David Koberstein
Active member
I am a Messianic
Jew. I can answer a question whether its asked to me or not. So what's your drama?Shalom
The fake OJB (Orthodox Jewish Bible)
- Thread starter praise_yeshua
- Start date
Jew. I can answer a question whether its asked to me or not. So what's your drama?Shalom
JoshebB
Active member
Can you answer for someone else? Do you know the thoughts, views, and positions of anyone other than yourself? Can you speak for others, and is it right for you to do so?I am a Messianic
Shalom
A plain, simple, direct, to the point, unqualified "yes" or "no" will suffice.
David Koberstein
Active member
Wow! we have a drama queen. I only speak for myself and others that do not have a voice. I do not answer to you. Sounds like you have some life issues to deal with.
Shalom
MTMattie
Well-known member
@JoshebB
Might I suggest if you want a conversation to be between you and only one other person make a note of it.
Something like... Note, This reply is private to _____ at the start... and I will stay out of it.
I admit to being guilty of jumping in with comment that neither side is addressing from time to time.
Might I suggest if you want a conversation to be between you and only one other person make a note of it.
Something like... Note, This reply is private to _____ at the start... and I will stay out of it.
I admit to being guilty of jumping in with comment that neither side is addressing from time to time.
David Koberstein
Active member
That's a bad idea. You can direct message them on this website in private. I do it all the time.
Shalom
JoshebB
Active member
And when you two become the sheriff of the forum then you can tell others how to post. Until then, it is self-evident to anyone who bothers to thoroughly read the original post that the poster who was quoted was the one asked if he was a Messianic Jew AND that question was not asked of anyone else.
You screwed up, David, and now you're trying to blame me for your lapse. You're mucking up the thread where silence would best serve EVERYONE. Get over it. I want to know if @praise_yeshua is a Messianic Jew because he wrote the op and he, not anyone else, has posted a hodgepodge of assertions about various misconceptions pertaining to Messianic Judaism. His being MJ is very relevant to his op, and the discussion thereof. I could have written the op, but I'm not MJ, and my posting the exact same content could have an entirely different purpose. Only praise_yeshua can speak for praise_yeshua and you, presumably, made an unintentional mistake made worse by the refusal to let it go. When I want to know your thoughts on anything you post then I will quote your words and ask you about those words. Until then I don't have any interest in what you are theologically. I appreciate yourself report for future reference, but it has nothing to do whatsoever with my original inquiry.
Troll
MTMattie
Well-known member
David Koberstein
Active member
I can speak from experience about him. He is NOT a Messianic Jew. However, he has some antisemitic tendencies and other life issues, that I placed him on ignore. I could tell by your reckless ignorant responses you are not a Messianic Jew either. Thank God. I don't need permission from you on how to respond on this forum. I will respond to future public posts as I see fit. You will not change that in anyway, shape, or form. You need to get over it. I didn't make any mistakes, but you sure have with your extreme immaturity and toxic lowlife attitude toward others like myself. Go have a ham sandwich
and your miserable non kosher life.Shalom
David Koberstein
Active member
Toxic
David Koberstein
Active member
You are correct. I believe some people lack the maturity level to be interacting on this forum. I know I have too much chutzpah at times.
Shalom
Shalom
JoshebB
Active member
Hypocrisy.
Which part of "The inquiry of my op-reply was not intended for anyone other than the author of the op" was not understood? The second you responded further was the moment your posts became toxic, and that problem was exacerbated by the gaslighting attempt to make me the bad guy. You have complete liberty in a public forum to post anything you like but so do I. That means I have the liberty to tell EVERYONE that I am interested in one poster's viewpoint and would like to be able to do that without further interruption.
I completely agree.
I made it more than it needed to be because of the following...
@David, that was completely unnecessary and inappropriate. It's also very immature. So, too is...
Faced with another poster politely and respectfully telling you he was interested only in someone else's response you lost all decorum.
Catty insinuations lack maturity.
The moment you learned I was interested only in @praise_yeshua's answer you should have said nothing or, if the need to say anything was felt, then...
Would have been measurably better...... but neither was the choice you made.
In instances like this digression I would normally ask the other poster if s/he has anything op-relevant to post but on this occasion, I have made it clear I'm interested only in the op's pov. No drama wanted, needed, or expected.
