Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A Question for Messianic Jews

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    I agree. Personally, I tend to think of such heavenly realities as everything we know currently and much, much more. If we go about subtracting things that we know now, we end up not being able to say or imagine anything at all, which I do not disagree with either, but I would usually rather affirm what we currently know of reality than say nothing at all. But I still see no reason to deny Jesus' Jewish identity. But we can just agree to disagree about that. When you pray to Jesus, do you still use his given, Jewish, name?
    Thanks for the discussion Rob, it's always a WONDROUS experience interacting with you.

    In prayer I mostly use Lord-God, Lord-Jesus, and Father-God.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    As stated, its hard to say because the glorified humanity is vastly different from our current state. I will state that Jesus is glorified in fullness of deity - that is His identity, anything else is speculation that I cannot confirm or deny, but I do have a viewpoint that has been stated, and I think it is faithful to the Scriptures.
    I agree. Personally, I tend to think of such heavenly realities as everything we know currently and much, much more. If we go about subtracting things that we know now, we end up not being able to say or imagine anything at all, which I do not disagree with either, but I would usually rather affirm what we currently know of reality than say nothing at all. But I still see no reason to deny Jesus' Jewish identity. But we can just agree to disagree about that. When you pray to Jesus, do you still use his given, Jewish, name?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    So do you also think that Jesus used to be a man but now he is neither a man nor a woman? Likewise, he is neither a slave nor free? Even now, Jesus, as God, has no free will? Do you think Galatians 3,28 is really speaking of Christ's lack of sexual identity?
    As stated, its hard to say because the glorified humanity is vastly different from our current state. I will state that Jesus is glorified in fullness of deity - that is His identity, anything else is speculation that I cannot confirm or deny, but I do have a viewpoint that has been stated, and I think it is faithful to the Scriptures.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    Its hard to say because the glorified humanity is vastly different from our current state, I imagine. In Christ there is no Jew nor Gentile, no male nor female, etc. I think this reality will be fully realized in our glorified state that will utterly eclipse all earthly distinctions.
    So do you also think that Jesus used to be a man but now he is neither a man nor a woman? Likewise, he is neither a slave nor free? Even now, Jesus, as God, has no free will? Do you think Galatians 3,28 is really speaking of Christ's lack of sexual identity?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    Are there other aspects of Jesus' humanity that you think he must somehow renounce or relinquish? Or just his Jewishness?
    Its hard to say because the glorified humanity is vastly different from our current state, I imagine. In Christ there is no Jew nor Gentile, no male nor female, etc. I think this reality will be fully realized in our glorified state that will utterly eclipse all earthly distinctions.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    It's just how I see it when I take matters into consideration. Though if I am not 100% correct here, I am OK with that.
    Are there other aspects of Jesus' humanity that you think he must somehow renounce or relinquish? Or just his Jewishness?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    Why? Was his full human identity incapable of being glorified? Why must he somehow renounce elements of his human identity? Is there something bad about Jesus being Jewish?
    It's just how I see it when I take matters into consideration. Though if I am not 100% correct here, I am OK with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    I would say that as Jesus' pre-existent status held no nationality, likewise his risen glorified humanity holds no nationality. We too will be like him in our glorified state and earthly matters such as race and nationality will be swallowed up in glory.
    Why? Was his full human identity incapable of being glorified? Why must he somehow renounce elements of his human identity? Is there something bad about Jesus being Jewish?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    I am not saying how much significance we should attribute to the various details of Jesus' earthly existence. What about Jesus' humanity, would you say that Jesus is no longer human because the second person of the Trinity pre-existed humanity?
    I would say that as Jesus' pre-existent status held no nationality, likewise his risen glorified humanity holds no nationality. We too will be like him in our glorified state and earthly matters such as race and nationality will be swallowed up in glory.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnnyP
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Johnny,

    The biggest problem I have with your "analysis" is that you seem to take a small section of Scripture, then go on a rabbit hunt to find anything else that might be related to it.

    The FIRST thing I believe we need to do is to look at the CONTEXT of the passage in question -- not just the "verse", but the "paragraph" (other verses in that same text that are directly related to the verse or verses in question). In the case of Ephesians, we would take the letter as a whole.

    We need to look at who is writing, to WHOM he is writing, what situation is being addressed, and how the audience to whom he is speaking would understand what he was saying. Not how WE would understand it, but how his audience would have understood it.

    You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but to me it looks like you have a preconceived notion of what you want to say, then you hunt up a bunch of verses to support your position.

    Frequently, the author is actually saying what he is saying, rather than some hidden agenda.
    That would seem to be the case with 1 Corinthians 7:18, he's plainly saying let Jews be Jews observing full Torah, and Gentiles be Gentiles observing partial Torah, therein lies a difference don't you think?

    I cited other verses to address the idea of breaking the partition which doesn't mean that all Jews turn into Gentiles or Gentiles into Jews, with all observing the same Torah. Rather it means that they all share in the promises of Israel.

