Something Bad Jesus Did

[Saltmeister]

I dislike the Golden Rule because few have managed to say it positively, always it relies on what not to do. Allow me to attempt something a little more positive:

Grow love in yourself and share it abundantly.

That's the same as not to do to others what we would not like they did to us.
Ben

Why does it matter so much whether you state it positively or negatively? If you're not doing something, you're still doing something. You're simply doing something else. If you're not busy, then you're either idle and thinking, sleeping or lying in the grave rotting away. Even if your entire body were to cease to exist, by staying out of the dramas of the universe, you're still contributing in your absence. That is something you're doing.

It's really just a linguistic construct. It just depends on which way you're looking at it.

If A = opposite of B then B = opposite of A

NCOT, the state of Israel is the moral responsibility of the whole damn world. The Empire f'ed it up with promising the land to both Jew and Arab. The US f'ed it up by pushing for a partition. The UN f'ed it up by providing a partitionthat, like Inda, could never work. The neighboring "brotherly" Arab states f'ed it up by promising that if the Palestineans left, they would make it Judenfrei and keeping the survivors in prison camps (while Israel resettled any Sephardic Jews who wished to come). The people of Israel f'ed it up by electing murferes like Sharon and Bebe.

The world will never be able to solve the problem that is Israel. Only the messiah can solve that problem, which is why he must come. The messiah will resolve all the confusion. In addition, anyone who claims he is the messiah and does not resolve all the confusion is a false messiah.

 

[wil]

The golden rule is the height of arrogance...

Do unto others as you would have done unto you...

Who are you to assume that whatever you like to have done unto you others would as well???

How about, 'Do unto others as they would have done unto them....or leave them alone and move on.'

I agree with you that the options you have presented above, are indeed the height of arrogance; but the formula I provided you with, I mean, authored by Hillel, is the height of common sense and magnanimity. Not to do unto onthers what we would not like they did unto us. Think! It's quite different from the options you have suggested above.
Ben
Ben

Nah, the same arrogance is there. Who are you to assume that they would not want done unto them what you would not want done unto you?

While I don't eat meat, as my choice, should I not serve meat to others as their choice?

I may be allergic to nuts, but my friend loves peanut brittle, should I not give it to him as a gift?

 

[Ben Masada]

wil-

Brava, right there with "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind", "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel", "loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world--and never will," and, my favorite "if Christ were here there is one thing he would not be--a Christian".

And I'll sign to that one.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

The world will never be able to solve the problem that is Israel. Only the messiah can solve that problem, which is why he must come. The messiah will resolve all the confusion. In addition, anyone who claims he is the messiah and does not resolve all the confusion is a false messiah.

Did Jesus solve the problem you claim is Israel? No, he rather complicated it farther. Does it mean you agree that Jesus was a false Messiah? That would be the conclusion if you reasoned about your own words. Besides, Israel is not the problem. The problem is what the world make of Israel. No wonder Hitler thought he had come to the final solution for the Jewish problem. Today he and all under him are gone while Israel remains stronger than never.
Ben

 

[Saltmeister]

Did Jesus solve the problem you claim is Israel? No, he rather complicated it farther. Does it mean you agree that Jesus was a false Messiah? That would be the conclusion if you reasoned about your own words. Besides, Israel is not the problem. The problem is what the world make of Israel. No wonder Hitler thought he had come to the final solution for the Jewish problem. Today he and all under him are gone while Israel remains stronger than never.

Let us not forget the context in which I said that. I was talking about the "confusion" in today's Middle Eastern politics regarding Israel. It's also not just any kind of "confusion," but confusion that involves violence and bloodshed. Many of the organisations meddling in Israeli and Middle Eastern politics are armed with weapons that can kill. Whether it's the Americans, the Zionists, the British or the Israeli Defence Force, they're all in the business of violence.

The point made by Jesus, Chabad/Schneerson and those Orthodox Jews protesting against Zionism and the state of Israel is that the "messiah" doesn't need violence, a nation state, a national government or a national army to achieve his goals. I think we have seen how, in the last 50 or more years that violence and military posturing have not solved the problem of "Israel" and that violence and military posturing only leads to more "confusion." Those Orthodox rabbis who opposed Zionism from the very start had a good point.

