Why would the two of you argue? You are on an interfaith site and both understand what interfaith means. Why is it you could not have a civil discussion?
On What are your Religious Beliefs Based?
- Thread starter Namaste Jesus
- Start date
wil said:
Now I just said, those were two questions I've never asked... You think I am trying to convert you? You are sort of correct. I don't want to convert you to Christianity....but would love to see you embrace Judaism...instead of always ranting on and dissing Christianity and Christians. (in a very interfaith way to be sure).
I always see it more advantageous to tell others about the advantages and positive parts of your own belief rather than trying to tear down another's belief to make yours look good....but I know where you are coming from...I fall into that trap myself sometimes.
S
Shibolet
Guest
This is a case of a personal opinion of yours since there is no quote to evidence what you have said. What I have is that, to clarify why he was born, Jesus said that he came to confirm the Law and the Prophets down to the letter, even to the dot of the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19) It means that he had nothing to clarify about Judaism per se but about his intentions to confirm every thing down to the letter. We accept every thing about Jesus as the Jew that he was. The problem is not with Jesus of Nazareth but with the "Christ" of Paul. That's the one whose gospel we could not accept. If you read Acts 9:20, Paul had made of Jesus the son of God without an earthly biological father which is akin to the Greek doctrine of the demigod which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. If the dead could be aware of what is going on, Jesus would turn in the grave.
S
Shibolet
Guest
I didn't get it. You speak as if I am not Jewish. Mine is Biblical Judaism. So much so that I quote the Tanach even too often to prove that my Jewish assertions are documented in our Scriptures. Can you mention what is it in Judaism I have not embraced? I will gladly point to you where in the Scriptures to check for the truth of what I am saying.
Jesus said, I and the Father are one... not Paul. Jesus challenged the working on the sabbath, Jesus gave us a new commandment.
I know you are a Jew. Or rather I accept that you have said you are a Jew. What I asked is who is this we? You are the only Jew I know that argues that Christianity is false because Jesus was a Jew. I have met the Jews for Jesus crowd, and I have met Jews that claim Jesus never existed, or Jesus was a prophet. But I've never met one that is upset about Christianity co-opting Judaism... who is this 'we' you speak of?
I know you are a Jew. Or rather I accept that you have said you are a Jew. What I asked is who is this we? You are the only Jew I know that argues that Christianity is false because Jesus was a Jew. I have met the Jews for Jesus crowd, and I have met Jews that claim Jesus never existed, or Jesus was a prophet. But I've never met one that is upset about Christianity co-opting Judaism... who is this 'we' you speak of?
Devils' Advocate
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,086
- Reaction score
- 392
- Points
- 83
So you are open to interfaith as long as I use the texts you approve of. Shib, seriously?
Last edited:
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
Again, I never said listening wasn't important, I was saying it doesn't matter which you think does or does not. It really is that simple. I'm not trying to defend myself, I don't agree that I have ever insinuated even an iota of monologue. Nor most others here. If I state my view and await hearing yours, or a question/contention, I don't see how this isn't an interfaith discussion. When you refuse to allow someone their view, I see that as more obstructive than anything. Listen, respond, ask questions, get more knowledge... Interfaith. Getting all stuck up because someone is not bending their viewpoint to include yours ... not interfaith. Is my belief a 1 way street, yes, I believe it is correct and true and is the most direct path to truth. I don't hold that over anyone, and I never intend any ill will or rudeness to anyone's beliefs.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
The analogy could be used for anyone's view if they don't believe there is only 1 path to their destination. Also if they believe they are right in their belief. That is the point. IMO my view is correct. It would be illogical for me to believe otherwise. I'm sure you believe your path is THE CORRECT one (the interstate), Thomas will probably say Catholicism is the Interstate. This doesn't change the fact that the analogy does get across CLEARLY that I believe there are paths that are not direct, and there are paths that are incorrect, and then there's the direct interstate.
Once again clear misrepresentation of what I wrote. Lets take one as far out from Islam as Thor. One of the Norweigen Gods. Thor is unimaginably Strong, controls that which Humans cannot (lightening and thunder) and is in constant battle with the Gods who create/instill evil. There are many parallels to Allah, which as I have stated would make sense since it is my belief Islam was around since the beginning. There are principles common throughout almost all religions. The fact that I can acknowledge this and use sense and logic to affirm what others have said, shows I listen to what others believe and make sense of it among my religious views. IMO is someone who believes in Thor, or any Polytheist system wrong, absolutely. Are there commonalities between them which we can agree, yes. Can we live next door to one another, yes. Does that mean I'm praying to Thor anytime soon? NO!
Again you are describing interfaith as a conglomerate religion that I must accept all views as equal to mine to be productive. Nowhere has any Interfaith organization ascribed that as a precursor to an interfaith discussion. I believe I am right. OK. I am not saying anyone is wrong, but rather comparing your belief with mine. So that I can be at ease with anyone's beliefs. It is not my place to judge in my religion (As I understand your view, it is not yours either). I have learned much from Atheists and Secular Humanists. Am I saying they are on the interstate with me, no. That doesn't have anything to do with my ability to learn their views.
Perfectly fine, as I would expect someone who believes a certain way to assert that their way is correct. Again it would not make sense otherwise.
