dyl (02/12/83)
Let's not call it a war, especially holy war, because nothing except God is holy. Everybody is free to put forth what they believe in a responsible way. First of all, I have not done any preaching so far. I am not ordained to do so. I never tell anybody to go to church or read the Bible but I like to speak out about what God has to offer for everybody and what God has shown me. I do dislike articles that slander the Bible without being specific. The nature of the subject has a tendency to rub people the wrong way. My only consolation for those that are offended when they hear about God is that may be God is dealing with them and they should treasure the experience. So far I find it most delightful that the Bible I believe in defends itself 100% and I never have to offer any of my foolishness to the net. Thus I can speak with confidence and it is too bad for those who cannot believe in what they believe and need supportive material from a zillion places. Of course their writing would not sound like "shuffling down other people's throat'" as I wonder if they have trouble shuffling down their own throats. Those who keep an open mind because they have not decided what is true and what is false should have no reason to oppress those who have made their choices. After all, there may be people reading net.religion who like to read views from Christians who take the Bible as it is. I am not going to waste my time acknowledging everybody else for the sake of open mind. The mustard size faith that I have helps me believe that God has the ability to take care of his own words. I have learned a lot from most articles concerning Judaism. What I still do not understand is why the New Testament acknowledges the Old Testament in every way but those who believe in Judaism as presented on the net denies the New Testament in every way. Why are many writings considered as holy as the Bible but the New Testament is not given any chance? I have drawn several conclusions and please correct me if I am wrong. I have no intention to attack Judiasm in anyway especially when Judiasm and Christianity shared the same roots and Jews are God's sovereign choice for delivering the gospel. - People have a tendency to believe in what they want to believe and deny all evidences contrary to their beliefs. Kind of like tradeoff studies where one decides the way to go and gather evidences allover to support the chosen scheme. - There is only one God but he is for the Jews and all others are born condemned. That is why anything that offers salvation for all nations must be false. Last but not least, let no one be intimidated by the spirit of oppression on net.religion and submit to it freely but responsibly.
leichter (02/12/83)
You ask why Jews are willing to accept all sorts of things beyond the Old Testament as true, but won't accept the New Testament. You suggest this might have something to do with a Jewish idea that Jews are chosen and everyone else is just going the wrong way. There is no simple answer to your question, but I can give you two pieces of information. First, Jews, like Christians, believe that there are hints - some, I think, in the Old Testament, but mainly in unwritten tradition (now long written down in many of the other books) - about how to recognize the true Messiah. Where Jewish and Christian traditions part is in deciding whether the hints indicate Jesus was the Messiah. In the Jewish interpreta- tion, the hints clearly show that Jesus was NOT the Messiah. By the way, there have been other claimants to the role of Jewish Messiah, at least one of whom - in the 13th century? - attracted quite a following. He was eventually renounced and his movement died soon after he did. As to the idea that Jews think only they are "good enough" to be saved: You are letting your own world-view color your understanding. In the "unwritten tradition", the following story is told: God developed the 10 Commandments as a guide to a way of life that would be good for man. Since God wants men to choose the good freely, He did not IMPOSE these laws; rather, he OFFERED them to the nations of the Earth. God did not offer any sort of "reward" for choosing to accept them; obeying them was a good in and of itself. (Notice how alien this is to much of our world-view. What was being offered was an OBLIGATION; the obligation is viewed as a good IN AND OF ITSELF - it is a good thing to accept an obligation to do good things.) Anyway, the nations of the Earth looked at the Commandments and decided they were too hard to follow; they would not accept them. Only the Israelites would accept them - and even they had a great deal of difficulty, as the story of the golden calf makes plain. Hence, Jews are bound by Jewish law as a matter of free choice, not inherent obligation. (You might wonder how today's Jews came to "choose". In Jewish tradition, ALL Jews were present at Sinai, and ALL chose.) Others did not choose to be bound, and are not. That's why Jews don't proseletize and, in fact, discourage conversions. Judaism is viewed as an obligation not to be entered into lightly, but only by free choice after careful consideration. Jewish tradition also does not deny that God loves and provides for non-Jews. There is nothing inherently inconsistent with Jewish tradition in believing that others may have a "right" religeon - so long as the worship the one true God. (I.e. the FORM of that worship is of no interest as such to Jews.) Judaism has always viewed vows and obligations as important and binding. God and the Jewish people exchanged vows, and they remain as valid as they ever were, notwithstanding any dealings God has since had with other peoples. So, Mr. Lee, next time try to understand the other person before making in- temperate remarks - and, yes, many of your remarks I read as intemperate, and what's important is how what you say is understood, not what you "really had in mind". For a Jew to hear a Christian talking with such certainty about the ONLY true way, and distorting the beliefs of others to make them look silly, is a frightening thing. Millions of Jews suffered over the last two millenia under the rule of Christians following "the Prince of Peace" for us to dismiss this as "just words". -- Jerry decvax!yale-comix!leichter
sher (02/15/83)
I have far more pressing matters right now but slander bothers me and slander against my religion is something I have been taught to respond to immediately and in public. A letter was submitted claiming that Judaism claims that salvation was only for the Jews. This is purely wrong. I will assume for now that he has received this false impression from some ignorant person or from some accidental misinterpretation of something he heard or read. Anyway what Judaism teaches is that Jews have certain responsibilities and because of this must follow certain laws. In return for this God has granted that our people should survive. This is a summary of my impression of what Judaism says about the differences between the Jews and the rest of the world. I do not even understand what you mean by salvation but whatever it is, if it is not an obligation to follow Jewish law then it is not denied to you. As far as believing in the New Testament, do you suggest that I should believe in the Koran also, how about the Hindu religious writings, the Cherokee lore? There's an awful lot of religious beliefs out there and I was born Jewish. -David Sher (oftimes AI project)
arlan (02/18/83)
While we are civilly considering why Jews do not accept the (so-called) New Testament, why don't we also consider why (so-called) Christians don't accept the later Revelations--The Book Of Mormon, for example? Surely, everyone is always interested in the latest update on the Holy Word? Or don't you all have a loose-leaf Bible? (In the small amount of reading I have done about the origin of the New Testament--The Council Of Nicea, etc.--I have come to the conclusion that no one today knows which, if any, of those stories should have been accepted into the Bible. Are there not books that Catholics accept that Protestants don't? Were not political affiliations the reasons why certain books (and certain contemporary believers) were thrown out or worse? Did not the Emperor and his consort help decide what was holy? Answer me these questions, showing that God maintained a strict control over His Word, and I'll start to believe your New Testament. If you can't answer them, you fundamentalists, then never again wave your 20th-century translations of 4th-century political interpretations of 1st-century philosophy at me, claiming that they are infallible and perfect. --arlan andrews/american bell/indy