Common Figure of Speech/Colloquial Language?

You seem like a scriptural person....do you have scriptural support for this?

Is it in a book? From your preacher? Or a analogy of your own making?
 
wil said:
Christian forum Shibolet.... as a jew you don't believe in Jesus, hence don't believe in the teachings of the new testament....

You are arguing against Christian beliefs that we know Jews don't believe... wrong garden for your arguments.
Click to expand...

Well, some one must stand for the Faith of Jesus which was Judaism. As long as Christians use of a Jew to preach against his Faith, the garden is never wrong for another who has read the Christian book to stand for Judaism. Is it against the law to protest the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology?
 
donnann said:
Wow. How wrong you could be. Jesus was a jew and advanced jewish teaching they do teach about bodily resurrection. Do you think jews are some people who believe in god but think they are all going into non existence.................I think not. Heavenly beings condense and descend into the human egg and are sealed for the purpose of resurrection of the human body. The question is who is Jesus that was here approx. 2000 years ago.................is he Michael or is he god?
Click to expand...

What am I wrong of, to have quoted Jeremiah and Ezekiel for having spoken against bloody redemption of a man for another? Blame those prophets for being wrong. I quoted them down.

If Jews preache about bodily resurrection, it is because there is no truth in what they say. (Isa.8:20) If Jews believe that after death they are going into another kind of existence, it is because they have no knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures. (Gen. 3:22; Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12:23; Job 10:21) Well, I don't need to quote the whole of the Tanach here. I am sure you are intelligent enough to have caught the idea.
 
Shibolet said:
Well, some one must stand for the Faith of Jesus which was Judaism. As long as Christians use of a Jew to preach against his Faith, the garden is never wrong for another who has read the Christian book to stand for Judaism. Is it against the law to protest the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology?
Click to expand...

What about "Interfaith" is so hard to understand?
 
wil said:
You seem like a scriptural person....do you have scriptural support for this?

Is it in a book? From your preacher? Or a analogy of your own making?
Click to expand...

It is all Biblical. It is not hidden from you, neither it is far off. It is not in heaven that you should say, who shall go up to heaven and bring it down to me that I may understand it? Neither it is beyond the sea that you should say, who shall go over the sea and bring it to me that I may understand it? It is rather very nigh unto you, in your own mouth and in your own heart that you may read it and understand. (Deut. 30:11-14)
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
What about "Interfaith" is so hard to understand?
Click to expand...

For you perhaps it is because IMHO, interfaith for you must be to read about the opinion of another and adopt his or her view straightforwardly. To me, as long as I am not offending any one by being personal, that's interfaith. I listen to your opinion, you listen to mine and we are at home.
 
Shibolet,

re: "...I do not understand what you are trying to convey."


Any particular reason for not having read the OP?
 
Shibolet said:
For you perhaps it is because IMHO, interfaith for you must be to read about the opinion of another and adopt his or her view straightforwardly. To me, as long as I am not offending any one by being personal, that's interfaith. I listen to your opinion, you listen to mine and we are at home.
Click to expand...

If the purpose of your presence is to tell people they are wrong, that is counter interfaith. If the purpose of your post is to tell someone they are wrong, that is counter interfaith. Changing peoples minds or adopting another view is not the purpose of interfaith, this can happen but it is not why we are here. The point is to understand each other, it's on us no one else.
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
If the purpose of your presence is to tell people they are wrong, that is counter interfaith. If the purpose of your post is to tell someone they are wrong, that is counter interfaith. Changing peoples minds or adopting another view is not the purpose of interfaith, this can happen but it is not why we are here. The point is to understand each other, it's on us no one else.
Click to expand...

What do you want me to say, that you are right? If you are right, what am I doing in the wrong side? I read what you address to me, draw my comment and, it just happens that my comment does not agree with yours. That's what I understand by interfaith. Further attempts to persuade is akin to proselytization and it is forbidden in this forum.
 
Shibolet.... you are in the Christian forum....

As a Jew DOH, you don't believe in the New Testament...the new commandments, Jesus's thoughts and words...

We aren't surprised...

What surprises everyone is you choose to argue this in the Christian forum


Again, you cross forums to find out what others believe, explore their texts, not dispute them.

