Jesus the Jew

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Ahab said:

I just caught on to the idea that we should be referring to the religion of Christ as Judaism,  with the term/title of Christianity being considered at most only a sub-religious term/title for a particular form of Judaism.  

Now I'd just like to understand why others don't see it that way.

Not that this should necessarily rank high on the list of the world's problems that we should be trying to solve,  but to be technically correct we should be referring to the religion of Jesus as Judaism and Jesus as the most devout Jew that ever lived his religion.

This is silly. By that standard we should all be called Adamites or whatever the enemies of the Church called the faith Adam passed on through Seth because everything else is a branch off of that.

And no, we should call it Christianity because it was distinctly different from Judaism and founded by Christ. Do you also think followers of Islam should be called Christians because they are a Christian heresy/breakoff? Are Jainism and Buddhism really Hinduism?

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

This is silly. By that standard we should all be called Adamites or whatever the enemies of the Church called the faith Adam passed on through Seth because everything else is a branch off of that.

And no, we should call it Christianity because it was distinctly different from Judaism and founded by Christ. Do you also think followers of Islam should be called Christians because they are a Christian heresy/breakoff? Are Jainism and Buddhism really Hinduism?

I got this idea by thinking about what religion Jesus was brought up in by his parents as a mortal boy which he continued in as an adult.  That would have been called Judaism, at least by them, I believe. And I don't think they thought they should change the name of their religion from Judaism to Christianity, based on the Greek word Christ, or to some otber name based on his Messiah-ship either. 

The book of Acts states that the followers of Jesus were first called Christians in a town called Antioch. What do you think they called themselves?  They were followers of the Messiah they knew had come. Why start using the Greek word instead of the word in their own language?

I think you're intentionally not considering this issue seriously enough

 

[longview]

15 hours ago, Ahab said:

How would you explain the distinctions of each and how they are all intertwined? 

In some sense I feel right about thinking Mormonisn is eternal,  just as I think Christianity is eternal.  The idea that Judaism is also eternal is fairly new to me and I'm still working out the idea in my mind.

The Nation of Israel is a political entity that went thru several phases:  1- Moses freeing the Hebrew slaves from Egyptian bondage and leading them in 40 years of wandering in the desert of Midian (not Sinai);  2- Joshua and his army invading and pacifying the various fiefdoms in the land of Canaan;  3- Hebrews settling down into their various holdings assigned by tribal affiliation and living under the rule of the judges;  4- the people getting silly notions about establishing a king over them (just like their neighbors) and hoping that will help them be better able to withstand the predatory incursions by their neighbors;  5- eventually to become a superpower in the region under the reigns of David and Solomon;  6- only to be split between the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah.  The Jews in the Meridian of Time were more political than religious.

But Jesus was different.  He had a much greater vision sweeping over the entire history of Man.  He put all things in their proper perspective.

I don't think Mormonism is eternal.  It represents the restoration of all things that were revealed or practised in various times in earthly history.  In the next life we will see something bigger such as the "Church of the Firstborn" - - -

Doctrine and Covenants 93:22
22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.
Doctrine and Covenants 88:5
5 Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son—
Doctrine and Covenants 76:54
54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.
Doctrine and Covenants 78:21
21 For ye are the church of the Firstborn, and he will take you up in a cloud, and appoint every man his portion.
JST, Genesis 9:23
23 And the general assembly of the church of the firstborn shall come down out of heaven, and possess the earth, and shall have place until the end come. And this is mine everlasting covenant, which I made with thy father Enoch.
Hebrews 12:23
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Doctrine and Covenants 76:102
102 Last of all, these all are they who will not be gathered with the saints, to be caught up unto the church of the Firstborn, and received into the cloud.
Doctrine and Covenants 76:94
94 They who dwell in his presence are the church of the Firstborn; and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known, having received of his fulness and of his grace;
Doctrine and Covenants 76:71
71 And again, we saw the terrestrial world, and behold and lo, these are they who are of the terrestrial, whose glory differs from that of the church of the Firstborn who have received the fulness of the Father, even as that of the moon differs from the sun in the firmament.

