no Old Testament prophecy explicitly stating one must "accept the Messiah to be saved."

In the Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) understanding, the repentance, righteousness, and following God's laws of the Torah, so as to join God in the afterlife, are fulfilled by a Divine Person, who is love and cleansing fire, if we cooperate with His grace.

Therefore, ANY explicit rejection of this Holy One is inherently Satanic, as when St. Peter denied Him 3 times. Judaism post-70 AD is unique among all human groupings in that such a rejection is a very major defining characteristic.

This is one of the problems with a firm Jew accepting Jesus. If there isn't a prophecy than why accept this new teaching. It contradicts Scripture they learned all their lives. Faith in God isn't enough, must have faith in Jesus, who is God, so if you have faith in God, don't you have faith in Jesus, if you believe Jesus is God?

You can go into satanic or Catholic this or that all you want, it doesn't help the conversation.

The foot of the Holy Cross is the dividing line of the spiritual world.

I would respectfully disagree that "there isn't a prophecy than why accept this new teaching. It contradicts Scripture they learned all their lives"

A significant number of Jewish converts, such as Israel Zolli, Benjamin Freedman, Oswald Rufeisen, Norman Lear's daughter, Roy Schoeman have written and talked in detail about how Jesus Christ is all over the Torah and the Psalms especially. Apostles very much included! (I would add 1 Enoch, quoted in Jude, which is Trinitarian and origin of "Son of Man")

There are many dozens of verses in such an argument. I hope Jewish people look. They are sinners in need of Christ, exactly the same as everyone else.

You made a statement about Shapiro, but have no answers to the question/statement. Just b/c people who are descendants of Abraham accepts Jesus doesn't prove one thing over another. I am trying to help you see why the majority of firm Jews are unwilling to even look into the claims of Jesus. There is nothing in their Word that suggests one must believe (put faith in) in the messiah to be saved. Yet, that is what Christians claim must happen. Yes, there is lots of foreshadowing, types, etc in the Jewish scriptures about the messiah. There isn't anything in the Jewish scriptures that one has to believe in the messiah for salvation. That is a problem.

Well, you've captured an essential question with this:

Quote:

---

their Word

---

meaning, elevation of holy texts. In the Apostolic tradition, the canon is not like the Koran, from God's mouth to our ears.

It is, rather, a holy product, often of intense and contentious debate. The Bible is not the Word of God, Jesus Christ is the Word of God.

God is a personal Spirit, and the revelation of his holy texts has this as the essential point: Emmanuel, God with us, Logos Incarnate.

The "Word of God" is a personal Spirit.

And even then, how impressive are the foreshadowings of the Nazarene.

Any firm Jew hears nothing but obnoxious noise with all that.

Ephesians 4:18 (NIV):"They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts."

Romans 2:5 (NIV):"But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed."

Such a gracious heart that you have. This is why, this right here.

Quote:

---

And even then, how impressive are the foreshadowings of the Nazarene.

---

Not really. You have to abuse the text to get that.

If Jesus Christ is God, and the Messianic fulfillment of the Torah, then His followers should engage in conversation about why, especially with those whose identity may be centered upon a rejection of this claim.

Jewish people are people, and they have souls and the ability to reason, exactly the same as everyone else. No one has special DNA. We all must choose, especially when the Logos of John 1 knocks at the door of our heart.

What happened to the Essenes, a major Jewish sect that didn't endure past the time of Christ? Is it possible that they, as with millions of others, accepted the Messianic claim and became a major world religion in less than three centuries?

Perhaps in no small part due to being experts on the Torah and other holy writings, such as the Trinitarian 1 Enoch that has been definitively proven to be a BC text?

Redstone said:

---

What happened to the Essenes, a major Jewish sect that didn't endure past the time of Christ? Is it possible that they, as with millions of others, accepted the Messianic claim and became a major world religion in less than three centuries?

Perhaps in no small part due to being experts on the Torah and other holy writings, such as the Trinitarian 1 Enoch that has been definitively proven to be a BC text?

---

Uh, the Essenes were small (4000 or so adherents) and were around well after Jesus. They disappeared after the First Roman Jewish War and were heavily involved in the war (Christians weren't).

That's exactly the point.

The producers of the Dead Sea scrolls, major scholars and mystics, apocalyptic (and wow was 33 to 70 a world shaking generation) .... one could make an excellent argument, as the Catholic mystical tradition does, they converted to Jesus Christ en mass.

How many others? And how many hundreds of thousands (and it was many) converted to a WHOLLY RECONSTITUTED (RABBINIC) JUDAISM, after the smoldering ruins of Jerusalem and the Temple cooled....
including major kingdoms in Pontus, along the Red Sea (centered in Yemen), along the coasts of North Africa....

Redstone said:

---

That's exactly the point.

The producers of the Dead Sea scrolls, major scholars and mystics, apocalyptic (and wow was 33 to 70 a world shaking generation) .... one could make an excellent argument, as the Catholic mystical tradition does, they converted to Jesus Christ en mass.