    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I don't think Matthew 5:17-19 is a commandment to keep all the laws of Torah, because Jesus did not do that (at least with the Sabbath law). I see it as talking about how the moral principles behind the law remain intact.
    Jesus did otherwise he would have been a lawbreaker and rightly criticized and/or punished by Jewish authorities, and he wouldn't have fulfilled the Law either. JPH also has a page about that HERE, in summary: "But Jesus is not breaking the OT law; he is violating a "tradition of the elders" - part of the Pharasaic oral law, or code of interpretation, not the actual law."

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    I don't think Matthew 5:17-19 is a commandment to keep all the laws of Torah, because Jesus did not do that (at least with the Sabbath law). I see it as talking about how the moral principles behind the law remain intact.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
    I think when Paul says...
    Johnny,

    The biggest problem I have with your "analysis" is that you seem to take a small section of Scripture, then go on a rabbit hunt to find anything else that might be related to it.

    The FIRST thing I believe we need to do is to look at the CONTEXT of the passage in question -- not just the "verse", but the "paragraph" (other verses in that same text that are directly related to the verse or verses in question). In the case of Ephesians, we would take the letter as a whole.

    We need to look at who is writing, to WHOM he is writing, what situation is being addressed, and how the audience to whom he is speaking would understand what he was saying. Not how WE would understand it, but how his audience would have understood it.

    You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but to me it looks like you have a preconceived notion of what you want to say, then you hunt up a bunch of verses to support your position.

    Frequently, the author is actually saying what he is saying, rather than some hidden agenda.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnnyP
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    A "difference" is not necessary, because He has broken down the middle wall of partition between us....
    Source: Ephesians 2

    11Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

    © Copyright Original Source

    I think when Paul says...
    Source: KJV

    1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised (MESSIANIC JEW). Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised (GENTILE CHRISTIAN).

    © Copyright Original Source


    ...he means, if you're a Gentile, you're probably better of remaining a Gentile and not taking on more of the Law than you have to, since if you fail to live up to it then it's counted against you:
    Source: KJV

    Galatians 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

    © Copyright Original Source


    That similar attitude exists in Judaism, full conversion isn't necessary, you can be a righteous Gentile only observing some of the Laws, mainly Moral and Judicial.

    However Paul telling Jews not to become uncircumcised would mean not abandoning other parts of Torah like Ceremonial Laws they are already observing as Jews. For example, Paul is telling Jews they shouldn't start eating pork and being like Gentiles just because they become Christians. This is also reflected here:
    Source: KJV

    Matthew 5:17-19 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    © Copyright Original Source


    Thus the "broken partition" as such doesn't mean there still won't be circumcised Jews who observe all applicable Torah, and uncircumcised Gentiles who only observe some of it. It means that uncircumcised Gentiles are able to be graffed in to share in promises of circumcised Jews: 2 Olive Trees, Jewish/natural and Gentile/wild, both united in Jesus.
    Source: KJV

    Romans 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

    Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

    © Copyright Original Source


    So outside of what the Bible says we can see two extremes: Judaizers who insist on circumcision and/or fully converting to become Jews, and Gentilzers/Replacement Theologians who insist on abandoning full observance of Torah.

    Leave a comment:


  • robrecht
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    I agree, but I think the verse can applied in the manner I am using it as well, especially since the distinction of Jew and Gentile in Christ is abolished to make way for the new man or third humanity.

    I don't think my nationality will hold much significance in the glorified state, if any at all. I don't think we should ignore the fact that Jesus WAS Jewish, but I think to see Jesus/God as Jewish now would be wrongheaded as Jesus existed before Jewishness existed.
    I am not saying how much significance we should attribute to the various details of Jesus' earthly existence. What about Jesus' humanity, would you say that Jesus is no longer human because the second person of the Trinity pre-existed humanity?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrawly
    replied
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    I think the verse from 2nd Corinthians is referring to Paul's previous understanding of the role of the Messiah from a human perspective, subsequent to his experience of the risen Christ, after which he accepted and helped develop a much more transcendent and divine christology.
    I agree, but I think the verse can applied in the manner I am using it as well, especially since the distinction of Jew and Gentile in Christ is abolished to make way for the new man or third humanity.

    When you yourself are raised from the dead in the glory of Christ, do you expect that you will no longer remember your hometown, your friends and family members? Of course not, right? Why should we forget or ignore this about Jesus?
    I don't think my nationality will hold much significance in the glorified state, if any at all. I don't think we should ignore the fact that Jesus WAS Jewish, but I think to see Jesus/God as Jewish now would be wrongheaded as Jesus existed before Jewishness existed.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 10-16-2021, 04:01 PM
21 responses
129 views
2 likes
Last Post Sparko
by Sparko
 
Started by nico, 10-08-2021, 11:16 AM
26 responses
159 views
0 likes
Last Post KingsGambit  
Started by Bill the Cat, 09-29-2021, 08:31 AM
76 responses
511 views
0 likes
Last Post NorrinRadd  
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 09-20-2021, 08:19 AM
28 responses
138 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by NorrinRadd, 09-07-2021, 04:03 AM
33 responses
195 views
0 likes
Last Post nico
by nico
 
Working...
X