You may argue all the intracies of Judaism and the OT as interpreted by Jews in that forum...

Christians talking about Christianity is not proselytizing...just as there is no such thing as a shark attack when you are swimming in their soup bowl.
 
donnann,

re: "...the ancient Jews counted as a whole day any part of a day..."


As regards the Jewish practice of counting any part of a day as a whole day I would agree, but when "nights" is added to "days"￾ to yield the phrase "3 days AND 3 nights" ￾it normally refers to a measurement of a consecutive time period where "day" refers to the light portion of a 24 hour period and "night"￾refers to the dark portion of a 24 hour period. No one In the history of apologetics as far as I know has ever presented historical documentation showing that a phrase stating 'x' days and/or 'x'nights was a first century idiom of Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek origin which could mean something different than what the phrase means in English (at least a part of each one of the days and at least a part of each one of the nights). If you have such documentation, I would very much like to see it.
 
rstrats said:
donnann,

re: "...the ancient Jews counted as a whole day any part of a day..."


As regards the Jewish practice of counting any part of a day as a whole day I would agree, but when "nights" is added to "days"￾ to yield the phrase "3 days AND 3 nights" ￾it normally refers to a measurement of a consecutive time period where "day" refers to the light portion of a 24 hour period and "night"￾refers to the dark portion of a 24 hour period. No one In the history of apologetics as far as I know has ever presented historical documentation showing that a phrase stating 'x' days and/or 'x'nights was a first century idiom of Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek origin which could mean something different than what the phrase means in English (at least a part of each one of the days and at least a part of each one of the nights). If you have such documentation, I would very much like to see it.
Click to expand...
I believe that
 
wil said:
Shibolet.... you are in the Christian forum....

As a Jew DOH, you don't believe in the New Testament...the new commandments, Jesus's thoughts and words...

We aren't surprised...

What surprises everyone is you choose to argue this in the Christian forum


Again, you cross forums to find out what others believe, explore their texts, not dispute them.

You may argue all the intracies of Judaism and the OT as interpreted by Jews in that forum...

Christians talking about Christianity is not proselytizing...just as there is no such thing as a shark attack when you are swimming in their soup bowl.
Click to expand...

I understand but, to pick up a Jew and to teach against his Faith which was Judaism is vandalism of Judaism with the things of Christianity. That's Replacement Theology.
 
Lol... we had a fellow here for a while complaining that Judaism stole from Zoroastrianism.

I've heard all the replacement theology arguments... I respect Jewish teachings, I like attending the shabbot service at a local synagogue. But this argument is similar to Jews for Jesus...fish out of water... quit arguing against other religions and elevate your own.
 
wil said:
Lol... we had a fellow here for a while complaining that Judaism stole from Zoroastrianism.

I've heard all the replacement theology arguments... I respect Jewish teachings, I like attending the shabbot service at a local synagogue. But this argument is similar to Jews for Jesus...fish out of water... quit arguing against other religions and elevate your own.
Click to expand...

And sit duck to the claims of Replacement Theology? Not enough just to elevate our own Faith. It will become some thing akin to mere verbal juggling.
 
Perhaps a further rewording of the OP will make it a bit more clear: Whenever the three days and three nights of Matthew 12:40 is brought up in a "discussion" with 6th day of the week crucifixion folks, they frequently assert that it is using common Jewish idiomatic language. I wonder if anyone knows of any writing that shows an example from the first century or before regarding a period of time that is said to consist of a specific number of days and/or a specific number of nights where the period of time absolutely couldn't have included at least a part of each one of the specific number of days and at least a part of each one of the specific number of nights? If it is using common idiomatic language, there ought to be examples of that usage in order to be able to make that assertion.
 
re#98
Think that changes the entire (Christian) Holy Word to the entire (Christian) Holy Question...I thought "A rose by any other name..." Maybe not...ED
 
EdgyDolmen,

re: "re#98 Think that changes the entire (Christian) Holy Word to the entire (Christian) Holy Question...I thought "A rose by any other name..." Maybe not...ED"

I'm afraid I don't see what that has to do with my post #98. I wonder if you might explain why you think that it does?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top