How many others? And how many hundreds of thousands (and it was many) converted to a WHOLLY RECONSTITUTED (RABBINIC) JUDAISM, after the smoldering ruins of Jerusalem and the Temple cooled....
including major kingdoms in Pontus, along the Red Sea (centered in Yemen), along the coasts of North Africa....

---

Except your "argument" has exactly zero evidence and much of the Essene beliefs don't line up well at all with Christianity.

And no, Judaism was not "WHOLLY RECONSTITUTED" after the loss of the Temple. Second Temple Judaism already had a vibrant synagogue culture with prayer and rabbis outside of the Temple system. Judaism had already lost the Temple once before and had traditions for keeping and evolving traditions in the absence of physical sacrifices. There were already large diaspora communities in North Africa and the Levant. Your grasp of history is pathetic.

Nope.

I'll follow to the initial post about this book, an amazing read, that lines up in a secular, academic press way very highly with the religion angle I've summarized about the time of Josephus.
https://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Zion-Revolt-against-Romans/dp/030024813X

Faith and practice was dramatically reconstructed.

A brief summary

destruction of the Second Temple, when Titus siege literally made the streets run with blood, was abrupt termination of CORE ritual practice… practice relevant to ALL houses of worship at the time

daily animal sacrifices
priestly hierarchies
pilgrimage festivals

Temple was "divine dwelling and atonement site"

After the decimation?
Who has the Temple (body), the priesthood, the Sacrifice (Mass)….

What did Yohanan ben Zakkai et al. do?

Very different reoriented Jewish life around oral law interpretation, yeshivot, and new communal prayers. Rise of halakhah instead of cultic rites

Do you really contend a direct and close continuity?

Redstone said:

---

What did Yohanan ben Zakkai et al. do?

Very different reoriented Jewish life around oral law interpretation, yeshivot, and new communal prayers. Rise of halakhah instead of cultic rites

Do you really contend a direct and close continuity?

---

Yes. Because any actual knowledge of Judaism would understand how continuity and preservation of past practices are woven into post-Temple Judaism.

Redstone said:

---

A brief summary

destruction of the Second Temple, when Titus siege literally made the streets run with blood, was abrupt termination of CORE ritual practice… practice relevant to ALL houses of worship at the time

daily animal sacrifices
priestly hierarchies
pilgrimage festivals

Temple was "divine dwelling and atonement site"

After the decimation?
Who has the Temple (body), the priesthood, the Sacrifice (Mass)….

---

You can claim these things, but the Christian versions of these have nothing in common with Temple rules and structures. You're claiming the words without replicating the substance. Actual memory of the Temple and the rules are maintained and extensively discussed in Rabbinic Judaism. Judaism without a Temple is not a new phenomenon. It was central to the texts created during the Babylonian captivity and represented a vibrant development of the faith.

We've summarized our positions then.

In the vast ocean of information we could both cite, I've remembered for a while Israeli Chasidic Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz - responsible for Steinsaltz Edition of the Talmud - after reading this article:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/never-mind-the-bible-its-the-sanity-of-the-talmud-you-need-to-understand-the-world-and-yourself-adin-steinsaltz/

Quote:

---

"It's a central pillar for understanding anything about Judaism, more than the Bible," says Steinsaltz, one of the world's best known Talmudical scholars. "The Talmud is not a divine gift given to people. The Jewish people created it. But on the other hand, it created the Jewish people. In so many ways, we're Talmudic Jews, whether we believe in it or not."

---

The comprehensive destruction of the center of faith and practice, whose sacrifices atoned in the houses of worship all over the world, to where pilgrims streamed in from all over the world.....
necessitated building something from the ground up.

I hope people will look at this decade, predicted by Christ in Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, and Luke 21:5-6, and consider its religious implications.

Quote:

---

The comprehensive destruction of the center of faith and practice, whose sacrifices atoned in the houses of worship all over the world, to where pilgrims streamed in from all over the world.....
necessitated building something from the ground up.

---

No it didn't. It absolutely necessitated changes, particularly amongst the elite. But the idea that Judaism had to be completely built as something wholly different is just you showing your bias. Synagogues already existed. The prayers and festivals and calendar were maintained. The sanctity of the Tanakh was maintained. Judaism had already gone centuries without a Temple. The idea that Judaism couldn't exist without the Temple is insane just from a cursory read of the scriptures.

Of course Judaism can exist without the Temple. Obviously it does today. Not only have I acknowledged that, I've detailed its definition and content, despite your many evasions when directly asked to state its content.

That's the point, isn't it? It was something, and then became very much something else. Here's what the secular and very much "pro-Jewish" Rogers has to say about the blood-soaked years of 66 to 75 AD:

Now, why is that relevant? 2 reasons.

1.) Because it is typical. He associates the nation-state Israel with the ancient entity that was utterly decimated. He uses "Judaism" as a synonym, of then and of now.

2). AND YET - wow, read the book - we have such conclusions, BECAUSE it's inevitable when an author spends 600 highly detailed, academic pages demonstrating total decimation of a way of life and of worship….
Necessitating reinvention and reinterpretation!