David Koberstein
Active member
Edit by Admin - Rule Violation
Please stop the personal attacks.
JoshebB
Active member
@praise_yeshua,
I've noticed your
s along the way. I've a couple of points of inquiry and commentary pertaining to the op. Perhaps the most salient is that AI is unreliable and seriously flawed. That may change as the technology improves but it is not yet veracious, and I don't know anyone who thinks it is when it comes to reporting on social, political, religious types of information.
Second, the op is a huge mixture of various thoughts that don't all occur in a linear way. It is, therefore, difficult to speak to the whole of the op with an alternative thesis (supportive or not).
I am curious about the comment "Messianic Judaism is made up of Christians that struggle with unbelief in Christianity." I would venture to say that any Christian who has any denominational or sectarian affiliation maintains the affiliation because of some dissatisfaction with Christianity. Non-denominationalism is a direct reaction to unbelief in Christianity. I also think that statement should be clarified because Christianity is not relative. There's no little bit or big bit of Christianity and people who think this ~ism or that ~ism within the pale of orthodox Christianity is more Christian than others are mistaken. What they're usually referring to is comfort they find with a particular ~ism. This idea that Messianic Judaism is made of discontents is also odd because modern Messianic Judaism in the US began in the 1960s and occurred largely due to the influence of a Baptist preacher who was trying to meet the needs Jewish converts in his congregation. Look that up if you don't believe me. That may not be your personal experience but, institutionally speaking, that is what happened in the US.
Next, for now, is the commentary about historic Judaism lacking a single belief system or oral tradition. That is certainly true, and I suppose you should be commended for making the observation, but I wonder what relevance it is to the previous premise of unbelief in Christianity. Christianity does have a single belief system and written tradition. We call it the Bible, and all the sectarian variations we have are supposed to be measurable and measured by that source. Therefore, whenever we explore Judaic roots, systems of belief, oral traditions, etc. we should start with the Bible. Extra-biblical sources warrant justification before use. I'm sure you read my comments about folks like Michael Brown, Sid Roth or Jonathon Cahn or the non-Jewish Tim Mackie and Michael Heiser. We've also traded posts about unwarranted or inappropriate Judaization of Christianity. You and I have also traded posts elsewhere pertaining to how the Jewish theology presented in the Old Testament and gospel era was often said to be mistaken by Jesus and the New Testament authors. Every time Jesus says, "You have heard it said.... but I say....." that is an example of Jesus correcting the Jewish thought, doctrine, and/or practice of his day. The preamble to John's gospel is a repudiation of Hellenist Judaism that had arisen to prominence during the intertestamental period. Paul is frequently sorting out the divisions caused by Jews and Gentiles trying to bring their roots into the Church. Every occasion where any New Testament writer interprets an Old Testament text non-literally he is presenting something different than he what that Jew learned in Judaism. He is, instead, giving Christianity. Or, to use the vernacular of the early Church, that writer is giving his readers the sectarian Jewish viewpoint that was then call "The Way" (see also Acts 9:2 and 26:9). That term meant the way of Jesus, the way of the Anointed One from Nazareth, the way of the Prophet Yeshua Ben Yosef.
I wouldn't trust AI to tell me the truth about any of the above. I openly and fully expect falsehood, and in the current political climate in which AI is being developed, I fully expect it to be rife with subterfuge.
Lastly, for now, the answer to the question asked in the op is no, we should not blindly accept the work of Phillip Goble. We should do our own work but doing "our own work" should not occur to the exclusion of doctrinally sound teachers. Too many Christian erroneous think and say, "All I need is the Holy Spirit." That is a completely unscriptural position. Scripture makes it explicitly clear Jesus gave the church apostles, teachers, and preachers (and others) specifically for the tasks of unity and maturity in Christ. The trick is finding doctrinally sound teachers.
Hope that's not too much in one post. Can you field some of the above for me? I'll inquire and comment on the rest of the op and the conversation prompts.
I've noticed your
s along the way. I've a couple of points of inquiry and commentary pertaining to the op. Perhaps the most salient is that AI is unreliable and seriously flawed. That may change as the technology improves but it is not yet veracious, and I don't know anyone who thinks it is when it comes to reporting on social, political, religious types of information.Second, the op is a huge mixture of various thoughts that don't all occur in a linear way. It is, therefore, difficult to speak to the whole of the op with an alternative thesis (supportive or not).