[The Nehor]

On 2/20/2016 at 9:48 PM, Ahab said:

I got this idea by thinking about what religion Jesus was brought up in by his parents as a mortal boy which he continued in as an adult.  That would have been called Judaism, at least by them, I believe. And I don't think they thought they should change the name of their religion from Judaism to Christianity, based on the Greek word Christ, or to some otber name based on his Messiah-ship either. 

The book of Acts states that the followers of Jesus were first called Christians in a town called Antioch. What do you think they called themselves?  They were followers of the Messiah they knew had come. Why start using the Greek word instead of the word in their own language?

I think you're intentionally not considering this issue seriously enough

 

I think they called themselves followers of Jesus. Also, the religious instruction of Jesus was probably not primarily given by his mortal mother and stepfather so I doubt that unduly influenced his perception of his faith.

[halconero]

On February 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Raingirl said:

How could Christianity be considered a form of Judaism? Once you have embraced the concept of Jesus Christ, you have left Judaism. 

My perspective comes from having converted from Judaism myself.

That's a very modern perspective, and this coming from my own family who converted from Judaism.

Such a view did not necessarily exist from Jesus up until until Constatine. Many Jews would attend Synagoguge on the Sabbath, and Church on Sunday. Ebionites kept the law, read the Torah, and saw in the Gospel of Matthew a fulfillment of Mosaic Judaism with an emphasis on a higher level of keeping it.

[Ahab]

On 2/20/2016 at 7:32 AM, longview said:

The Nation of Israel is a political entity that went thru several phases:  1- Moses freeing the Hebrew slaves from Egyptian bondage and leading them in 40 years of wandering in the desert of Midian (not Sinai);  2- Joshua and his army invading and pacifying the various fiefdoms in the land of Canaan;  3- Hebrews settling down into their various holdings assigned by tribal affiliation and living under the rule of the judges;  4- the people getting silly notions about establishing a king over them (just like their neighbors) and hoping that will help them be better able to withstand the predatory incursions by their neighbors;  5- eventually to become a superpower in the region under the reigns of David and Solomon;  6- only to be split between the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah.  The Jews in the Meridian of Time were more political than religious.

But Jesus was different.  He had a much greater vision sweeping over the entire history of Man.  He put all things in their proper perspective.

I don't think Mormonism is eternal.  It represents the restoration of all things that were revealed or practised in various times in earthly history.  In the next life we will see something bigger such as the "Church of the Firstborn" - - -

Doctrine and Covenants 93:22
22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.
Doctrine and Covenants 88:5
5 Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son—
Doctrine and Covenants 76:54
54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.
Doctrine and Covenants 78:21
21 For ye are the church of the Firstborn, and he will take you up in a cloud, and appoint every man his portion.
JST, Genesis 9:23
23 And the general assembly of the church of the firstborn shall come down out of heaven, and possess the earth, and shall have place until the end come. And this is mine everlasting covenant, which I made with thy father Enoch.
Hebrews 12:23
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Doctrine and Covenants 76:102
102 Last of all, these all are they who will not be gathered with the saints, to be caught up unto the church of the Firstborn, and received into the cloud.
Doctrine and Covenants 76:94
94 They who dwell in his presence are the church of the Firstborn; and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known, having received of his fulness and of his grace;
Doctrine and Covenants 76:71
71 And again, we saw the terrestrial world, and behold and lo, these are they who are of the terrestrial, whose glory differs from that of the church of the Firstborn who have received the fulness of the Father, even as that of the moon differs from the sun in the firmament.

The Church of the Firstborn (who we know as Jesus Christ) is just another way of referring to The Church of Jesus Christ, whether we're referring to his Church in these latter days (which we know as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) or in some other earlier days, and by whatever other names his Church has been called.