Not exactly a surprise, is it, that so much confusion reigns regarding questions of "Jewish," "Israel," "Semitic", "anti-Semitic"

Fools like John Hagee definitely don't help. The Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) definitions provide clarity (although as a Catholic, the weaponized ambiguity post-Vatican II is awful)

Followers of the Logos of John 1 are the people Israel. Who do you, Sapper, believe are the people Israel?

Redstone said:

---

Now, why is that relevant? 2 reasons.

1.) Because it is typical. He associates the nation-state Israel with the ancient entity that was utterly decimated. He uses "Judaism" as a synonym, of then and of now.

2). AND YET - wow, read the book - we have such conclusions, BECAUSE it's inevitable when an author spends 600 highly detailed, academic pages demonstrating total decimation of a way of life and of worship….
Necessitating reinvention and reinterpretation!

Not exactly a surprise, is it, that so much confusion reigns regarding questions of "Jewish," "Israel," "Semitic", "anti-Semitic"

Fools like John Hagee definitely don't help. The Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) definitions provide clarity (although as a Catholic, the weaponized ambiguity post-Vatican II is awful)

Followers of the Logos of John 1 are the people Israel. Who do you, Sapper, believe are the people Israel?

---

You're not the people of Israel. You assert that with no right. It's textbook supersessionism. The ethnoreligious Jewish people are the people of Israel.

Redstone said:

---

the Church, as the Body of Christ, fulfills the covenant. The entire point of the Old Testament is Jesus Christ, who is the Law itself.

Jesus' life, death, and resurrection established a universal covenant that includes all people. Let us choose Christ today, and all days.

No one has special DNA. We all can choose.

Matthew 28:19
Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

---

The point of the Torah is Jesus? Tell me you know nothing about the Torah, without saying it. I mean really. The Torah, prophets, and writings, always included everyone.

It's right there in Matthew 5:17. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill"

Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets, including the first five books of the Bible. Further, the Logos of John 1 is their creator, dynamic and moving in history.

Therefore, He is the "living Torah," containing all the wisdom, law, and will of God in His holy person and mission.

Many verses in the Old Testament that helped to convince Oswald Rufeisen, Norman Lear and his daughter, Benjamin Freedman, Israel Zolli, and many others about the Messianic claim of Jesus of Nazareth.

Among them:
Genesis 3:15
Isaiah 7:14
Micah 5:2
Isaiah 9:6-7
Isaiah 11:1-2
Psalm 22:1, 16-18
Isaiah 53:3-7
Psalm 110:1
Daniel 7:13-14
Zechariah 11:12-13
Zechariah 12:10

The rejection of this claim is, since the smoldering ruins of 70, the main organizing principle of the new Judaism.

Sapper Redux makes good points.

You skipped over the comment that we can all choose, which always was the case. When Israel left Egypt a "mixed multitude" went with them. Ruth, Uriah, Ebed are all people who joined Israel. There are laws on how to treat a "ger".

Fulfilling the Torah and the point of the Torah are not the same thing. We can disagree about what fulfilling the Torah means, but fulfilling and the reason for the Torah are not the same thing.

Regarding the Jews who converted to Christianity, many who considered themselves Christians have converted to Judaism as well. It is not proof of anything.

Christianity states one must believe in Jesus to be "saved", yet not one verse from the Tanakh can be cited to point to this. Not one prophecy. If something was going to be so important for one's salvation, so important, that it is the be all, one would think there would be at least one verse pointing to it.

Time is limited, thank you for responses. About this:

Quote:

---

Regarding the Jews who converted to Christianity, many who considered themselves Christians have converted to Judaism as well. It is not proof of anything.

---

When a person of Christian baptism - such as Ivanka Trump - converts, does that process include a formal and explicit rejection of this baptism?

What does beit din approval require here? Any similarities to Oswald Rufeisen, who tried and failed to return to the nation-state Israel? That's why I bring these names up.

It's not just illustrative, it tells us something essential…what Judaism post-70 IS.

ie one of the most prominent and influential Jews of the 20th Century, for many decades, whose identity was essential to his life and work according to him, Norman Lear…..died NOT a Jew. How exactly does that work?

It works by the Holy Cross, the dividing line of all the world.

Your pointing to 2 specific occasions to try an illustrate a point, which you nor I know the full story. So that discussion is pretty fruitless.

Christianity and/or Catholicism pretty much accepts anyone today. Just profess and you are saved! Is that person truly a Christian? Who knows, their life will tell soon enough. Jews have been burned many times by Christians coming in acting as Jews or in the best interest of Jews and trying to evangelize. Even done to me personally. How many times have Jews been sought out to be killed by "Christians"? Do Jews remain guarded? Absolutely!

The cross ain't holy...nonetheless, it is continued dogma without being able to address the issue of required to be in Jesus for salvation.

All of those examples are extremely illustrative of what Judaism, post 70, actually IS. Look at why Oswald was denied entry. Really think through WHY very prominent Jews from very prominent Jewish families, with Trinitarian baptism….are suddenly no longer Jewish. According to …. both Jewish authorities and Christians.

So the Cross, however one views it, really is a major dividing line, isn't it?

This fits exactly with the definitions of terms I've provided.

It defines nothing. You can't get past your talking points / dogma and have a discussion.