Looking for thoughtful Muslim dialogue partner

[RabbiO]

Lol, no problem, I am in the U.S.

As am I. I want to frame an answer to a question/comment you made and I want to reach back to my secular law years and it is easier if we’re both living in countries with thevdame orvsimilar legal foundations.

 

[DerekhHikmah]

As am I. I want to frame an answer to a question/comment you made and I want to reach back to my secular law years and it is easier if we’re both living in countries with thevdame orvsimilar legal foundations.

Ok go ahead, I want to know what you think about Jesus' response.

 

[Craz]

Ok go ahead, I want to know what you think about Jesus' response.

Welcome to IF & PMFJI

RabbiO is away (Away).

I don't know what RabbiO will answer, but being a former religious Jew myself, I would have answered that the stories and quotes about Jesus mentioned, all come from the NT, which hold no authority for Jews.
In other words it's fake news for the Jews. (Eta)otherwise they'd all be Christians :>).

 

[DerekhHikmah]

I don't know what RabbiO will answer, but being a former religious Jew myself, I would have answered that the stories and quotes about Jesus mentioned, all come from the NT, which hold no authority for Jews.
In other words it's fake news for the Jews. (Eta)otherwise they'd all be Christians :>).

Yes, I understand that the Greek Scriptures and Jesus as Messiah are not held as authoritative within Judaism, because yeah, like you said, they would then be Christian. My question to RabbiO was more about how Jesus and the Gospel accounts were addressing interpretive questions surrounding Shabbat and the authority behind its intended meaning.

What I was trying to point to is how Shabbat was not primarily only around restricting activity, but had an intention and purpose, of delight and entering God’s rest. Psalm 95 connected this entering of God’s rest with trust and obedience, not only the outward legalistic regulation.

So when Jesus says, “The Sabbath was made for man,” and defends plucking grain while walking through a field, I wonder if he was challenging an understanding of the Law that had, in some cases, become overly burdensome or disconnected from the deeper purpose of covenant rest, mercy, and delight in God.

Also, the entire Tanakh seems to create an expectation that Jehovah God would raise up a prophet and promised seed through whom restoration and blessing would come to mankind (Genesis 12:1–3; 22:16–18; 49:10; Numbers 24:17; 2 Samuel 7:16; Isaiah 9:6, etc.). And Deuteronomy 18:18 is even more explicit about a prophet being raised up like Moses: “I will put my words in his mouth.”

So, from the perspective of the Gospel accounts, the central question is not merely about differing interpretations of mitzvot, but whether Jesus claimed authority as the one through whom Torah itself was being unveiled and fulfilled. Whether one accepts that claim or not, it still seems to me to be a meaningful point worth considering from within the broader direction of the Tanakh, because at that point the question becomes less about isolated legal rulings, and more about the authority and identity of the one interpreting them, and what authority a prophet like Moses would actually possess if Jehovah truly placed His words in his mouth.

 

[Craz]

Yes, I understand that the Greek Scriptures and Jesus as Messiah are not held as authoritative within Judaism, because yeah, like you said, they would then be Christian. My question to RabbiO was more about how Jesus and the Gospel accounts were addressing interpretive questions surrounding Shabbat and the authority behind its intended meaning.

What I was trying to point to is how Shabbat was not primarily only around restricting activity, but had an intention and purpose, of delight and entering God’s rest. Psalm 95 connected this entering of God’s rest with trust and obedience, not only the outward legalistic regulation.

So when Jesus says, “The Sabbath was made for man,” and defends plucking grain while walking through a field, I wonder if he was challenging an understanding of the Law that had, in some cases, become overly burdensome or disconnected from the deeper purpose of covenant rest, mercy, and delight in God.

Also, the entire Tanakh seems to create an expectation that Jehovah God would raise up a prophet and promised seed through whom restoration and blessing would come to mankind (Genesis 12:1–3; 22:16–18; 49:10; Numbers 24:17; 2 Samuel 7:16; Isaiah 9:6, etc.). And Deuteronomy 18:18 is even more explicit about a prophet being raised up like Moses: “I will put my words in his mouth.”

