Do you know how insulting some of your comments about the Tanakh (OT) are?

Question

- and do you care? :)

I've read umpteen posts today alone, describing the Tanakh as being 'wrong', 'irrelevant', 'deluded' etc

So if you don't mind, I'd just like to clarify:
1) Jesus did not 'do away' with the 'old' laws. He was a devout Jew his entire life and he did not state that the Judaic laws no longer applied

2) You can quote from the NT all day long, but it was written after the death of Jesus, and by people who mostly never even met Jesus, such as Paul.

3) How is that the Christians I know personally, cherry pick: they claim that yes, they must adhere to the ten commanments but that - conveniently! - they don't have to keep kosher and so can eat pork etc!

4) The so-called predictions about Jesus in the Tanakh are NOT about him: they all rest on mistranslated Hebrew!

5)To those who do insult the Tanakh: does it ever occur to you that it's really insensitive to do so?

ENCANTAR - I stated in the question that Tanakh = old testament :)

PHILHOON - that's truly funny. I'm not religious, but I AM fed up with so many people insulting the OT

SPARKI - read it again: I stated 'the Christians I KNOW PERSONALLY'. I did not generalise about all Christians.

CAPTAIN - that's not logical, to quote the NT to invalidate the OT. Of course the NT will say that!

Answer 1

One of the answers here was so wrong on every point I actually did laugh out loud at his ignorance of the context of the Hebrew Bible passages he put down despite arrogance that he knew it! then When I reached the point where he chastized you for not knowing the Tanakh..I actually had tea go up my nose!
Is the rationale for such behavior thinking that if they accuse someone of ignorance on a topic someone else may not have read much about that they will convince others lacking in knowledge of the text that they REALLY know?

Talk about INSULTING! That kind of behavior actually depends on assuming that everyone is more ignorant. I never assume that everyone I'm speaking doesn't have the same or greater level of knowledge on any particular area if I don't know them. It is only through dialog that you determine the level of knowledge one has.

Another ploy is to try to make it out as if you have to have some special Divine gift or years of special training to be able to understand what is written. It is a method to intimidate and control. If you only have the right " belief" you can see it says something different than what others who don't will read. It's also hogwash. If you posess a high school level of reading comprehension, and a sincere desire to understand what you're reading in context and go slow enough ..and also look up terms or dates and related history to get a feel for what you're reading..it isn't at all beyond your reach to understand ON YOUR OWN. Atheist, Jew, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Buddhist, Pagan..everyone who wants can read it the same way, if they try.

I had to laugh at the copy-paste of texts taken out of context..another funny thing about all this was that by choosing Jeremaih .. another poster ignored the fact that others who are actually familiar with the text can just as easily show their unassuming audience they're trying to convince, that if you use the surrounding text..the exact opposite of what he's trying to convince you is what it is really all about.

But DON'T take my word for it. PLEASE don't take my word alone! Go read it yourself. Start way back in chapter 1 of Jeremiah. His narrative tells at least five times that even though Israel has been so bad, and as bad as a woman who has been unfaithful to her husband and whose husband wouldn't even take her back.God will. He mentions that there has always been and shall forever remain at least a remnant who are faithful to the covenant. but states that if all Israel only repents and returns to God and lives in righteousness..and that when that happens..because the covenant won't cease until heaven and earth pass away..that one day all humanity..Jew and gentile alike will KNOW God. . It won't need to be TAUGHT to anyone. It will leave the realm of faith and trust in subjective experience and it will simply be a reality for all. Missionaries are a de-facto admission that the " new" covenant of Jeremiah hasn't happened.

How about THIS challenge? Don't ever take my word for what I claim the Tanakh states within it's texts. .just read it in context without using texts written 800 years later for the purpose of replacement theology to interpret meaning. THEN re-read the New Testament and see what Jews mean when we say you just don't have a clue. I have read both religion's texts, in context, in entirety. I completely understand that the perspective of the Hebrew Bible is often in complete contradiction to what the actual text states when viewed through the lens of the New Testament.