I am curious about the comment "Messianic Judaism is made up of Christians that struggle with unbelief in Christianity." I would venture to say that any Christian who has any denominational or sectarian affiliation maintains the affiliation because of some dissatisfaction with Christianity. Non-denominationalism is a direct reaction to unbelief in Christianity. I also think that statement should be clarified because Christianity is not relative. There's no little bit or big bit of Christianity and people who think this ~ism or that ~ism within the pale of orthodox Christianity is more Christian than others are mistaken. What they're usually referring to is comfort they find with a particular ~ism. This idea that Messianic Judaism is made of discontents is also odd because modern Messianic Judaism in the US began in the 1960s and occurred largely due to the influence of a Baptist preacher who was trying to meet the needs Jewish converts in his congregation. Look that up if you don't believe me. That may not be your personal experience but, institutionally speaking, that is what happened in the US.
Next, for now, is the commentary about historic Judaism lacking a single belief system or oral tradition. That is certainly true, and I suppose you should be commended for making the observation, but I wonder what relevance it is to the previous premise of unbelief in Christianity. Christianity does have a single belief system and written tradition. We call it the Bible, and all the sectarian variations we have are supposed to be measurable and measured by that source. Therefore, whenever we explore Judaic roots, systems of belief, oral traditions, etc. we should start with the Bible. Extra-biblical sources warrant justification before use. I'm sure you read my comments about folks like Michael Brown, Sid Roth or Jonathon Cahn or the non-Jewish Tim Mackie and Michael Heiser. We've also traded posts about unwarranted or inappropriate Judaization of Christianity. You and I have also traded posts elsewhere pertaining to how the Jewish theology presented in the Old Testament and gospel era was often said to be mistaken by Jesus and the New Testament authors. Every time Jesus says, "You have heard it said.... but I say....." that is an example of Jesus correcting the Jewish thought, doctrine, and/or practice of his day. The preamble to John's gospel is a repudiation of Hellenist Judaism that had arisen to prominence during the intertestamental period. Paul is frequently sorting out the divisions caused by Jews and Gentiles trying to bring their roots into the Church. Every occasion where any New Testament writer interprets an Old Testament text non-literally he is presenting something different than he what that Jew learned in Judaism. He is, instead, giving Christianity. Or, to use the vernacular of the early Church, that writer is giving his readers the sectarian Jewish viewpoint that was then call "The Way" (see also Acts 9:2 and 26:9). That term meant the way of Jesus, the way of the Anointed One from Nazareth, the way of the Prophet Yeshua Ben Yosef.
I wouldn't trust AI to tell me the truth about any of the above. I openly and fully expect falsehood, and in the current political climate in which AI is being developed, I fully expect it to be rife with subterfuge.
Lastly, for now, the answer to the question asked in the op is no, we should not blindly accept the work of Phillip Goble. We should do our own work but doing "our own work" should not occur to the exclusion of doctrinally sound teachers. Too many Christian erroneous think and say, "All I need is the Holy Spirit." That is a completely unscriptural position. Scripture makes it explicitly clear Jesus gave the church apostles, teachers, and preachers (and others) specifically for the tasks of unity and maturity in Christ. The trick is finding doctrinally sound teachers.
Hope that's not too much in one post. Can you field some of the above for me? I'll inquire and comment on the rest of the op and the conversation prompts.
Last edited:
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
@praise_yeshua,
I've noticed your
I see people posting returns that I can verify by referencing AI returns. Those same people comment throughout social media and various website throughout the internet.
I believe most people communicate using such "mixtures". You are very structured in your responses. I once did the same but I found no value in trying to please academics with such (No reflection upon you). I'm usually in a hurry. I write what comes to mind. I'm sitting here now trying to fit in a response in between the requirements of my life at the moment. I seem always to be busy at something. If I wait till I'm not, then I will probably not even respond. I've struggled with this my entire life. I have a career that very demanding of me. A career I've considered very seriously recently to walk away from. I probably do the work of 4 or 5 people. I'm not trying to brag. Just explaining.
