Shalom

[Dan Ben Noah]

Shalom

[Zelhar]

Truly pathetic.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Dan, the New Testament does not teach dhimmitude or Israeli national suicide. I am getting sick and tired of the digs, insinuations, and cherrypicked examples you always give.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Dan, Jesus is talking about our enemies in a personal sense, not national issues of war and peace and self-defense. He is saying that we aren't supposed to get even with individual people that we don't like or mistreat us.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Well then there would have been nothing for him to correct from before if that was the case, because Judaism had always taught to not seek revenge and to love people on an individual basis among the Jewish people, as the Torah states: 
Leviticus 19:17 “‘Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt. 18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD."
But in Matthew 5 Jesus was giving a whole list of ways to go beyond the original teachings so that people could be "perfect", and loving your enemies in addition to your neighbor (i.e. fellow Israelite) was one of them.  He even mentions in that verse that people shouldn't "greet only your own people".  Further proof of this is when he told the parable of "The Good Samaritan" where the hero is a Samaritan.  Samaritans were enemies of the Jews that tried to subvert their efforts to build the Second Temple.  That would be like nowadays telling a parable of "The Good Fatah Member".

You are reading into Jesus' words too far Dan. I'm not here to promote Christianity but I will clear misconceptions. First of all, the purpose of the Samaritan parable (which was just that, a parable, not an actual recorded incident) was just to show that "good" people are capable of moral failings and evil people/races sometimes demonstrate laudable behavior. It would be like comparing Joseph Farah to Satmar. That's all there is to it. He was nowhere trying to lift up enemies of the Jews as heroes or dissolve Israel's national identity. If you doubt that, please see Matthew 15:21-8 regarding Jesus and the Canaanite (like a Fakestinian today) woman:

Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “L-rd, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” The woman came and knelt before him. “L-rd, help me!” she said. He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” “Yes it is, L-rd,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Jesus is hereby teaching exactly what Torah Judaism teaches on the nature of righteousness and mercy--that anyone, including people from evil, Nazi nations and races, can be forgiven, healed, and become righteous, if they set themselves apart and choose it for themselves.

And Jesus was precisely upholding the Levitical teachings on mercy and revenge. Some people were not practicing them, and he was outlining their application.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Dan, I think you know that Jesus used a lot of metaphor and a lot of allegorical language and drama to prove his points. He was not saying at all that Mosaic commandments are no longer applicable or need to be changed--he was saying that they need to be followed more strictly. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Judaism in all forms condemns lusting after women, needless hatred towards anybody, divorce without reason, etc. In this passage, he was criticizing people for not following Levitical commandments, not saying they need to stop following them or follow new ones--in essence, chastising them for not practicing Torah Judaism.

As for the Samaritan parable, yes, the message is that anybody is capable of a righteous act--but moreover, it is a personal challenge to every person to strive to be righteous towards those in need. It is most certainly not a promotion of Samaritans. Since you insist on doubting me, perhaps you can do an online search for some Christian commentaries on the matter.

However this is really besides the point. People have explained to you that this is not what the NT teaches and you still insist on dragging Christianity into the discussion even in places where it has absolutely no place, such as these two Judenrat kapos who feel sorry for Iran. I can guarantee you that Christians (at least conservative evangelicals) want military action against Iran and other enemies of Israel a lot more than most Jews do, right at this very moment in history. You insisting that the NT means what you think it means to the Christians of this forum would be like Gentiles coming to JTF, quoting Tanachic and Talmudic passages, and lecturing Jews as to what they "really" mean, in their eyes, just like that Fakestinian Christian troll Lisa just brought to my attention. It's very offensive. A Christian cannot be an ultimate authority in what some other religion's religious sources state and vice versa. Please try to understand that next time you make a thread that implies that Christianity or the NT is pro-Israeli national suicide or that Lutherans/Presbyterians are the "authentic" Christians and not evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, etc. Zionists.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Dan, the reason this is offensive is it's been explained many, many times. It seems like you are just disregarding every single word of it. You can deny as you wish but it sure looks to me like you have painted Lutherans, Presbyterians, Arab "Christians", etc. as the true interpreters of the New Testament and Zionist Christians as simply benevolent Gentiles that don't really understand their religion. You even made a thread in which you said "We need to start an Edom Watch to see what our enemies are doing at all times." How the heck do you think that looks? I could make a long list of the threads and posts you have made that imply that but really, I don't have any reason to. You know what you've written.