I fully understand that statement may enrage some devout Christians who believe their texts are inerrant. I am not claiming that by default the Tanakh is an inerrant group of texts...what I am speaking to is the accuracy of translation and to the contextual meaning of the writings themselves.

Many well-meaning Christians who sincerely believe they have the best interests of Jews at heart also don't realize how deeply hurtful it is when we see some of the most deeply significant and important religious customs and rituals hijacked and assigned meanings that are considered sinful and a violation of our faith in God. One of the more easily recognizable I think would be speaking of changing the Passover lamb sacrifice from being a symbol of marking the home as belonging to the Hebrews and in loyalty to God for the angel of death to pass over the Israelites. The lamb was used to show that the God of Israel is more powerful than the false deities (one of which was a RAM)of Egypt. The blood was used because they believed the life force was in the blood. By taking the very life force of an Egyptian deity and putting it on their slave household door was the ultimate in rebellion to their slavery. That's right in the Torah that the Egyptian deities were to be slammed through this. The commandment of the paschal lamb was NEVER, ever a sin sacrifice. It is stated to be continued a MEMORIAL..done in memory..to remember. Passover is a very central part of our faith and identity as a covenant nation. In the days of the Temple, the passover lamb was never a sin sacrifice, either! By hijacking this central aspect of observance it is yet another attempt to invalidate the eternal covenant of Israel. Well meaning people who have been mislead and who want to feel a connection to the ancient Hebrews engage is such a disrespectful abuse of the Passover story and think they're honoring it! I suggest everyone read the whole story in Exodus in context.

It is very disturbing to see evangelic Christians posing as Jews ( "messianic jews") teach other Christians about " Christ in the Passover". They misappropriate symbolism and try to pervert the very core faith of the Torah that, despite those efforts, has withstood 3500 years and the scattering of the Jewish people.

Unfortunately, I cannot come to any other conclusion than to see that the New Testament is entirely dependent on attempt to invalidate and do away with the faith of Judaism. Their very rearranging of the books of our Holy Scriptures and calling them an " Old Testament" despite the assertion that it is eternal within it in dozens of places from Genesis forward. Christianity has claimed for 2,000 years that the eternal covenant was done away with..yet it exists today and shall exist..until heaven and earth are gone.
Am Yisrael Chai :)
Judaism does not claim exclusive hold or connection to God. Torah never said this. Righteous gentiles are blessed within it's cover from beginning to end. Gentiles even worshipped at the Temple. Isaiah and Jeremiah both echo that the righteous ( and this means honest, too ) of all nations have a place in the world to come.
I hope for the day when this world will be one of honesty and respect for each other. Ask yourself:
If your faith depends on demonizing others and misrepresenting another's..what does that say?

EDIT: Tanakh is an acronym for the Hebrew Bible. It is comprised of the Torah ( teaching/law first five books of Moses) Neviim ( Prophets) and Ketuviim (Writings). It is the complete Jewish Bible or Holy Scriptures. I think one of the posters reads as confused on this point.

The essence of the eternal covenant, Micah sums up well, ""What Does the Lord Require of You? to Act Justly and to Love Mercy and to Walk Humbly With Your God"

God's mercy has always been available directly and shall forever remain so. My chosen path of Judaism expects of all Jews that we strive to do this, as an example for all. It is how we live and treat one another that displays what we hold dear in ethics and values. Sometimes I'm gonna mess up, no one is perfect and not expected to be perfect. We can do our best to fix what we mess up and try to do better. It's about how we live as much as about what we believe.

I respect the right of others to their own customs and beliefs up to the point where expression of such beliefs would demonize another with misrepresentation, seek to incite harm or remove civil rights. If I hope for others to respect my free will to worship God, then I cannot begrudge another their own right to worship whomever or whatever they wish.
Shalom

Note to Green eyed girl..I can't email you so I'll give note here. If you want to add me as fan..enable me to reciprocate. It isn't really fair otherwise. Shalom :)

Answer 2

To repeat and modify your point 2!