Why Orthodox Jews are Opposed to the Zionist State

I think there is a good reason why the messiah won't need violence or an army to achieve his goals. Consider the presence of 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims in the world today. Consider what Maimonides said about Christianity and Islam:

All those words of Jesus of Nazareth and of this Ishmaelite [i.e., Muhammad] who arose after him are only to make straight the path for the messianic king and to prepare the whole world to serve the Lord together.

Consider that many of the things in Christian and Islamic tradition have their roots in Judaism. When the messiah comes, he may not even need to fight a war. All he may need to do is tell those 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims to discover the Jewish roots in their traditions and all wars will end. National governments with be abolished. National armies will be disbanded. This is when a new era will begin.

The Zionists, Illuminatis, fundamentalist terrorists and others who believe in violence are likely to be led astray by "false messiahs" when the "great war" begins as prophesied in Zionist, Christian and Islamic tradition. Each will have its own ideology, but the fundamental flaw in their ideology is their belief that violence is necessary in achieving their goals. These "false messiahs" will simply create more "confusion" or allow the existing "confusion" to persist. They will fail to eliminate the confusion because violence only leads to more violence.

The "true messiah" will establish the messianic kingdom with a bloodless coup. He will be able to persuade the 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims to embrace their roots. The messiah will probably send rabbis to the billions of non-Jews in the world to spread his message. When this happens, there will be a massive sociological and political movement throughout the world. Massive social and political changes will be made without governments or armies.

 

[luecy7]

The golden rule is the height of arrogance...

Do unto others as you would have done unto you...

Who are you to assume that whatever you like to have done unto you others would as well???

How about, 'Do unto others as they would have done unto them....or leave them alone and move on.'

It seems like you are associating with the physical thing rather than the manner or the intention, and then you call that the arrogance of the golden rule. As in: give the thing that you would have others give to you, rather than: giving to others in the manner that you would have others giving to you. Another approach is to replace that 'thing' with something like a confession or a choice. Give a choice. Give a confession. Give some love.


Then there is that negated version: 'don't do'. In my opinion, the adherent misses the boat with those manners of love, patience, faith, honesty, confession, charity, etc... which takes some self directed 'doing'.

 

[Ben Masada]

Whether it's the Americans, the Zionists, the British or the Israeli Defence Force, they're all in the business of violence.

Violence, no doubt, but perpetrated by the dark side of humanity in the struggle to extinguish the light Israel has been set aside to shine among the nations. (Isa. 42:6) What did you expect that we dismantle our Defense Forces and sit duck to be pushed into the sea? We would not exist today if we adopted that attitude. We have faught five major wars with forces far superior to ours, covenanted themselves with one purpose only: To push us into the sea. That's repetition of History in our modern Gideon with his 300 warriors by the grace of Adonai.

The point made by Jesus, Chabad/Schneerson and those Orthodox Jews protesting against Zionism and the state of Israel is that the "messiah" doesn't need violence, a nation state, a national government or a national army to achieve his goals.

You believe that Jesus was the Messiah. What did he do to achieve the goal of peace? He rather lost his own life in violence, and left Israel in a worse situation. So much for the Messiah that you claim he was.

I think there is a good reason why the messiah won't need violence or an army to achieve his goals. Consider the presence of 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims in the world today. Consider what Maimonides said about Christianity and Islam: "All those words of Jesus of Nazareth and of this Ishmaelite [i.e., Muhammad] who arose after him are only to make straight the path for the messianic king and to prepare the whole world to serve the Lord together."

Sorry, but I am unable to acknowledge that Maimonides talked about Christianity and Islam in those words you use. I have read several of Maimonides' works and I do not recall such a text. It rather seems to be a forgery to me.

Consider that many of the things in Christian and Islamic tradition have their roots in Judaism.

They love to claim those roots. IMHO, they exist rather as a plagiarism than in reality. Christianity owes its rise to Paul about 35 years after Jesus had been gone. And Islam in the 7th Century as also a religion of its own. Both quite hostile to Judaism. BTW, we have lost thousands of lives as a result of the violence of both.

The "true messiah" will establish the messianic kingdom with a bloodless coup. He will be able to persuade the 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims to embrace their roots.

Well, you believe that Jesus was the Messiah. How is it that he failed to establish the messianic kingdom with a bloodless coup? Even with shedding of blood, including his, he did not succeed.

Ben

 

[radarmark]

Ben try Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 11:10–12. It is one of Miamonides' rather more famous remarks.