Obviously we can pick out plenty of examples of so-called Christians that try to use the Bible to justify anti-Semitic and replacement-theological views. I think you know that I can't stand these people. By the same token, there are lots of so-called Jews out there that try to use selected Torah verses to justify their sick beliefs, such as Satmar and NK. Do they represent true Judaism? How would you feel about Gentile Nazis using handpicked Judaic verses to "prove" either that G-d is against Israel, or that Judaism hates Gentiles, and posting them here? (Lots of people actually do that, all over the internet.)

[Rubystars]

Dan, the reason this is offensive is it's been explained many, many times. It seems like you are just disregarding every single word of it. You can deny as you wish but it sure looks to me like you have painted Lutherans, Presbyterians, Arab "Christians", etc. as the true interpreters of the New Testament and Zionist Christians as simply benevolent Gentiles that don't really understand their religion. You even made a thread in which you said "We need to start an Edom Watch to see what our enemies are doing at all times." How the heck do you think that looks? I could make a long list of the threads and posts you have made that imply that but really, I don't have any reason to. You know what you've written.

This disturbs me too.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Dan, you don't know the New Testament better than real Christians. I don't know the Torah and Talmud better than Jews. I think it's a closed case. Yes it's good to expose evil people who claim to be religious but the commentary about how replacement theology and "turning the other cheek" are being correctly interpreted by the "Christian" anti-Semites of the world is completely unnecessary and contrary to JTF's mission. I would venture to guess that the majority of practicing devout Christians in the Western world either reject replacement theology outright like John Hagee or consider both Jews and Christians to be elect.

BTW, Chaim himself has read the NT and while he rejects its theology, he has said on Ask JTF that he believes that leftists have distorted and misread these passages to support their views.

[muman613]

Actually Christian anti-Semites have not historically "turned the other cheek" when it comes to Jews so they would not be correctly interpreting the New Testament, or at least not living by it.  It is the self-hating Jews that do this.  I'm not convinced that the Christians who totally reject replacement theology are a very large group.  It would be interesting to know stats on this.  An easy way to detect replacement theology is if you ask a Christian whether or not Jews need Jesus for salvation/redemption.  If they say yes, they are a replacement theologian, and most devout Christians are going to say yes.  I'm not totally familiar with John Hagee's views, but if he is countering replacement theology and supporting Israel I welcome that.  We need currents like that in Christianity just like we need Muslim groups to start abrogating jihad.  Leftists tend to use NT passages regarding giving and having things in common to support communism, which would be a distortion.

Yes.... I believe that the Majority of Christianity believes that the Jews have been replaced by the Church of christ.... Although sometimes they don't say this to your face, they will eventually reveal it to you as they become comfortable talking about theology..

But I am glad that most Christians have the respect to not talk about this alien theology with me...

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Actually Christian anti-Semites have not historically "turned the other cheek" when it comes to Jews so they would not be correctly interpreting the New Testament, or at least not living by it.  It is the self-hating Jews that do this.  I'm not convinced that the Christians who totally reject replacement theology are a very large group.  It would be interesting to know stats on this.  An easy way to detect replacement theology is if you ask a Christian whether or not Jews need Jesus for salvation/redemption.  If they say yes, they are a replacement theologian, and most devout Christians are going to say yes.  I'm not totally familiar with John Hagee's views, but if he is countering replacement theology and supporting Israel I welcome that.  We need currents like that in Christianity just like we need Muslim groups to start abrogating jihad.  Leftists tend to use NT passages regarding giving and having things in common to support communism, which would be a distortion.

Most mainstream practicing American Christians (meaning not the insane nuts like Quakers or anti-Semites) would say that both Jews and Christians are a chosen people. That actually is in the NT. Obviously most of JTF will disagree with that, but that is still not true replacement theology. As for Muslims to abrogate jihad, forget it. They would have to stop being Muslims.

[Lisa]

Dan Ben Noah, Brennanfan, Rubystars, you guys are great JTF'ers. 

Now Brennanfan, I understand there are right wing Christian Zionists like you, who genuinely love Israel and want to do the right thing.  And I appreciate them very much.  We all do.

On the other hand, Christian Zionism/philosemitism is a relatively new phenomenon from what I can tell. 

Throughout history, certain passages of the NT have been used to justify the murder and persecution of Jews.  Now if there are philosemitic Christians like our members here who have never subscribed to such an interpretation, then great.  But there still seem to be plenty of others who do. 

Anyway, interpreting the NT could be the subject of an entire forum, blog or book(s).  So if you guys want to continue this discussion, I'm asking you to do so via the private message function.