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
Dear KFC, yes there are two versions, so to speak of the Talmud. Most Jews today see the Babylonian version as the most valid because it was in Babylonia that most of the best Jewish scholars resided.
There is to be no question that Jews of old (as well as the modern Orthodox) hold the Messiah is a real possibility. There are scores of legends as to a hidden Messiah and legends as to why he has not come out of hiding. But understand, the Jewish notion of a Messiah is not a God-like person, not super human in any respect. The Jewish objection to Jesus as the Messiah is founded upon two discreet things. First, as we noted together earlier, the prophecies were not fulfilled, there was no ushering of a new era where lion and lamb resided together, ect., and secondly the claim that Jesus was an incarnation of God himself. Something Jews find terribly offensive.
Yes. And as far as within Christianity, I have no problem with this interpretation. Still, outside of Christianity, we are still left with the problem of completely unfilfilled prophacy and the stepping way from monotheism that God splitting into two or three poses. Chistians should, as I said in a recent blog, believe in their Jesus. I support that with all my heart. I equally support that Jews have a right and an obligation to continue their faith along its own guidelines.
Be well and thank you for your thoughtful comments.
I just read through all of the article and comments, I find it both interesting and informative.
I just have one small thing to add. If you are not Jewish you are doomed to die and go directly to hell to burn for eternity for worshiping a false G-D and idolatry.
That is all.
Obviously you have not a lick of anything resembling a sense of humor, or is this just a response because I blacklisted your silly ass from my blog? you sad pathetic piece of belly lint.
Obviously this is in response to me just blacklisting your sad pathetic silly little ass from my blog just a few moments ago, you sad little thing you. You first seem fixated on little whip am I now to have the honor of having you follow me around like a trained puppy?
Dear Lula, I can understand your point of view here. From a believing Christian's perspective, those who cast doubt on the doctrines of Christianity could appear to be attacking it. I don't agree with this point of view, obviously. I think to question is a good thing. (A bit of history here. Once upon a time I searched all over the place for a spiritual home, even Catholicism. I even took catechism classes with an Irish priest for a few months. We just could not come to terms. I would question; he would turn flaming red mad.)
The point of this article was to cause discussion around the belief that Jesus was the Messiah. to show that there are alternative theories as to what his behavior at the time was about, and suggest as the article does, that the tablet in question should stir debate among Christianity. As a non-Christian, it is hardly blasphemy to claim Jesus was following a script in order to be acclaimed the messiah. Messiahship had nothing to do with divinity anyway.
The fact of the matter is that Jews rarely attack Christians. What we tend to do is question. Its a far more common occurance going in the other direction, as your comments have made very clear.
Are you an anti-semite? I don't know. I do think that your comments about Jewish clergy and holy books borders on it. I also think that from your point of view anyone questioning the tenents of your faith must hate it.
Questioning is almost always about understanding. Questions do take things apart. But the intent is not to destroy, but rather to get to know.
I'll give you this. I'll admit to making fun in my own mind of anyone who might seriously believes God became a man or that his birth was "immaculate." The times when I respond out loud or in writing in such a way are usually the times I am being accosted by Christians acting, I'm sure, in good faith, but none-the-less asking me to leave my faith and become an apostate or deriding me for my faith's practices or my faith itself.
Both of us have trouble accepting the other's point of view, don't you think?
Here puppy! here Puppy!
Nightshades: I am a retired Zen Buddhist priest. I write about Zen and other spiritual matters. Please review my blog here at JU and you can also find me at:
http://www.clearmindzen.org
or
http://clearmindzen.blogspot.com/
Be well.
There is no "war on Christianity." I think you've been watching too much Fox News.
I would agree that someone leading grace at a governement institution should be prohibited. Its not againsat Christianity, but rather against government sponsored religion. If people wish to pray at the US Naval Academy, public schools, or anywhere else, they are free to do so on their own. We just should not allow a representative of that institution, like a principle or a teacher, lead that prayer and have everyone say it together. Prayer is a private matter. Besides this is not just a "Jewish" cause. There are members of all faiths standing in favor of a continued separation of Church and State.
I don't know who Michael Newdow is.
As far as the Passion of Christ, I think Mel Gibson is a nut case. He pretty much shot himself in his drunken foot that night he was picked up DUI spewing all sorts of anti-semitic hogwash. Personally, I had no problem with the film itself, though I wouldn't see it. (I don't watch gratuitous violence.) I am not in favor of banning movies or books.
Nightshades:
Try this:
http://sodaiho.joeuser.com/
SlyDrivel, We practice Zazen. Link. Be well.
Nightshades, I have no opinion one way or the other. I do know dead men don't walk.
Lula, I don't know what to do with you. Have you ever heard the truism, "two Jews, three opinions?" Goodness. Get a grip. Be well.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
