How we got our Bible

[e v e]

I can understand where Eve is coming from when she says that Jesus is not Jewish If you look at it along these lines.

The Definition of Chalcedon says that in the one person of Christ are united a true human nature and a true divine nature without confusion, mixture, division, or separation. In other words, when the Son of God, who from all eternity possessed the divine nature, added to Himself a human nature, each nature retained its own attributes. The divine nature did not become human and the human nature did not become divine. Neither were the natures mixed together such that Christ was a strange human-divine hybrid, neither truly human nor truly divine. No, Christ was and remains the God-man. This is a mystery we cannot fully comprehend, but we must affirm it. If Christ is not truly human, He cannot atone for our sin, for only a human being can atone for the sin of other human beings. If Christ is not truly God, the atonement He offers does not have sufficient value to be applied to all the elect. If Christ is not the God-man, there is no salvation.

This is what is called the hypostatic union: Christ is one person with two natures. We know that his divine nature did not have blood but his human nature did have blood. And that blood came from the line of David. So the DNA of Jesus was definitely Jewish.

I can understand why Christianity wasn't real keen on that idea and I believe that's how anti-semitism came about.

This explains it better than I can:

To wrench Jesus out of his Jewish world destroys Jesus and destroys Christianity, the religion that grew out of his teachings. Even Jesus’ most familiar role as Christ is a Jewish role. If Christians leave the concrete realities of Jesus’ life and of the history of Israel in favor of a mythic, universal, spiritual Jesus and an otherworldly kingdom of God, they deny their origins in Israel, their history, and the God who has loved and protected Israel and the church. They cease to interpret the actual Jesus sent by God and remake him in their own image and likeness. The dangers are obvious. If Christians violently wrench Jesus out of his natural, ethnic and historical place within the people of Israel, they open the way to doing equal violence to Israel, the place and people of Jesus. This is a lesson of history that haunts us all at the end of the 20th century. by Anthony J. Saldarini originally appeared in Bible Review, June 1999

I don't understand all the various narratives about race and religion since all that i care about is the soul but it must be a satanic agenda to hurt souls by creating narratives to foment divisions by race, politics, and religion when the real issue is the soul and if that soul is His, that a soul come to Him.

 

[Ahar]

On this earth Christ was obviously hebrew. i am simply saying that what was hebrew in the OT and what is termed jewish today are not the same.

Just as today modern christianity is often far from ancient sense of Christian, before medieval times, which is reflected in kierkegaard's regretful remark about 'philistine christianity'. In ancient times this just referred to judah. Mixing of cultures renders terms differently than how they were understood by the ancients.

How Did the Word "Jew" Become Identified with the Jewish People?

How did the name Yehuda become the name most identified with the Jewish People and evolve into its derivative, "Jew?"

www.hartman.org.il

The link was awesome, full of a lot of good information

 

[Ahar]

I don't understand all the various narratives about race and religion since all that i care about is the soul but it must be a satanic agenda to hurt souls by creating narratives to foment divisions by race, politics, and religion when the real issue is the soul and if that soul is His, that a soul come to Him.

I read his post and what you're describing seems to be what he was talking about. I know that when the Jews were scattered from their Homeland that most of the places they went they weren't very well received. What amazes me is that out of the Holocaust they were returned to their Homeland. And they turned a wasteland into a garden.

 

[e v e]

I think it's important not to turn a kingdom of this world into God's. example, I am an american but often I notice the usa being glorified... well it is a kingdom of this world .

Christ said my Kingdom is not of this world.

 

[e v e]

I read his post and what you're describing seems to be what he was talking about.

I just didn't express it that well and I am sorry.

 

[e v e]

No.



The Bible teaches that all are sinners and fall short of the glory of God.

We are all capable of sin and have sinned—the nicest of us, the sweetest of us, the best of us—we all sin and are capable of it.

We all can be guilty of favoritism and compromising important truths just to get others to like us.



Civic, in the past, has been very unkind to me both here and the previous forum on Carm.

I forgive these things, but honestly, just because he will pick one person to always defend, does not mean he is somehow "kind" to all people.

I think he is improving, but your experience with civic is, is not unbiased.

civic has been kind generally. I saw him argue on another forum but he was seriously being hounded imo.

being kind isn't being perfect... either.

 

[e v e]

No.



The Bible teaches that all are sinners and fall short of the glory of God.

We are all capable of sin and have sinned—the nicest of us, the sweetest of us, the best of us—we all sin and are capable of it.

We all can be guilty of favoritism and compromising important truths just to get others to like us.



Civic, in the past, has been very unkind to me both here and the previous forum on Carm.

I forgive these things, but honestly, just because he will pick one person to always defend, does not mean he is somehow "kind" to all people.

I think he is improving, but your experience with civic is, is not unbiased.

yes i fail every day but I try. And I ask He forgive me immediately, always.