Messianic Judaism has existed since the first "Jew" accepted Christ. I'm not confining my comments to just modern understandings. I believe every single "Jew" struggles with what their fathers taught them about Messiah. What their fathers taught them was very wrong. What they teach them now is very wrong. Have you read the Talmud? I read such writings a very long time ago. You will find a mixture of commentary and teachings that is just down right offensive to Christ. The same is true of the Didache.
I can give you examples of how even Peter hated Gentiles. He mistreated the early Grecians and refused to preach to Gentiles until years after Jesus Christ gave His life for all men. I've watched over my life as people explain away these very facts. I've found that Messianic Jews have long hated Gentiles. I don't personally care how they treat me. I do care how they treat anyone else. They can't affect me. They do keep people from embracing who Jesus Christ is. Anyone that does that is a target for me. Anyone. I've spent much time commenting among most of you and I have believed what I just wrote all that time. I only mention these truths when it is time. You can't have this conversation without offending many people. I know. I have lost many friends over this. This false doctrine has been among "Jew" converts since the "Jewish" apostles. It is the darkest aspect of early Christianity.
I've said much throughout this forum recently and it hasn't gone over well with most anyone. If any of you want to debate this topic, I will gladly defend my position. Everyone seems to have preferences for certain peoples of this world. I don't. I treat all men equally. I do have a few friends left. Maybe we can actually come to that position ourself.
I will have an open video debate on this topic if anyone is interested. We can actually accomplish more than responding in a forum environment.
JoshebB
Active member
No, Christianity has existed since then. It is not called Messianic Judaism in scripture AND there are differences between Messianic Judaism and scripture AND such diversity within Messianic Judaism sufficient to question, if not refute, that position. There's no reason Messianic Jews couldn't call themselves Christians. They just happen to be Christians preferring to adhere to and practice certain aspects of Judaism they think informed by post Calvary/Pentecost conditions. While the roots of Messianic Judaism may be traced back to New Testament era Jews accepting Jesus as the fulfillment of long-awaited messianic prophesy, I can make the same claim about my viewpoints and practices, and so can many others.
I understand that. My point is that Messianic Judaism is, in fact, a relatively modern phenomenon. That's true whether (some of) its roots go back to the first "Jews" accepting Jesus or not. Something being new does not mean it is wrong. Nor does it make it right. The same exact logic applies to roots. Just because a Christian (or "Christian") claims his/her views and/or practices go back to New Testament times does not make it correct. Gnostics, reincarnationists, and Satanists can make that claim!
Yep. No dispute with me there.
Yes, and on at least two occasions he was corrected for doing so. In God's wisdom, He saw fit to have the imperfections of the apostles recorded for our benefit (presumably so we do not make the same mistakes, and our understanding that those mistakes do not eradicate one's eternal disposition).
You'll have to be more specific because this post, like the op, isn't very focused, specific, or linear. I also wonder why you've couched the potential replied in debate and defense instead of fellowship and conversation. This is, after all a discussion board, not a debate board. As for me and my part, you know my standard mode of operation.....
- Affirm that which bears consistency with well rendered scripture,
- Ask questions about that which is either unclear or not understood,
- Refute that which does not bear consistency with well rendered scripture.
And try to do so within the forum's tou
. I have practiced that here in this thread, affirming, inquiring, and dissenting where appropriate.I'm fairly confident that if and where succinct thesis statement is posted respondents are better able to reply and any ensuing discussion benefits accordingly. I have no particular or inherent disagreement with Messianic Judaism. I've fellowshipped in Messianic congregations, inquired of their leaders, read a modicum of MJ sources, and have many friends among that sectarian viewpoint. Some of them are quite devoted to Jesus
. So please don't take my posts to mean I think ill of you, your ilk 
, or MJism as a whole. The op's point about the necessity of each of us doing the work is commendable and worthy. I'd add only that should never be thought to occur in isolation because God uses others and the work we do is partly dependent on our reliance on those God provides us..... and learning to discern which resources are actually from God to us and which are not.Ephesians 4:11-16
And he [Jesus] gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.