So you don't believe your view is logical? I agree anyone can make the claim. And I assume everyone does. Otherwise why believe it? Admiration, acceptance, peace, and understanding are all goals of interfaith which is what I strive for in topics that I comment on. Why would I come in here and say, 'You are correct there must be multiple Gods' If I don't believe it. Why would I say that person is correct? Am I going to say 'You are an idiot for believing that'? No, but I might ask 'Why do you believe there are multiple Gods'? This question is a legitimate interfaith question. I might read a statement that someone believes there are multiple Gods, and I might respond with "In Islam we believe in 1 God because..." which doesn't mean I am degrading or taking away from his/her belief, but rather comparing.
But your whole point here was that If I made the cake and said it was good you should accept it, embrace it and like it. If you don't like it or it is not pleasant to you, would I expect you to eat it all? No. If you looked at the top and saw spinach on it and you hated spinach, would I expect you to have to try it? No. But you can acknowledge that I do like it, and that it is ok... Hence why I do not understand your contention with my saying I use logic to fortify my belief.
I want you to note that I am not trying to start conflict but rather to negate this useless banter over what should or should not be included. IMHO it should be implied until otherwise stated that a response is to include, 'I acknowledge your view, and this is mine.' And that it is open for discussion.
Wa alaykumu s-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
The highlighted portion goes against the words recorded. Therefor the prior sentence is incorrect. You do believe Isaiah was wrong. Or at least by extension one of the other prophets were wrong. And it is acceptable for you to think and believe that. Not in a Judaic way or a Christian way or an Islamic way, but your way. And this can be further discussed as you did here. The underlined portion is the part that I personally deviates from you and wil's argument. There are many people who believe there is 1 correct path (and yes there are many groups who do). And as such you MUST accept people who believe that as an interfaith effort. I'm not telling you to agree, as you clearly don't, but you CAN'T resist someone's right to believe there is 1 path.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
Have to take a sec to say you are making generalizations. Not all Christians are set on converting. But will agree a vast majority of the more religiously minded do. Same with Jews and Muslims and I assume most others.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
I would point out... Do listen, don't give in... but I agree nearly every person here is to a minor degree trying to assert his/her way as correct (as is natural)
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
As I hope is understood in my post, I do not agree either from a personal, or Islamic standpoint. But I respect her ability to believe what she wants.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
Understood, I usually get the response from nearly every viewpoint. But I feel this is more a topic of debate which should have its own thread rather than fighting it out in the realm of other topics.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
Except I don't think Isaiah was wrong, as most Muslims and all of what I would call true Muslims would not. We are taught that his message was that of truth. And he did not lie and was not mistaken. Our view is that the Truth that he preached was not recorded in exactness or completeness, and if it had, it would have been the Quran. Hence why so many parallels can be made between the Tanach, Bible, and Quran. Not that you have to agree, but it is our view.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
And there you go wil, almost a constructive discussion. Shib stated A JEWISH perspective, maybe not shared amongst all Jews, but is his view. I share the view as a Muslim that Paul ascribes Jesus to the higher status of God. And that before that Jesus' teachings were to correct errors that had come up in the Jewish people's views that were deviating from that which is taught by the earlier Prophets. This is my opinion, shared among many Muslims. Am I asking you to accept it as truth, no. But you should acknowledge that you have a different view of the topic, if you do.
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
BigJoeNobody
Professional Argument Attractor
This is something better placed in a debate thread, but Jesus (PBUH) did say that. But he did not Claim he IS God. Something God had no problem claiming for himself in the Tanach... He never promoted working on the sabbath except when needed (such as healing the sick. If you say this is ascribed to all his followers, why did Mary not come to anoint him on the Sabbath? He gave a new Command, which coincides with the earlier Laws, but clearly made people realize God's people are all 1 in the sense that they are believers, and that believers should work together. This parallels to Islam directly. I have known several Jews with this contention. If Jesus (PBUH) was a prophet why did he go against Judaism (his religion and claimed prophethood in)and then why does Christianity defy the laws that Jesus (PBUH) prescribed for all? These questions are talked about and debated all the time.
IMHO regarding Judaism and Jesus, divine teachings always have an essence/reason and a physical form or law. A lot of times people stress the letter so much that it kils the spirit, and these are the times when law needs to be loosened up. There are many examples of this in islam. For example if someone puts a gun on your head and forces you to leave islam, simply say ok I am leaving. In the same way haram animals are allowed after 3 days of starvation and laws for stealing dont apply during famine. A literalist will say no, thou shall die rather than eating a pig. But thats not the divine reason behind the law.
In the same way jesus just loosened up a lot of man made stiffness in Jewish law. nothing else. If somebody is dying, you can break sabbath. Its not a new commandment, just a refinement of the old. The law was nailed to the cross by paul, not jesus
I and the father are one, in what? substance? who said that? Cant there be any other interpretation of this statement?
In the same way jesus just loosened up a lot of man made stiffness in Jewish law. nothing else. If somebody is dying, you can break sabbath. Its not a new commandment, just a refinement of the old. The law was nailed to the cross by paul, not jesus
I and the father are one, in what? substance? who said that? Cant there be any other interpretation of this statement?