So, from the perspective of the Gospel accounts, the central question is not merely about differing interpretations of mitzvot, but whether Jesus claimed authority as the one through whom Torah itself was being unveiled and fulfilled. Whether one accepts that claim or not, it still seems to me to be a meaningful point worth considering from within the broader direction of the Tanakh, because at that point the question becomes less about isolated legal rulings, and more about the authority and identity of the one interpreting them, and what authority a prophet like Moses would actually possess if Jehovah truly placed His words in his mouth.

Well, maybe I shouldn't have answered you. I will leave it to RabbiO to answer, if he chooses to.
What I see is that you are another Christian(Jehova Witness?) trying to prove that Jesus was prophesied in the TaNach.
(I may get reprimanded for this comment, if so, so be it.)

 

[DerekhHikmah]

Well, maybe I shouldn't have answered you. I will leave it to RabbiO to answer, if he chooses to.
What I see is that you are another Christian(Jehova Witness?) trying to prove that Jesus was prophesied in the TaNach.
(I may get reprimanded for this comment, if so, so be it.)

No that is quite alright thanks for responding, and yes, I am a Christian that is fair as well. Let's just take Jesus out of this altogether for now then. You said you were 'a former religious Jew' so may I ask you what do you see as the overall message and direction of the Tanakh? What do you see as the purpose behind God's covenant with Abraham, the binding of Isaac, the calling of Israel, the kingdom covenant with David, and the promises of restoration? It's been about 2,500 years since Malachi, so when you step back and look at the Tanakh as a whole, what future did its authors and prophets expect God to bring about?

 

[Craz]

No that is quite alright thanks for responding, and yes, I am a Christian that is fair as well. Let's just take Jesus out of this altogether for now then. You said you were 'a former religious Jew' so may I ask you what do you see as the overall message and direction of the Tanakh? What do you see as the purpose behind God's covenant with Abraham, the binding of Isaac, the calling of Israel, the kingdom covenant with David, and the promises of restoration? It's been about 2,500 years since Malachi, so when you step back and look at the Tanakh as a whole, what future did its authors and prophets expect God to bring about?

Just to clarify my last post to you.
I would have had no objection to your post if you had posted it to anyone but an obviously religious Jew(RabbiO).
I am well aware that Christianity has adopted the Tanach as part of their cannon. I see a lot of energy wasted in trying to to prove Chistianity from the Tanach.
Isn't the NT enough?(rhetorical question)

My closest living friend is a Christian and we have spent many hours discussing scripture and explaining the Jewish version of these things vs his (Christian) view.

In answer to your question above. I am no longer a theist, so my interest is purely academic. Also it doesn't mean I cannot share knowledge I have. I think the Bible is vastly myth sprinkled with history. I think many of the main characters are made up to be archetypes for people to relate to.
I could give an answer as to how I would answer if I was religious, but I'd rather not, because it would all be supposition.

Your question is better for RabbiO or any other practising Jew, who can answer from a position of faith/belief.

I probably shouldn't have replied in the first instance. I apologise to anyone who has been offended here.

Cheers.

 

[DerekhHikmah]

Just to clarify my last post to you.
I would have had no objection to your post if you had posted it to anyone but an obviously religious Jew(RabbiO).
I am well aware that Christianity has adopted the Tanach as part of their cannon. I see a lot of energy wasted in trying to to prove Chistianity from the Tanach.
Isn't the NT enough?(rhetorical question)

My closest living friend is a Christian and we have spent many hours discussing scripture and explaining the Jewish version of these things vs his (Christian) view.

In answer to your question above. I am no longer a theist, so my interest is purely academic. Also it doesn't mean I cannot share knowledge I have. I think the Bible is vastly myth sprinkled with history. I think many of the main characters are made up to be archetypes for people to relate to.
I could give an answer as to how I would answer if I was religious, but I'd rather not, because it would all be supposition.

Your question is better for RabbiO or any other practising Jew, who can answer from a position of faith/belief.

I probably shouldn't have replied in the first instance. I apologise to anyone who has been offended here.

Cheers.

No worries at all, thank you for taking the time to clarify your position and I apologize I should have been quicker to listen. That actually helps me understand where you're coming from. I had assumed you were still approaching these questions from within a religious Jewish framework. May I ask what swayed your mind away from theism? Also, do you think Abraham or Moses or king David are archetypes only, or real historical people as well?