The word "church" isn't even necessary as a part of the name of the body or assembly or congregation of the people who are Jesus' disciples, either, as long as the meaning in those words is conveyed.  Israel, for example, formerly known as Jacob, was also a disciple of Jesus and a part of his "church" even before the word "church" was used to refer to disciples of Jesus. 

So whatever words or names we use to refer to those people we should understand that they are all collectively in the same church (or body or assembly or congregation,  etc) of people. Including the Jews who were disciples of Jesus (or any other name that referred to Jesus). They were his people then just as much as we in his Church are his people now, and they still are even though many of them don't recognize Jesus as one of the names of the God they worship and who their ancestors have worshipped for millennia.

So with all that in mind now what do you think is the difference, if any, between a Jew and a Christian?  Which of those groups of people are his people?  The Jews or the Christians? I say both are the same group or at least in the same group, collectively,  even though some of the people in each group don't know as much about him as some others.

[longview]

7 hours ago, Ahab said:

So with all that in mind now what do you think is the difference, if any, between a Jew and a Christian?  Which of those groups of people are his people?  The Jews or the Christians? I say both are the same group or at least in the same group, collectively,  even though some of the people in each group don't know as much about him as some others.

Fundamentally, Jews tried to live the Law of Moses as rigorously as possible.  But they had apostatized on points of doctrine without really understanding how it happened.  They were waiting for a Messiah to come without understanding that He was to first come as a meek and lowly sacrificial lamb.  Their expected "Conqueror" will come the second time.

When Jesus explained that the Mosaic Law was to be fulfilled upon His death, some of His Jewish followers were able to make a clean break from the Law of Moses and start living the higher law in the new church of Christ.  Although many were confused and it took awhile before they were able to make the transition.  Some even tried to make the Gentile converts live by the Law such as mandating circumcision.  So the apostles (Peter and Paul and others) had their hands full getting their flocks to follow the new way.

So the "New Christians" parted ways from the "Old Jews".  When Christians are baptized, they are adopted into the "House of Israel" without any entanglement with Judaism except those principles that are accepted and taught in the new Church of Christ.  Christianity is NOT an offshoot of Judaism.  Judaism was a temporary diversion to help the rebellious Hebrews overcome their problems (Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.  25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.)

I still think that the church in the next life will be different and greater than the earthly church (Kingdom of God on the Earth).  I will check my notes for the name of the Heavenly Church.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 2/19/2016 at 11:25 AM, Duncan said:

isn't the million dollar question, what kind of jew was Jesus?

Jesus was a pharisaic rabbi, as was Paul his apostle.

[Craig Bolton]

I am a  "Jew by choice." I am interested in this site because there is much virtue in Mormonism and some strong similarities with some sorts of Judaism.

[USU78]

4 minutes ago, Craig Bolton said:

I am a  "Jew by choice." I am interested in this site because there is much virtue in Mormonism and some strong similarities with some sorts of Judaism.

Welcome, craig

[volgadon]

5 hours ago, Craig Bolton said:

I am a  "Jew by choice." I am interested in this site because there is much virtue in Mormonism and some strong similarities with some sorts of Judaism.

Welcome! Thus is a topic of great interest to me.

[Ahab]

22 hours ago, Craig Bolton said:

I am a  "Jew by choice." I am interested in this site because there is much virtue in Mormonism and some strong similarities with some sorts of Judaism.

Hello and welcome.  

I think it helps to realize that words are tools to help us get some ideas and there are multiple definitions/ideas associated with every word. Including words that are used as titles and names for things.

The word Judaism for example refers to what some ancient people were taught in the past by the person we now know by the name of Jesus Christ, although many of those people referred to him by some other name back then. Some knew him by that name, though, even when other people didn't. Like some of the prophets who wrote what we now call the Book of Mormon. 