I think other forums online can sometimes be harsh just because of the emphasis on debate
which is not really christian... it's greek.

even op titles can be harsh

 

[GeneZ]

the religion called judaism doesn't accept that Christ is our savior. I was not referring to specific people.

interesting. I was looking for that citation still and found this about the mixing of peoples.

Encyclopaedia Iranica Online

"Encyclopaedia Iranica Online" published on by Brill.

referenceworks.brillonline.com

Back in the day we used to have family days on Sundays with relatives and neighbors over my parents house.
They would sit around the kitchen table talking, joking, and played cards, etc.

One afternoon when they were gathered in the kitchen my sister walked in and announced that she wanted to read something to them.
My Aunt Judy was right near her and asked my sister to hand her what she wanted to read, and have her read it to everyone.
My Aunt Judy was a professional woman ... Being articulate was one of her gifts.

Well... My sister Buni handed Aunt Judy a book and pointed to her what was to be read.

Everyone was quieted down.
Aunt Judy began reading where she was shown.

When done reading Aunt Judy turned to my sister and told her in front of everyone....

"Buni? This is about Jesus. This is a Catholic Bible. We are Jewish and do not believe in Jesus."​

Without a pause... My sister told her that what she just read was not a Catholic Bible. It was the bible she found in my bedroom on a shelf.
The one I was given for my Bar Mitzvah!

"Aunt Judy. What you just read is Isaiah 53!"​

My sister told me you could hear a pin drop...

grace and peace ................

 

[e v e]

Back in the day we used to have family days on Sundays with relatives and neighbors over my parents house.
They would sit around the kitchen table talking, joking, and played cards, etc.

One afternoon when they were gathered in the kitchen my sister walked in and announced that she wanted to read something to them.
My Aunt Judy was right near her and asked my sister to hand her what she wanted to read, and have her read it to everyone.
My Aunt Judy was a professional woman ... Being articulate was one of her gifts.

Well... My sister Buni handed Aunt Judy a book and pointed to her what was to be read.

Everyone was quieted down.
Aunt Judy began reading where she was shown.

When done reading Aunt Judy turned to my sister and told her in front of everyone....

"Buni? This is about Jesus. This is a Catholic Bible. We are Jewish and do not believe in Jesus."​

Without a pause... My sister told her that what she just read was not a Catholic Bible. It was the bible she found in my bedroom on a shelf.
The one I was given for my Bar Mitzvah!

"Aunt Judy. What you just read is Isaiah 53!"​

My sister told me you could hear a pin drop...

that is just lovely. aunt Judy was correct... it is about Christ. and peace ................

 

[e v e]

Back in the day we used to have family days on Sundays with relatives and neighbors over my parents house.
They would sit around the kitchen table talking, joking, and played cards, etc.

One afternoon when they were gathered in the kitchen my sister walked in and announced that she wanted to read something to them.
My Aunt Judy was right near her and asked my sister to hand her what she wanted to read, and have her read it to everyone.
My Aunt Judy was a professional woman ... Being articulate was one of her gifts.

Well... My sister Buni handed Aunt Judy a book and pointed to her what was to be read.

Everyone was quieted down.
Aunt Judy began reading where she was shown.

When done reading Aunt Judy turned to my sister and told her in front of everyone....

"Buni? This is about Jesus. This is a Catholic Bible. We are Jewish and do not believe in Jesus."​

Without a pause... My sister told her that what she just read was not a Catholic Bible. It was the bible she found in my bedroom on a shelf.
The one I was given for my Bar Mitzvah!

"Aunt Judy. What you just read is Isaiah 53!"​

My sister told me you could hear a pin drop...

grace and peace ................

I like you wrote about your family
...it reminds me
that souls from Him
do understand in their soul
even if not the mind...
and recognize Him (like Judy did...)
even when all our traditions
may try to get in the way

 

[e v e]

Here is the page...
it's not what I remembered but is page 41 of the jewish encyclopedia and is on that topic

 

[e v e]

The Religion of Idumea and Its Relationship to Early Judaism

For several hundred years, from the late Iron Age to the end of the 2nd century BCE, the southern neighbor of Judea was “Idumea”, populated by descendants of Edomites, together with Qedarite and other Arabs and a mix of additional ethnicities. This paper examines the known data on the identity...

www.mdpi.com

Qaus (edom/esau's god in the article)
sounds close to the egyptian god QÃN (I think a god based upon cain!), p 176.

or

Qa-aau, Denderah IV, a bull-god with a loud voice - p170.

qaau, god of Creation (egyptian god), p 171.

reference: Budge hieroglyphic dictionary vol 2.

the point from jewish encyclopedia is
a) ancient israelites did not view esau as true hebrew
b) in time the edomites did get grouped under the term jewish along with israelites, per p 41 jewish encyclopedia, image above. also see mdpi com article, above.
c) the god of the edomites was qaus? (see above journal article at mdpi com) which is very close in spelling to egyptian deities possibly referring (imo) to cain.
d) this situation of esau mixed into jacob is interesting on many levels......
including esau pharisees later corrupting His words...

