Is Messianic Judaism a Judiasm.

a Jew is one thing
recognizable culture possibly specific to Jews is another thing
faith or religiousy activity of Jews considered distinctly from the second is still another thing
 
American Gothic said:
if Jews do it...it's "Judaism", no?
Click to expand...
NO, not at all. Jews do latke and stand up comedy, but that's not Judaism.

To be Judaism, it has to have the primacy of the Torah, as understood by oral Torah (Talmud). This necessarily excludes those who are of different religions, who worship other gods.
 
Open Heart said:
To be Judaism, it has to have the primacy of the Torah, as understood by oral Torah (Talmud). This necessarily excludes those who are of different religions, who worship other gods.
Click to expand...
the third thing up there is faith/religious activity, not popular entertainment or pancakes - I understand I can be confusing

if an ethnic Jew eats kosher, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew observes the 7th day of the week, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew observes Passover, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew studies the Hebrew Bible, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew believes the covenant promises, is that Judaism?
 
American Gothic said:
the third thing up there is faith/religious activity, not popular entertainment or pancakes - I understand I can be confusing

if an ethnic Jew eats kosher, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew observes the 7th day of the week, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew observes Passover, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew studies the Hebrew Bible, is that Judaism?
if an ethnic Jew believes the covenant promises, is that Judaism?
Click to expand...
Those are elements of Judaism. But again, you are missing the essense of the whole: the primacy of Torah as understood through the lens of Oral Torah. If a Jew practices this covenant as his religion, that is Judaism.
 
Open Heart said:
Those are elements of Judaism. But again, you are missing the essense of the whole: the primacy of Torah as understood through the lens of Oral Torah. If a Jew practices this covenant as his religion, that is Judaism.
Click to expand...
Jews who think the Rebbe is Messiah
and do certain Torah things...

a Judaism?
 
Open Heart said:
a whole different religion.
Click to expand...
Messiah being God is just the Faith of the patriarchs - all the way back to Adam and Eve

"And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel.” Gen 3


וְהָאָדָם, יָדַע אֶת-חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ; וַתַּהַר, וַתֵּלֶד אֶת-קַיִן, וַתֹּאמֶר, קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת-יְהוָה.

Eve was mistaken here at first about who Messiah was, but her theology was correct -
she understood the God-man concept and Who exactly would have to be mankind's kinsman redeemer

"I have gotten a man the LORD" Gen 4:1
 
Last edited:
Open Heart said:
Christianity doesn't just teach that Jesus is the messiah. It teaches that he is God. That's not a heresy, that's a whole different religion.
Click to expand...
You are confused, for how can he be God if the words attributed to him claim to be inferior to God?

“the Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)

Nevertheless, Jesus is called “God” being Elyon’s representative just as Moses was “as God” being God’s representative.

“you [Moses] shall be as God to him.” (Exodus 4:16)

Which is why Paul wrote the following,

”For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord [aka, Son of God], Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.”

Go read, “The Great Angel” by Barker who demonstrates that YHWH-Elohim was Son of El Elyon, aka, Son of God, for many centuries before the Pharisees came to power. You have been misled by the Rabbis, formerly called, Pharisees, belonging to the cult of YHWH.

For example,
(Psalm 89:6). “For who in the skies compares to Yahweh,​
who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of Gods (bênê ’Ēlîm).”​
 
Last edited:
@Open Heart

Here is something else to consider.

IF Barker’s explanation is true (you can read her book and decide for yourself) that YHWH-ELohim was actually considered by the royal cult of Judaism (before Pharisees came to power) to be Son of God or Son of El Elyon or Son of the Most High,

AND if that Son of God (aka, YHWH-Elohim) was also referred to as Primal Man or “First Adam” by the royal cult, since he was God’s Heavenly Son, God’s Man,

THEN Son of Man would be a soul on earth produced by primal Man.

Therefore, there are three levels of emanation in which the immortal God became mortal in humans found in the Jewish religion going back to the seventh century BC.

1) Preexistence: The God Most High (El Elyon) = true God
2) “In the Beginning” of existence or of the world: Son of God = YHWH-Elohim = Primal Man (in Heaven)​
3) Son of Man = YHWH-Elohim on earth in human form (aka, the prophets)​
​
This is why the Essenes referred to the “Sons of God” (see Dead Sea Scrolls) and why the Teacher of Righteousness and/or Jesus was associated with the “Son of Man“ except the New Testament”Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua” is a type actually representing the Ruach Elohim or Holy Spirit in the human body “Saving” us and leading his “chosen ones” to the “promised land”.

