Please don't say Rabbis, that doesn't explain anything to me.
This is following on from another question i asked - something concerning almahs.
And also please don't say harsh words. I try to respect you if you will me.
2007-07-26 08:36:46 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
if you'd like to discuss the other point further then please feel free to e-mail me, I'm interested in discussing it further.
I think the short answer to this... why prove it? prove it how? God's Truth reveals itself. Gods Truth is consistent, and endures any challenge.
Judaism has been passed down over so long, with the same fundamental core beliefs (singularity of God, ect) its ... well, natural?
some will tell you about a degree of... something, energy, elation, uplifting that is very powerful in most jewish services, sometimes this is even observed by non-jews who are visiting, and they are amazed by it. i know the feeling they mean, but I can't imagine it NOT being there.
God shows me the way, and the way that MY God has shown me, has never failed me. if anything when I did NOT follow that guidance, is when there was failure.
in the previous post you said that "sin is not OF God" ... then who is it of? God is the source of *ALL*, good and bad.
I have a feeling you have some misconceptions about the nature of the God of Judaism, again, if you'd be interested in discussing it I'd be happy to give at least MY take on it, might be easier in email.
remember the old joke, you put two jews in a room, and you'll have 3 opinions.
2007-07-26 10:59:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is concerning the choice of the word 'ha-almah' in Isaiah 7:14 and exactly what the word means. The word, based on other places where it is used, refers to a young woman. Nothing about the sexual status or marital status of the woman is implied. Can an almah be a virgin...yes, but it is not a requirement.
Besides, if the verse in question required the woman to be a virgin, why then didn't the author of Isaiah use the precise word 'betulah' which he knew quite well as he used it on no less than 5 occasions!?
Secondly, if an almah must be a virgin, then what of the child that was born 700 years BEFORE Jesus as related in the following chapters!? Why was this child of a virgin birth NOT the Messiah!? And if this child was a product of a virgin birth, then the birth of Jesus is not unique or special in any way.
The fact of the matter is the prophesies of Isaiah 7 and Isaiah 9 do not speak of Jesus in any way, but rather of a child who was conceived in normal fashion and whose birth served as a sign to the King of the day.
Further, as the concept of a virgin birth as described in Matthew and Luke (I believe) is a completely foreign concept to Jews and Judaism, any child whose birth was so proclaimed would instantly be labelled a 'mamzer'...a child of an illicit and forbidden relationship. An as such, that person would NEVER be viewed a king, as Jesus was proclaimed by some. Perhaps, it was his status as a mamzer that was the reason why a 30-something man (who purported to be a rabbi) was unmarried.
It is a wondrous thing to take verses out of context, and/or intentionally mistranslated to 'prove' a point that was never made, intended or thought of. This is just one of many such cases expounded by Christian theologians.
Lastly, and I don't mean to be harsh or indelicate, but, do you not think it a bit arrogant for Christians to be telling Jews what their Scriptures say and mean!? After all, the writings of Isaiah had been known to the Jewish people for 7 centuries and never did the thought of a virgin birth leap out from those scrolls.
If you wish to discuss this further, you are welcome to email me via Y!A.
2007-07-26 09:05:41 · answer #2 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I appreciated your last question. This one is impossible to answer because faith, by definition, does not rely on proof. To begin with, over the centuries there have been many "proofs" for or against the existence of G-d, each one of them flawed in one way or another. So therefore the very foundation of *all* theistic religions must be based on the classical "leap of faith" so eloquently written about by Kierkegaard. Having said that, I have had moments in which I have felt a connection to the Divine, both during prayer and at other times.
The closest to "truth" that I can come is that what I interpret makes sense to me, satisfies me logically, spiritually and emotionally. Given this and my experience of the Divine, I don't find it necessary to go beyond this point.
2007-07-26 08:46:54 · answer #3 · answered by Mark S, JPAA 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm not a big religeos person (I believe in froof and only proof) but I'm offended. It's like asking you the same question. How do you know a bunch up people grouped up and one said "Hey guys wanna play a joke on hummanity that will last till the end of time?" "Sure." "so this on guy jesus christ is sent to earth by by god because he is his son. Hes killed on a cross and goes to heaven bla bla bla" "great" "ok this book will change everybodys beliefs." Now lets send out copies.
No offense but wouldn't that be just a likely as your beliefs?
Edit: feel free to give thumbs downs
2007-07-26 08:53:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lets see- we were the original followers of the Tanach, hebrew is our language, aramaic is our language, we have teachings dating back millenia, many written down, others passed down orally. The question has to be - why do you think we are wrong? Why do you think that we don't understand our own scriptures and language?
2007-07-26 09:59:16 · answer #5 · answered by allonyoav 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Can any faith or an interpretation of faith be "proven?"
That is kinda silly to practically order Jewish people to "prove" their religion to you...
2007-07-26 08:46:31 · answer #6 · answered by robinwagner22 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Truth is subjective. And I don't give a darn whatever your truth maybe :P So why the heck do you care about mine?
2007-07-26 08:45:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Respectfully, you prove that it isn't.
2007-07-26 08:42:44 · answer #8 · answered by S K 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