You and Saltmeister are using the term "Messiah" quite differently. He in his Christian mind-set, you in your Jewish one.

What does "Annointed" really mean (over and above both conflicting, unreconcilable definitions)? "He or she who will come chosen by the divine". So there would be lots of Messiahs.

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben try Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 11:10–12. It is one of Miamonides' rather more famous remarks.

I have read the whole of the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides, but I'll check it out again. I am not familiar with that text. I'll be back to you soon.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

You and Saltmeister are using the term "Messiah" quite differently. He in his Christian mind-set, you in your Jewish one.

What does "Annointed" really mean (over and above both conflicting, unreconcilable definitions)? "He or she who will come chosen by the divine". So there would be lots of Messiahs.

You might be right. Anointed means Maschiach in Hebrew and Christ in Greek. A king is an anointed, so is a prophet, and so is the People of Israel, according to Habakkuk 3:13, as it goes thus: "Thou have come forth to save Thy People, Thy anointed one." An anointed one can also be a person with a special mission, even if he is not Jewish, as in the case of Cyrus. (Isa. 45:1) But the Messiah per se, there were two in the History of Israel. Israel, the Ten Tribes aka Messiah ben Joseph and Judah, the Jewish People aka Messiah ben David. Messiah ben Joseph is gone as it was sacrificed for the sins of Judah, (Isa. 53:11,12) and Messiah ben David remains as a People before the Lord forever. (Jer. 31:35-37)
Ben

 

[radarmark]

So, do as I do. "Annointed" for both (and more, the Madhi would be in this group). "Christ" for the "Christian Messiah". And leave "Messiah" for the Maschiach.

That way you do not talk past each other.

 

[Saltmeister]

You believe that Jesus was the Messiah. What did he do to achieve the goal of peace? He rather lost his own life in violence, and left Israel in a worse situation. So much for the Messiah that you claim he was.

You are mistaken. I did not claim that Jesus was "messiah" and nor did I say I "believed" he was "messiah." I have not done that for at least 12 months, perhaps even longer. Can you present evidence for such a claim or belief? If not, you have no business in making the above statement.

Quite obviously, Judaism and "Christianity" have different definitions of "messiah." Because there are so many different definitions of "messiah," it becomes practically pointless to use the same word and try to impart the same meaning to it. Jewish messiah, Christian messiah, Muslim messiah, Davidic messiah, priestly messiah, Essenic messiah, individual messiah, collective messiah -- the word becomes meaningless in a discussion when people go into it with a different definition.

To say that one "believes" that Jesus is "messiah" is meaningless. Because the Jewish and Christian concepts are different, neither is right or wrong. To say that one "believes" Jesus was "messiah" does not make him more or less of what he is. He cannot be "more," because Jews don't accept him as messiah. He also cannot be "less," because he at least conforms to the "conventional Christian" definition. Because he is neither more or less after the "belief" is affirmed, the affirmation of such a belief changes nothing. The claim that Jesus is "messiah" is an anachronism. It refers to something he said or did 2,000 years ago, not to something that will happen in the future. Because the claim refers to something in the past, not to the future it means nothing today.

The problem, however is that you assumed that I was talking about the "conventional" Christian concept of messiah and yet you don't even ascribe to the concept of messiah I commonly hear from Jews. You talk about a collective messiah rather than an individual one.

I said nothing about Jesus being the messiah, only that whoever establishes the messianic kingdom will not need a national army, national government or nation state. Religious tradition, not armies or governments will be the basis by which the messiah establishes the new regime. Jews will not part from their Torah, Muslims will not part from their Quran and Christians will not part from their NT. The messiah will show that the three can be sociologically linked without compromising tradition. He will take advantage of the existence of two religions that have Judaism as their roots and he will give them "new instructions." He will offer a new "hermeneutic." This is how he will achieve his aims without violence.

Jesus is not necessary. Occam's Razor.

They love to claim those roots. IMHO, they exist rather as a plagiarism than in reality. Christianity owes its rise to Paul about 35 years after Jesus had been gone. And Islam in the 7th Century as also a religion of its own. Both quite hostile to Judaism. BTW, we have lost thousands of lives as a result of the violence of both.

Plagiarism or not, they still have Jewish tradition as their roots. Plagiarism actually implies roots. Many of Islam's laws have their basis in Jewish Law. Many of Jesus' teachings have their basis in Jewish tradition.