 

[e v e]

um and, coming round to the op title, ptolemy ii (not christian!) had supposed hebrew translators (esau in disguise?) translating OT texts....who of course he had vetted in advance. see pithom stele and aristeas letter.

Septuagint - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[e v e]

The terms OT and NT were started by Marcion. Marcion separated the two because he hated the OT and wrongly equated the satanic entities with God... therefore, wanted to diminish the hebrew books. To this day some christians disregard the OT. Marcion's separation was then taken up by the roman catholic church and became the custom.

 

[e v e]

parentheses mine; wiki, marcion page: "According to Marcion, the god of the Old Testament, whom he called the Demiurge, the creator of the material universe, is a jealous tribal deity (compare prince of the air) of the Jews (correction, esau), whose law represents legalistic reciprocal justice (pagan law, karma, law of sin and death) and who punishes mankind for its sins through suffering and death (satanic realm does). In contrast, the God that Jesus professed is an altogether different being, a universal God of compassion and love who looks upon humanity with benevolence and mercy. (Marcion probably an esau himself, could not see God in the OT!) Marcion also produced a book titled Antitheses, which is no longer extant,[22] contrasting the Demiurge of the Old Testament with the Heavenly Father of the New Testament."

comments
Marcion confused esau with the israelites (under the term jews), as per my last number of posts and cites regarding hebrews versus edomites, and also he confused the satanic realm entities with God. Similar to Marcion's confusion...: some believe God would hurt christ or direct wrath at Christ....

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Here is the page...
it's not what I remembered but is page 41 of the jewish encyclopedia and is on that topic

Great. Yes, that is the page in other editions I read. So exactly where is the statement that the Israelites weren't Jewish?

 

[e v e]

Great. Yes, that is the page in other editions I read. So exactly where is the statement that the Israelites weren't Jewish?

I will rephrase:

the term jewish came to include, lump in esau as part of the israelites, which they themselves did not do!, per page 41 jewish encyclopedia scan. therefore the term is ambiguous. esau, the edomites, followed different gods, and mixed hebrew scripture with egyptian practices.

Using the term jewish to refer to ancient israelites is unclear, since today that distinction ancients understood, see previous paragraph, is lost.

ancient hebrews themselves did not consider edomites to be hebrews. the term jewish combines esau and jacob together. So I (personally) don't use the term to refer to ancient israelites.

 

[e v e]

And to be clear, there are plenty of esaus in history ... possibly such as newton or leibniz, for example. And neither as far as I know were hebrew souls, such as were the prophets and apostles, but instead they practiced the occult .... and were platonists.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I will rephrase:

the term jewish came to include, lump in esau as part of the israelites, which they themselves did not do!, per page 41 jewish encyclopedia scan. therefore the term is ambiguous. esau, the edomites, followed different gods, and mixed hebrew scripture with egyptian practices.

Using the term jewish to refer to ancient israelites is unclear, since today that distinction ancients understood, see previous paragraph, is lost.

ancient hebrews themselves did not consider edomites to be hebrews. the term jewish combines esau and jacob together. So I (personally) don't use the term to refer to ancient israelites.

But exactly what quote says this on page 41? Where exactly? I can't ask this any clearer.
You are making statements which can not be supported with anything that you are using to supposedly bolster your claim. It's all made up. It's factually incorrect.

 

[e v e]

But exactly what quote says this on page 41? Where exactly? I can't ask this any clearer.
You are making statements which can not be supported with anything that you are using to supposedly bolster your claim. It's all made up. It's factually incorrect.

Read the entire page. It covers the issue of esau not being part of the Israelites, how later due to political events and such, the edomites (esau) were absorbed into the hebrews. The two groups were not the same, yet ended up under the same title later, in time. The second article amplifies the subject. The point is that jews, as a term, going up to the hellenistic period, included many who were not part of the Israelites. The page talks also about how even until 4 generations (of observation?) they were not considered such. The word jew includes those who were not israelites, clearly, and for me is not a good term to describe the israelites as it was a later styling including many other people absorbed for various reasons under a regional or political domain. The information is there. The quote must be from a later page, and I can see if to find a full pdf for that volume to provide it (if time permits though the page submitted does make the point!) Though from the same book, I said above that the page was different from the page I remembered (even though it covers the same issue, which must have continued to the next page.) I see that later translators, to simplify or for their own reasons (and not all translators agree it was a good idea), just labeled any hebrew or any edomite jewish. In translation the word was used as if the same. I do not agree with that simplification, because it confuses what is meant by a hebrew soul.

In the same way, I do not agree with the use of the Greek term psuche for soul to explain the hebrew word npsh, which also means soul. Since for each group, the Greeks and Hebrews, the meaning of soul is entirely different and the words are not synonymous. But today, no one cares about the difference, even if it be huge, and they use these interchangeably, imo causing problems. People disagree and if you do not like what I said, I get that. You do not have to.