2) You can quote from the NT (tanakh) all day long, but it was written long after the death of Jesus (Abraham, Moses, Joseph, David, Solomon, Isaiah, etc), and by people who mostly never event met Jesus (Abraham, Moses, Jospeh, David, SOlomon, Isaiah, etc), such as Paul (Various people from the Rabbinical Tradition.

Can you see the problem with your argument. The same applies to the Tanakh. It was people's interpretations of original events which they themselves did not experience.

And on point 1)

Jesus claims he is to 'fulfil' the law, or that it is fulfilled in him (Matthew 5). What he criticised was the Pharisees for creating so many extra laws and traditions, that they took people's hearts away from God (Yahweh).

In Mark 2 he does claim that the Old Covenant and the New Covenant (By his Blood) are not compatible (Old and New Wineskins) so in a sense he does claim to be doing something new, and doing away with the Old. He argues that 'man was not made for the sabbath, but sabbath for the man. The Law was created to help people worship God, but once strict adherence to it actually takes peoples focus away from God onto the law, it has failed its purpose! So Jesus came to show its true purpose, which is a life lived spontaneously serving and worshipping God, not following every one of the 10, 613 or however many commadments (Mitzvah)

EDIT by that Logic also then the tanakh is pointless as it cannot have more authority that the Torah? Since it came second? The whole point of Jesus' claim was that he was doing something new. How else can we decide whether Jesus was the genuine Messiah, than if we look at the historical accounts of his life? If you can;t use any other document to explain the OT how are you going to know when the Messiah has arrived? "OH, thats not in the OT, it can't be the Messiah" (which funnily enough was the exact thing the pharisees did! "You can't be the Messiah, you don't fit in with outr interpretation of the Law")

Your basically taking a 'we're right' and nothing you can possibly say can prove us wrong, because we got here first, la la la la!'

Just because you were first doesn't make you right! Your stuck inside an insular, circular, self-re-inforcing argument, with no way out of your closed mind!

Answer 3

I agree with you fully that the OT was not wrong. Who said that!??

However...

1) He didn't do away with the law, but he fulfilled it. He also told off the Pharisees and "worked" on the Sabbath so I wouldn't exactly call him a devout Jew either. He was and is the Son of God.
2) Actually Paul did meet Jesus on the road to Damascus. The other gospel writers did their homework to ensure that their accounts were accurate.
3) This Christian doesn't cherry pick and neither do the ones you describe. The dietary laws were designed to symbolize the Jews' separation from the Gentiles. After Jesus, the Jews and the Gentiles are no longer separated.
4) Many well-studied Hebrew scholars would disagree with you on that. But I would love to see you try to come up with an example.
5) Doesn't apply to me. YHWH God is and has always been YHWH God. Perfect. :)

Now I'd like to know, since you mentioned the cherry-picking, why don't you perform animal sacrifices anymore? Why do you ignore the part of the OT that prophesied the Messiah arriving during a very specific time period - the exact time that Jesus came? Either he is the Messiah or there is none. And why don't you stone the adulterers among you to death? Don't you know that YOUR OWN SCRIPTURES tell you that most Jews would reject their Messiah? If I were you I'd get out of the rejection camp fast and get right with God. And burn those golden calves that are in your head.