Paul’s epistles explicitly characterize the Holy Spirit as the inner “spirit of Jesus” indwelling the elect whom Paul calls “Lord”. The Gospel stories are esoterically personifying the Holy Spirit in Paul because the Jewish-Christians considered Paul another theophany of YHWH-Elohim on earth AFTER the prophets predicted his coming, predicted the visitations of YHWH-Elohim to earth. Where Isaiah writes, “Thus sayeth the Lord”, Paul says, “this is a word from the Lord.” There is no difference.

How do we know Paul was a theophany of YHwH-Elohim? Because Isaiah said he would return to bring the knowledge of salvation (Jesus) to the nations (the Jewish nation is one of those nations). This he did, IN PAUL!

Whether it sounds fantastic or not, this ^^^ is the best natural explanation for the development of the royal cult of Judaism (going back to King David) into what it became today in modern Christianity. The natural development of Jewish-Christianity makes sense even if one chooses not to believe it.
​
​
​
 
Last edited:
docphin5 said:
@Open Heart

<snip>
THEN Son of Man would be a soul on earth produced by primal Man. <snip>
Click to expand...
Check this out.

It has got to be one of the earliest Jewish references to the “Son of Man” found in the Book of Enoch written up to 300 BC. Of course, Pharisees/Rabbis reject it because it supports what Christianity teaches but at least it proves the concept of a “Son of Man” was part of the Jewish literature well before formal Christianity began. Since multiple copies were found at Qumran then it would be reasonable to assume that the sect of Judaism called today by the name of Essenes, formerly, “The Way,” were the proponent of this theological idea: Son of Man.

1And there I saw One who had a head of days, And His head was white like wool, And with Him was another being whose countenance had the appearance of a man, And his face was full of graciousness, like one of the holy angels. 2And I asked the angel who went with me and showed me all the hidden things, concerning that 3Son of Man, who he was, and whence he was, (and) why he went with the Head of Days? ​
​
And he answered and said unto me: This is the son of Man who hath righteousness, With whom dwelleth righteousness, And who revealeth all the treasures of that which is hidden, Because the Lord of Spirits hath chosen him, And whose lot hath the preeminence before the Lord of Spirits in uprightness forever. (Book of Enoch)​
​
whoever he is, sounds like an aeon, or an immortal, because he was predestined to live forever even if he dies like a man. Maybe one of the elohim or gods in Elyon’s council.

Of course, you are probably familiar with this one.

I saw in the night visions,​
and behold, with the clouds of heaven​
there came one like a son of man,​
and he came to the Ancient of Days​
and was presented before him.​
And to him was given dominion​
and glory and a kingdom,​
that all peoples, nations, and languages​
should serve him;​
his dominion is an everlasting dominion, (Daniel 7:13)​
 
Last edited:
Two words for man are used, ἁνήρ (אדם) and the compound ἅνθρωπος (בן-אדם).

The Septuagint is the source of confusion and NT authors were using it.
 
Lee Magee said:
Two words for man are used, ἁνήρ (אדם) and the compound ἅνθρωπος (בן-אדם).

The Septuagint is the source of confusion and NT authors were using it.
Click to expand...
This is a tangent from the OP but I read that the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew texts is more closely aligned with the Dead Sea Scrolls than the Masoretic text. If true, would that not make the septuagint version the more accurate translation of Hebrew texts if it reflects more accurately those Jewish texts used by pre-christian Jews, namely, Essenes at Qumran, up to 200 BC?

”It will further be obvious that the Massoretic form of this text, which has so long been generally as conservative of the most ancient tradition and as therefore final, is after all only one of many phases through which the text passed in the process of over 1,000 years, ie. 400 B.C. till A.D. 600, or thereabouts. As we pursue the examination of the materials just mentioned we shall see grounds for regarding the Massoretic text as the result partly of conscious recension and partly of unconscious change extending over many centuries.” (RH Charles, Book of Jubilees)​

Charles then lists the oldest texts preceding the Masoretic texts then states that the older texts are more closely aligned than the Masoretic text is with them.

1) Hebrew-Samaritan text
2) LXX of the Pentateuch (200 BC)
3) Book of Jubilees (multiple copies at Qumran, 200 BC)
4) syriac Pentateuch ( 1st century CE)
5) vulgate (4th century ce)
6) Targums (6 th century)

THEN THE masoretic text!
 
Last edited:
docphin5 said:
This is a tangent from the OP but I read that the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew texts is more closely aligned with the Dead Sea Scrolls than the Masoretic text.
Click to expand...

It depends on the book, the worst books in the MT are both the Samuels. The LXX versions of Proverbs and Job read differently.

The LXX version of Isaiah is very different to the MT.

Book of Ezra and Nehemiah, originally one book, as missing chapters in the MT and is disordered.

They appear to be two translation styles in the LXX, a literal word by word translation and an interpreted translation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top