So they were being taught by Jesus while following the laws he gave them through Moses and for some reason we usually refer to those disciples of Jesus as Jews. But why don't we  refer to them as Christians? And why don't we refer to ourselves and other Christians today as Jews? 

As you say there are some strong similarities between us and them.

I think we just need to think more about everything that is involved in a name without any unwarranted restrictions on all they can be used to convey.

[Craig Bolton]

Well, let me define my words then ..... Jews are those are of the tribe of Judah. Judah and Benjamin were the only two tribes remaining after the conquest and obliteration of the Kingdom of Israel. Benjamin was comparatively a very small tribe and eventually became absorbed into Judah.

At some point in history, probably before the obliteration of Israel, the tribes began accepting converts. I am such a convert.

J ews today are not governed by the OT, since about 40% of the 613 laws in the OT have to do with temple observance,  And there has been no Jewish Temple for about 1950 years. Jews today look to the Babylonian Talmud and Responses authored by rabbis. The Talmud contains many sorts of writings, but it is most notable for its summaries of debates among the venerable founding rabbis.

There is no Jewish creed or theology, or, perhaps more accurate, there are many opinions about creeds and theology. Judaism (the culture and beliefs of Jews) are much more concerned with right action than with right belief.

[Ahab]

34 minutes ago, Craig Bolton said:

Well, let me define my words then ..... Jews are those are of the tribe of Judah. Judah and Benjamin were the only two tribes remaining after the conquest and obliteration of the Kingdom of Israel. Benjamin was comparatively a very small tribe and eventually became absorbed into Judah.

At some point in history, probably before the obliteration of Israel, the tribes began accepting converts. I am such a convert.

J ews today are not governed by the OT, since about 40% of the 613 laws in the OT have to do with temple observance,  And there has been no Jewish Temple for about 1950 years. Jews today look to the Babylonian Talmud and Responses authored by rabbis. The Talmud contains many sorts of writings, but it is most notable for its summaries of debates among the venerable founding rabbis.

There is no Jewish creed or theology, or, perhaps more accurate, there are many opinions about creeds and theology. Judaism (the culture and beliefs of Jews) are much more concerned with right action than with right belief.

In your view can't a Jew also be from any tribe/heritage of Israel, as well as anyone from a so-called Gentile nation that converts to Judaism?  With Judaism referring to the religion of all of Israel,  collectively, including everything taught by all the prophets of our Lord to Israel?

Abraham,  for example, and Jacob/Israel too, and all of our Lord's prophets since the days of Adam.  Wouldn't they be considered Jews of old, as fathers of all Jews and those who established what Judaism is and has been all about since long ago?

The idea I'm working with now involves what some may consider a radical change in understanding what Judaism is and is all about,  but nonetheless it is what it is and always has been about.  

Accepting what it is and has always been about, though, instead of rejecting parts of it because of a lack of faith to accept more and more from what our Lord (and Savior) has been trying to teach us for thousands of years. 

[volgadon]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

In your view can't a Jew also be from any tribe/heritage of Israel, as well as anyone from a so-called Gentile nation that converts to Judaism?  With Judaism referring to the religion of all of Israel,  collectively, including everything taught by all the prophets of our Lord to Israel?

Abraham,  for example, and Jacob/Israel too, and all of our Lord's prophets since the days of Adam.  Wouldn't they be considered Jews of old, as fathers of all Jews and those who established what Judaism is and has been all about since long ago?

The idea I'm working with now involves what some may consider a radical change in understanding what Judaism is and is all about,  but nonetheless it is what it is and always has been about.  

Accepting what it is and has always been about, though, instead of rejecting parts of it because of a lack of faith to accept more and more from what our Lord (and Savior) has been trying to teach us for thousands of years. 

What Craig Bolton is saying (if I may be presumptuous) is that Judaism today is a religion revolving around the interpretation of the Torah by the early rabbis and their successors, and being post-exilic, largely belonged to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin Has nothing to do with rejecting things because of a lack of faith.

