With palms together,
There is an interesting article in the N Y Times today about a stone tablet found amid the Dead Sea Scrolls. Apparently it suggests that the notion of a suffering messiah who would rise in three days was a common belief in the century prior to the Christian Jesus.
The article suggests:
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
Hmmm. The death and resurrection myth prior to Jesus' birth? It would seem this adds to the notion advance some decades ago by a Jewish scholar suggesting this whole Jesus script was a scheme to get Jesus recognized as the Messiah, that Jesus was aware of the things that needd to happen before they happened in order to meet the criteria.
And later:
Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and “Gabriel’s Revelation” shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”
Strange.
Link
Be well
Lula, your thoughtful comments paint a clear picture as to why Christianity and Judaism are two different religions. While Christianity shares its origin with Judaism, it has developed its own interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures which serves its own needs and at the same time separates it from Judaism. Both walk in God's light and grace.
Its rather like the rebelious daughter, Christianity, recasts her parent's family history in light of her own rebellion. Care should be taken by the daughter, it seems to me, to respct the parent and the parent's point of view. The daughter has her own family tree, no need to disclaim the authenticity of the parent's roots. There's room for many trees in the forest.
Be well.
No worries, nothing to forgive, I am a Jew and "Pharisees" is not a bad word in my religion. I do, indeed, look at Jesus as rebellious and heretical.
True within your religion, absolutely false within mine. As I said, they are two separate religions. As to the Gentilesm, true again. You are only bound to the Noahide law.
Paul could say this till the cows came home. He had no authority in Judaism since he became an apostate. Its more like Paul took his own sample and planted it in a Gentile pot. No longer Judaism. Then grafted on all the Gentiles. They were not Jews, but Christians, and have no claim to Jewish history, customs, or anything else. Of course, they are always welcome to become Jewish. But then they would have to swear off Jesus.
See ya.
No he wasn't. This is an after the fact attribution made by Christians. The prophets
certainly did not have Jesus in mind.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