The future of the Jewish people may not rest in the Israeli Defence Force, but in the billions of people who follow religions that have Judaism as their root. To believe that the IDF is the future of the Jewish people is to believe in violence. To believe that the billions of Christians and Muslims are the key to the future of the Jewish people is to believe in a more peaceful solution. This is the purpose of interfaith discussions.

We have faught five major wars with forces far superior to ours, covenanted themselves with one purpose only: To push us into the sea. That's repetition of History in our modern Gideon with his 300 warriors by the grace of Adonai.

Who exactly do you mean by "we?" Do you mean the Israeli Defence Force and their military doctrine? Do you represent the Israeli Defence Force?

Violence, no doubt, but perpetrated by the dark side of humanity in the struggle to extinguish the light Israel has been set aside to shine among the nations. (Isa. 42:6) What did you expect that we dismantle our Defense Forces and sit duck to be pushed into the sea? We would not exist today if we adopted that attitude.

Did you not read the link I posted?

Why Orthodox Jews are Opposed to the Zionist State

There is no need to fight when there are other alternatives or options. The future of the Jewish people may not depend on the Israeli Defence Force. There is another force out there -- a sociological, rather than a military one.

 

[Saltmeister]

You and Saltmeister are using the term "Messiah" quite differently. He in his Christian mind-set, you in your Jewish one.

Ben Masada is mistaken. I did not claim Jesus was messiah or even say that I believed he was "messiah." The idea that Jesus was "messiah" is an anachronism whose definition refers to things he said and did 2,000 years ago that are not even properly understood today. Biblical scholars are still trying to figure this out and until they do, there is no business in calling Jesus "messiah." It could be that calling Jesus "messiah" means nothing, especially if it changes nothing. The words may simply be empty.

I certainly do have my own concept "messiah" but don't confuse this with the conventional definition. People's ideas about a messiah have evolved and we don't necessarily have to base them on the old ones. The Pharisees' idea of the messiah may persist, but only because they were the ones who came up with the idea and survived to keep that idea alive. The Essenes disappeared, so whatever their definition was no longer matters. I could say the same about the Nazarenes. Because the Nazarenes died off, the "Christian messiah" is irrelevant today. All other ideas regarding the messiah are secondary, even my own.

 

[Saltmeister]

Sorry, but I am unable to acknowledge that Maimonides talked about Christianity and Islam in those words you use. I have read several of Maimonides' works and I do not recall such a text. It rather seems to be a forgery to me.

Please investigate and report back to us. It could be one of the things the Catholic Church censored.

 

[radarmark]

I stand corrected.

 

[Ben Masada]

So, do as I do. "Annointed" for both (and more, the Madhi would be in this group). "Christ" for the "Christian Messiah". And leave "Messiah" for the Maschiach.

That way you do not talk past each other.

Jesus was a Jewish individual. And there is no Messiah on an individual basis. The Messiah is collective in Israel, the Jewish People. Rashi thought so, and so did Maimonides. There is a consensus among Christians, and I do subscribe myself to that consensus, that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah. Well, Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name if you read Isaiah 41:8,9 and 44:1,2,21. Then, if that's not enough, we can always use logic. The individual is born, lives his span of life, and eventually dies. Are we supposed to expect a new Messiah in every generation? The Messiah cannot die. According to Jeremiah 31:35-37 he is supposed to remain as a People before the Lord forerever.
Ben

 

[Servetus]

... And there is no Messiah on an individual basis. The Messiah is collective in Israel, the Jewish People. Rashi thought so, and so did Maimonides ...

Sorry, Ben, but are you saying that Maimonides did not refer to an individual when he referred to the expected Messiah? If you are saying that, I read him (Maimonides) differently. He gave specific criteria by which the "true," as he saw it, Messiah would be identified, and those criteria, it seems to me, clearly referred to a specific individual.

 

[Ben Masada]

You are mistaken. I did not claim that Jesus was "messiah" and nor did I say I "believed" he was "messiah." I have not done that for at least 12 months, perhaps even longer. Can you present evidence for such a claim or belief? If not, you have no business in making the above statement.

You are a Christian, aren't you? A Christian, by definition, is the one who believes that Jesus was Christ. Christ means Messiah in Greek. If you are a Christian, you are contradicting yourself. Sorry to remind you of this.