[Craig Bolton]

The term "Jew" refers to a later cultural group than the term "Hebrew." Hebrews arose from the second of the sons of Abraham. Jews were what was left of the Hebrews after the destruction of the northern Kingdom of Israel. In a still later historical development. http://genius.com/Shaye-j-d-cohen-ancient-judaism-chronology-and-definitions-annotated.

That is the history of Jews.  On the separate topic of the contemporary nature of Judaism, Volgadon is correct as to the institutions. But note what I said before about the substance of contemporary Judaism.

 

 

[Robert F. Smith]

On 2/20/2016 at 8:32 AM, longview said:

The Nation of Israel is a political entity that went thru several phases:  1- Moses freeing the Hebrew slaves from Egyptian bondage and leading them in 40 years of wandering in the desert of Midian (not Sinai);  2- Joshua and his army invading and pacifying the various fiefdoms in the land of Canaan;  3- Hebrews settling down into their various holdings assigned by tribal affiliation and living under the rule of the judges;  4- the people getting silly notions about establishing a king over them (just like their neighbors) and hoping that will help them be better able to withstand the predatory incursions by their neighbors;  5- eventually to become a superpower in the region under the reigns of David and Solomon;  6- only to be split between the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah.  The Jews in the Meridian of Time were more political than religious.

But Jesus was different.  He had a much greater vision sweeping over the entire history of Man.  He put all things in their proper perspective.

....................................................................................................

Why did you stop with #6?? You might have gone on to (7) the destruction of the Northern Kingdom, and its Exile, (8) the destruction of Judah, and the Exile of the Jews, (9) the return of the Jews under Persian aegis,(10) their brief independence, (11) conquest by the Romans and King Herod the Great, (12) Exile for two millennia, and (13) the modern gathering of the Jews and founding of the State of Israel (fulfilling Scripture and the specific 1841 dedication by Apostle Orson Hyde of Palestine to the return of the Jews and rebuilding of their temple).  What kind of perspective is that?  What  would Jesus the Jew say?

Edited February 27, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[longview]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Why did you stop with #6?? You might have gone on to (7) the destruction of the Northern Kingdom, and its Exile, (8) the destruction of Judah, and the Exile of the Jews, (9) the return of the Jews under Persian aegis,(10) their brief independence, (11) conquest by the Romans and King Herod the Great, (12) Exile for two millennia, and (13) the modern gathering of the Jews and founding of the State of Israel (fulfilling Scripture and the specific 1841 dedication by Apostle Orson Hyde of Palestine to the return of the Jews and rebuilding of their temple).  What kind of perspective is that?  What  would Jesus the Jew say?

I stopped because it gets murkier after that point.  I once heard a fireside speaker claim that the modern state of Israel is NOT fulfillment of prophecy (don't remember his name, it was back in late '80s).  I am more interested in knowing when and how the Temple will be built in Jerusalem.  Especially with the moslems being VERY touchy about the Dome of the Rock.

[Guest]

On February 19, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Ahab said:

I just caught on to the idea that we should be referring to the religion of Christ as Judaism,  with the term/title of Christianity being considered at most only a sub-religious term/title for a particular form of Judaism.  

Now I'd just like to understand why others don't see it that way.

Not that this should necessarily rank high on the list of the world's problems that we should be trying to solve,  but to be technically correct we should be referring to the religion of Jesus as Judaism and Jesus as the most devout Jew that ever lived his religion.

 

Note: Jesus is the "author and finisher" of our's or any true faith. Of course he was a Jew, but came to to change the Fath of Christianty, the did so when true faith had strayed. After all he is is the is the Church. 

[Ahab]

13 hours ago, Craig Bolton said:

The term "Jew" refers to a later cultural group than the term "Hebrew." Hebrews arose from the second of the sons of Abraham. Jews were what was left of the Hebrews after the destruction of the northern Kingdom of Israel. In a still later historical development. http://genius.com/Shaye-j-d-cohen-ancient-judaism-chronology-and-definitions-annotated.