Answer 4

There are a number of differences. Hebrew is a rich language and lends its self to multiple possibilities when being translated. Added to that problem is the cultural difference between Judaism and Christianity and you are sure to have any conversation on the subject get emotional very quickly. In the Latin translation efforts were made to use as much of the Aramaic Targum translation as possible. Jesus spoke Aramaic and it was most common language in the Israel at that time. Since Jesus’ references to the Jewish scriptures were primarily from the Targum translation it made sense to use them as a reference in translating from the Septuagint (Greek). The first translations were made using the Targums the Septuagint and the original Hebrew. The Targum translation is where I understand the young women/virgin interpretation came from. All Jewish translations come directly from the Hebrew text. The issue of the difference between Christian and Jewish versions is not as much of an issue with Christians since we have so many translations of the OT available. Varity is the norm for us, it is not the same for Jews. The differences within Christian translations are no greater that the differences between any of the them and the Tanakh. Because of this your best source on the differences would be Jewish sources. The problem is that Jewish sources are not interested in why there are differences or how they came about. All efforts are directed towards proving that Christianity is a false religion.

Answer 5

I doubt if most people even know what the TANAKH is.

Alot of Christians are taught that with the coming of Jesus, it set aside the ''Old Testament'' and only the ''New Testament'' is relevant. I guess when you have been told something over and over you can begin to believe it.

There are alot of people who even go so far as to say Jesus was a Christian-not a Jew-because he brought Christianity.

Who knows where people get such ideas and believe them.

Answer 6

Green eyed Girl, I will be indebted to Judaism forever for my own religion. If I have ever, in any way, insulted your beliefs, I ask forgiveness. The Hebrew Bible is very important to me, but I was born Gentile, not Jewish and chose to follow Christ. And you are correct, Jesus never tried to destroy Jewish law for the Jews. But do you realize when you so cavalierly discount the New Testament, you are doing the same thing to my scripture that others are doing to yours?

Perhaps there is just no way to have a good dialog on this subject in the R/S forum. Too many people are on here trying to stir up bad feelings instead of really discuss.

Answer 7

The Old Testament pre dates the New Testament that is for sure. What Paul and Peter did was their own interpretation for the times they were living in. It is the same with today with new science that didn't exist in those days.

So don't be offended by some of the answerer's as some are very good and make sense and some are just 2 points to be gained.

Yes I have heard of the Tanakh and it is part of the Jewish scrolls of the OT. bye bye sweat dreams.

Answer 8

I do feel that a lot of people on YA are insulting.

For your info - your point 3 actually could be seen as insulting to Christians. EDIT: to Christians you know - have you discussed this with them?

I am a Christian. Fact. If you're not fine. I respect that and respect what you believe.

I don't see why people are so insulting. I respect that people have different opinions.

I totally understand what you are saying and I don't take any notice of the people who are insulting as I don't agree with that behaviour so I try not to rise to it.

I see so often people write 'religion causes wars etc'. Well in fact I believe it is disrespect and hate that causes wars.

Answer 9

They have no clue. Also, good luck finding a christian that even knows what the Tanakh is.

But I would argue with you about Jesus being a devout Jew. That whole being saved through him thing, kind of makes me suspect. But maybe he didnt say that. I wouldnt know, because I have never read the christian bible.


Hmm.. I have to ask, Are you a "Messianic Jew" by any chance?

Answer 10

I'm Jewish and I don't consider anything people say about the Torah or Tanach to be intentionally insulting. I consider it to be a result of ignorance.

I often say "What to you call a christian who has studied the Torah verse by verse for 3 years?

Then answer is a Jew.

(Keep in mind, technically you can only study the Torah in Hebrew as it is not correctly called the Torah when it's translated.)

As far as christians eating pork, kosher is only for Jews, not for gentiles. People may not like this, but the reason Jews aren't supposed to eat pork is because it makes the mind unable to understand the Torah. (That is directly in the Torah in the Hebrew.) The Torah is only for Israel and those that choose to join Israel. Others will not be able to comprehend it.

Answer 11

I am also concerned about insults to the Tanakh. I am sorry to hear this but have seen many beliefs of people attacked. It is okay to disagree, however. I may be like a cherry-picker like you described because I am Catholic, but I respect your beliefs.

Don't let the insults get to you. It is of the same type of insults Jesus had to endure and he said, we will also have to endure the same. And in the end, that gives us some share in his glory, however small.