Quite obviously, Judaism and "Christianity" have different definitions of "messiah." Because there are so many different definitions of "messiah," it becomes practically pointless to use the same word and try to impart the same meaning to it. Jewish messiah, Christian messiah, Muslim messiah, Davidic messiah, priestly messiah, Essenic messiah, individual messiah, collective messiah -- the word becomes meaningless in a discussion when people go into it with a different definition.

Well, I am all ears to discuss my collective view of the Messiah. What's the question?

The claim that Jesus is "messiah" is an anachronism. It refers to something he said or did 2,000 years ago, not to something that will happen in the future. Because the claim refers to something in the past, not to the future it means nothing today.

It refers to what Jesus said 2,000 years ago. That he said or was said about him 35 years after he had been gone? That's when Paul started preaching about Jesus as Christ. (Acts 11:26)

The problem, however is that you assumed that I was talking about the "conventional" Christian concept of messiah and yet you don't even ascribe to the concept of messiah I commonly hear from Jews. You talk about a collective messiah rather than an individual one.

The idea is not only mine. Rashi and Maimonides had the same view.

I said nothing about Jesus being the messiah, only that whoever establishes the messianic kingdom will not need a national army, national government or nation state.

How can the dead establish a messianic kingdom? Read Eccles. 9:5:6.

Religious tradition, not armies or governments will be the basis by which the messiah establishes the new regime. Jews will not part from their Torah, Muslims will not part from their Quran and Christians will not part from their NT. The messiah will show that the three can be sociologically linked without compromising tradition.

You mention three religious factions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Where is the Messiah supposed to come from to perform that link? Judaism has lost too many lives for trusting Christianity and Islam. A compromise among these three traditions is highly impossible.

He will take advantage of the existence of two religions that have Judaism as their roots and he will give them "new instructions." He will offer a new "hermeneutic." This is how he will achieve his aims without violence.

That's the major problem. None of those religions: Christianity and Islam has any roots in Judaism. They rose as a religion of their own. And both have adopted the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology.

Plagiarism or not, they still have Jewish tradition as their roots. Plagiarism actually implies roots. Many of Islam's laws have their basis in Jewish Law. Many of Jesus' teachings have their basis in Jewish tradition.

Plagiarism implies forgery or vandalism of Judaism by Christianity or Islam.

The future of the Jewish people may not rest in the Israeli Defence Force, but in the billions of people who follow religions that have Judaism as their root. To believe that the IDF is the future of the Jewish people is to believe in violence. To believe that the billions of Christians and Muslims are the key to the future of the Jewish people is to believe in a more peaceful solution. This is the purpose of interfaith discussions.

To believe in the IDF is to believe in survival. Were not for the IDF we would be all drawn in the Mediterranean Sea today. What future is there to trust in Christianity and Islam? Have you forgotten the polgroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition and lately the Holocaust? To survive as the Jewish People, is what Adonai has allowed us to raise a strong IDF.

Who exactly do you mean by "we?" Do you mean the Israeli Defence Force and their military doctrine? Do you represent the Israeli Defence Force?

I am an Israeli and have largely contributed for the grandeur of our IDF. Therefore, the answer to your question is yes. I am sure I can be counted among those who represent the Israeli Defence Force. Only by the grace of Adonai I can say this today.

Did you not read the link I posted?

Yes, I did; but for two reasons I am not too fun of links. The first in this case is the ignorance of Othodox Jews who oppose themselves to the Zionist State. And the second is that, IMHO, links are only the personal opinion of another man. I don't like to subscribe myself to authority in any kind of issue just because he or she has achieved a title on the subject.

There is no need to fight when there are other alternatives or options. The future of the Jewish people may not depend on the Israeli Defence Force. There is another force out there -- a sociological, rather than a military one.

I got you! There is no need to fight for survival! I am sure you are aware of where we would be today if we had not fought to remain where we are. What would you be saying today? Good rindance, may be? Thank you my friend, but no thanks. The Lord has not made us strong to sit duck but to show the handiworks of God.

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Please investigate and report back to us. It could be one of the things the Catholic Church censored.

I live here in Ramat Gan. I went to the public library in Tel Aviv where I had read the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides, but just to be said that they are remodeling the Maimonides Hall, where I have read the works of Josephus and Maimonides. In other words, the Hall will be temporarily closed. I'll keep checking with them from time to time. I will eventually come up with something.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

I stand corrected.

For the time being.
Ben