That is the history of Jews.  On the separate topic of the contemporary nature of Judaism, Volgadon is correct as to the institutions. But note what I said before about the substance of contemporary Judaism.

 

 

Okay, so in your (and other's) view you see many divisions between the faith and religion of those who have been disciples of our Lord and his prophets since the days of Adam (and Eve) up to the present day.  And you distinguish those divisions with different names, like whatever you would call the faith and religion of Adam (and Eve), and then at some later point whatever you would call the faith and religion of the Hebrews...perhaps with another name or many other names for divisions of faith and religion you see between the days of Adam (and Eve) up to the days of the Hebrews... and then another name for the faith and religion of the Jews, and then another name for the faith and religion of the Jews who accepted Jesus as their Lord (and Messiah/Christ/Savior) vs the Jews that didn't, and then another name (or many other names?) for the faith and religion of the disciples of Jesus (the Christ/ Messiah) in our present day.  With many different levels of however much people were able to accept from what our Lord has been trying to teach us for thousands of years.

What I'm trying to convey to you though is that I see our Lord's message to us as the same message he's been trying to teach us for thousands of years.  And just as today there are disciples of our Lord with more knowledge of him and his teachings than some others today,  so too there have also been different levels of knowledge of him through all of those thousands of years.  But not because our Lord is more willing to teach us more today.  That isn't the case.  These latter days are simply the days of a restoration of all the things our Lord had already been teaching for thousands of years, since the days of Adam (and Eve).

So what all encompassing term do you think we should or could use to refer to the common faith of our fathers going all the way back to Adam and Eve?  MUST we maintain the division you see with different terms, or can we use only one name to refer to them all? And more to my point, can't we just use any one of the names to refer to them all?  Whether we use the term Judaism or Christianity or Mormonism, isn't the essence of it all the same thing?  I think so, and I understand that some others don't,  but I think we could all see it that way if we wanted to.

And while I agree that Judaism/ Christianity/ Mormonism should be more concerned with right action than right belief, belief itself is based on the action of believing so we still need to have a concern in whatever we choose to believe. 

[Craig Bolton]

23 hours ago, Ahab said:

 

What I'm trying to convey to you though is that I see our Lord's message to us as the same message he's been trying to teach us for thousands of years.  And just as today there are disciples of our Lord with more knowledge of him and his teachings than some others today,  so too there have also been different levels of knowledge of him through all of those thousands of years.  But not because our Lord is more willing to teach us more today.  That isn't the case.  These latter days are simply the days of a restoration of all the things our Lord had already been teaching for thousands of years, since the days of Adam (and Eve).

So what all encompassing term do you think we should or could use to refer to the common faith of our fathers going all the way back to Adam and Eve?  MUST we maintain the division you see with different terms, or can we use only one name to refer to them all? And more to my point, can't we just use any one of the names to refer to them all?  Whether we use the term Judaism or Christianity or Mormonism, isn't the essence of it all the same thing?  I think so, and I understand that some others don't,  but I think we could all see it that way if we wanted to.

And while I agree that Judaism/ Christianity/ Mormonism should be more concerned with right action than right belief, belief itself is based on the action of believing so we still need to have a concern in whatever we choose to believe. 

 

[Craig Bolton]

(1) If G-d has a message to convey, surely he is capable of conveying it.

(2) If it is one message, what is the function of numerous historical and contemporary prophets?

[Ahab]

5 hours ago, Craig Bolton said:

(1) If G-d has a message to convey, surely he is capable of conveying it.

(2) If it is one message, what is the function of numerous historical and contemporary prophets?

1) He is, was, and always will be.

2) If it can be considered one message I'd say it is in the sense of everything he has ever said and will ever say being in harmony, whether he has said it himself or through messengers he has appointed to speak for him.

Wouldn't you say so as well?