No Christian has to be MJ (or RC, EPC, AoG, or any other ~ism). to understand and practice that text. ALL of us are to receive from the leaders Jesus gave to the ecclesia.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
I disagree but it doesn't matter. Take "Messianic Judaism" as I referenced as my own "personal" distinction. I don't want to argue over this. I simply was defining how I see it. I believe I accurately expressed my view of the reference. If you feel this is essential to the conversation, then please give an specific example of how/why.
I believe we are "talking past" one another. I don't believe modern movements define the real issue. The real issue is what affects the majority of modern Messianic Judaism. (a belief system that shares peoples within both modern and ancient cultures) This is about people. The roots of this issue come from people. People form beliefs based upon relationships. This is connected to teachings themselves. While they may diverge at some points, they are largely the same at key points of beliefs. They are called "traditions of men". Every belief system has them. Christianity included.
I'm glad we agree. We both see this as being an obvious impact.
Peter wasn't corrected relative to the Grecian widows. This created a very real problem relative to Peter's authority. Peter had authority to make those choices but he was wrong in making them. When someone with authority makes such choices, it cause a dramatic impact. If Peter had owned his unbelief in the Gentiles.... The early church would have been dramatically different. (I know we disagree. These disagreements are relative to Providence.) I believe mankind is directly impacted by our failures. Even to the point of damning others. We are our brother's keeper. I believe God will allow this to happen and it will be man's fault and contrary to God's desire. Nevertheless, it is our responsibility. God doesn't get what he wants from everyone and it has nothing to do with "election" as generally understood by either ancient "Jews" or modern Calvinists.
I will give an example. God didn't want Israel to have a king. Nevertheless God allowed them have a God. Even blessed the nation while those kings ruined the country. Those same children because of both David, Solomon, and etc (kings) had a very wrong understanding of God.
You'll have to be more specific because this post, like the op, isn't very focused, specific, or linear. I also wonder why you've couched the potential replied in debate and defense instead of fellowship and conversation. This is, after all a discussion board, not a debate board. As for me and my part, you know my standard mode of operation.....
- Affirm that which bears consistency with well rendered scripture,
- Ask questions about that which is either unclear or not understood,
- Refute that which does not bear consistency with well rendered scripture.
And try to do so within the forum's tou
For me to believe what you just wrote requires that I have enough respect for you to trust you're being honest with this reply instead of trying to appear reasonable. I'm not at that point in our interactions. I'm not going to give you the "benefit of the doubt."
If you don't "understand" it isn't because I haven't done a good job of explaining myself. It is your issue. Not mine. It is just typical debate tactics from you. This is what you usually do in our conversations. You try your best to to insist I must come to your level of requirement. Your assessment doesn't matter in the context of this conversation. BTW... this is a debate because we have a history of disagreement over core doctrinal position. I'm not going to waste my time trying meet your structural demands.
Now go ahead and insist that I really didn't make my point.... Yeah. Right. That is why you responded to me... right?
I'm fairly confident that if and where succinct thesis statement is posted respondents are better able to reply and any ensuing discussion benefits accordingly. I have no particular or inherent disagreement with Messianic Judaism. I've fellowshipped in Messianic congregations, inquired of their leaders, read a modicum of MJ sources, and have many friends among that sectarian viewpoint. Some of them are quite devoted to Jesus
Then post your thesis statement on this topic and we can have competing threads. Teach me. Teach everyone else. Like I've said before, I once did this. You haven't learned yet that it doesn't add up to nothing but a "book" on the storefront that nobody buys.
We learn good things and we learn bad things from these "teachers". I don't expect to get perfection from anyone but Christ. If you even care about my thoughts on this.... I will share freely.
Paul wrote those words in context of those he knew at that time. He knew these people personally. It was NOT a blanket approval of anyone. Same is true of Paul's approval of Titus and Timothy.
When anyone attempts to use the words of Paul to Titus and Timothy in application to themselves, this is nothing more than an attempt to use the good name of Paul, Timothy and Titus for their own benefit.
There are no more Paul, Timothy and Titus to be found today. They don't exist. That is why Timothy and Titus vanished from the narrative. It is amazing to me how so many denomination are all battling for approval from the same people. Paul didn't approve anyone other than Timothy and Titus and we have no idea what happened to them.
David Koberstein
Active member
Mine already went down he tubes for the KJV and Christianity in general.
Shalom
