MISQUOTE SCRIPTURE?

Some claim Paul must have been lying about his religious educaton because his scriptural references did not according to them, exactly match the Hebrew Masoretic text. This is a particularly flimsy argument not least because Paul was likely not refering to the Hebrew Masoretic text. Writing in Greek to a predominently non Jewish audience Paul likely would have used a version of the Greek Septuagint.

Further he was not writing to Pharsaic Jews who would perhaaps have taken exception to any paraphrasing, he was for the most part writing to people unfamiliar with the Hebrew text, people to for whom paraphrasing would arguably be the best approach. Paul was not attempting to reproduce a copy of the Hebrew bible, he was explaining its meaning to his readers. As such it is logical he highlight or mention the parts of the verses he wished to emphasis and organise words in a way that emphasised his intent (see example below ) . Jesus did similar, particialy quoting scriptures and giving them an unconventional "spin" .

CONCLUSION The accusation that Paul misquoted scripture because his references do not exactly match Hebrew Masoretic is insignificant to say the least as it is based on the unproven premise that exactitude was a primary concern.

[JehovahsWitness]

[1213]

It fascinates me how Christians and Muslims want the religion of the Jews, but without the Jews. They'll write ten thousand books to explain why the Jew is damned, whilst they, the holy exemplars of the Jew's God, are blessed. I simply can't ignore this, as some courtesy to etiquette. Let's actually discuss this. 1st Thessalonians 2:15,16 " ...The Jews killed the lord Jesus and the prophets... they do not please God, and are hostile to ALL men... wrath is upon them to the utmost." Galatians 5:12 " I wish they ( the Jews) would castrate themselves." Surah 5:64 " the Jews...are cursed... they love to make mischief in the Earth." I find it curious. Shouldn't God be the focus of religion? If God's enemy is the focus of religion, should it even be called a religion? ....

Two lines from the Bible, interpreted as hate for all Jews is not in my opinion enough reason to think Christianity is focused on "God's enemy". And I don't think it can be said Jews generally are God's enemy. Only those that are evil, do bad things, like murder, lie and steal, can be seen as enemy of God.

[SacredBishop]

[Revelations won]

To all respondents,

Yes God will save all twelve tribes of the house of Israel meaning those who repent and serve the Lord. This also applies to ALL others who accept and obey all of God's commandments.

I find no scripture which allows mortal man the right to damn and condemn any race. Last time I checked, God requires all men to forgive others. God alone has the right to forgive those whom he choses.

Further I find no scriptural reference which denies salvation to any particular tribe or race.

We are, according to the Bible all the spirit children of God. Since God is indeed the literal father of our spirits, then it would make clear sense that he would desire all of his children to become like him and receive salvation and exaltation.

People say a Bible , a Bible, we have got a Bible! Are those who condemn the Jews extremely guilty of a serious sin of ingratitude? Would any of you have a Bible today without the faithful work of those covenant people who have written and preserved those sacred records for thousands of years and I am speaking of the tribe of Judah? What thanks do these modern day hippocrites honor and give thanks to those faithful Jews who sacrificed so very much to preserve those sacred OT and NT records which we assembled together for our Bibles of today???

Shame, Shame, Shame on all those ungrateful wretches who today damn and condemn all the good faithful Jews of today!!! For without those diligent and faithful records saved by the Jews, none of you would have a Bible today!

Let us face reality folks! Is there any man or woman who has ever been denied the opportunity to receive ALL that God has ever promised because of the Jews?? I give a resounding No!!!!

So where is your so called "Jew" problem??? As I see it, it is only a product of your own satanic bigotry and blind ignorance!

I stand ready to challenge anyone who can show otherwise....

Kind regards,
RW