Martin Luther contrasts the materialistic Talmudic notion of Messiah to Christian one

[Petr]

I personally found this to be the most moving part of Martin Luther's anti-Judaic pamphlet Von den Jüden und ihren Lügen (1543). He really lays out the fundamental difference between the Christian worldview of spiritual hope and the materialistic dreams of Talmudic Jews.


http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm



"Finally I wish to say this for myself: If God were to give me no other Messiah than such as the Jews wish and hope for, I would much, much rather be a sow than a human being. I will cite you a good reason for this. The Jews ask no more of their Messiah than that he be a Kokhba and worldly king who will slay us Christians and share out the world among the Jews and make them lords, and who finally will die like other kings, and his children after him. For thus declares a rabbi: You must not suppose that it will be different at the time of the Messiah than it has been since the creation of the world, etc.; that is, there will be days and nights, years and months, summer and winter, seedtime and harvest, begetting and dying, eating and drinking, sleeping, growing, digesting, eliminating - all will take its course as it does now, only the Jews will be the masters and will possess all the world's gold, goods, joys, and delights, while we Christians will be their servants. This coincides entirely with the thoughts and teachings of Muhammad. He kills us Christians as the Jews would like to do, occupies the land, and takes over our property, our joys and pleasures. If he were a Jew and not an Ishmaelite, the Jews would have accepted him as the Messiah long ago, or they would have made him the Kokhba.

Even if I had all of that, or if I could become the ruler of Turkey or the Messiah for whom the Jews hope, I would still prefer being a sow. For what would all of this benefit me if I could not be secure in its possession for a single hour? Death, that horrible burden and plague of all mankind, would still threaten me. I would not be safe from him; I would have to fear him every moment. I would still have to quake and tremble before hell and the wrath of God. And I would know no end of all this, but would have to expect it forever. The tyrant Dionysius illustrated this well when he placed a person who praised his good fortune at the head of a richly laden table. Over his head he suspended an unsheathed sword attached to a silk thread, and below him he put a red-hot fire, saying: Eat and be merry, etc. That is the sort of joy such a Messiah would dispense. And I know that anyone who has ever tasted of death's terror or burden would rather be a sow than bear this forever and ever.

For a sow lies down on her featherbed, on the street, or on a dung-heap; she rests securely, snores gently, sleeps sweetly, fears neither king nor Lord, neither death nor hell, neither the devil nor God's wrath, and lives entirely without care so long as she has her bran. And if the emperor of Turkey were to draw near with all his might and his wrath, she in her pride would not move a bristle for his sake. If someone were to rouse her, she, I suppose, would grunt and say, if she could talk: You fool, why are you raving? You are not one-tenth as well off as I am. Not for an hour do you live as securely, as peacefully and tranquilly as I do constantly, nor would you even if you were ten times as great or rich. In brief, no thought of death occurs to her, for her life is secure and serene.

And if the butcher performs his job with her, she probably imagines that a stone or piece of wood is pinching her. She never thinks of death, and in a moment she is dead. Neither before, during, or in death did she feel death. She feels nothing but life, nothing but everlasting life! No king, not even the Jews' Messiah, will be able to emulate her, nor will any person, however great, rich, holy, or mighty he might be. She never ate of the apple which taught us wretched men in Paradise the difference between good and evil.

What good would the Jews' Messiah do me if he were unable to help a poor man like me in face of this great and horrible lack and grief and make my life one-tenth as pleasant as that of a sow? I would say: Dear Lord God, keep your Messiah, or give him to whoever will have him. Instead, make me a sow. For it is better to be a live sow than a man who is eternally dying. Yea, as Christ says: "It would have been better for that man if he had not been born" [Matt. 26:24].

However, if I had a Messiah who could remedy this grief, so that I would no longer have to fear death but would be always and eternally sure of life, and able to play a trick on the devil and death and no longer have to tremble before the wrath of God, then my heart would leap for joy and be intoxicated with sheer delight; then would a fire of love for God be enkindled, and my praise and thanks would never cease. Even if he would not, in addition, give me gold, silver, and other riches, all the world would nonetheless be a genuine paradise for me, though I lived in a dungeon.

That is the kind of Messiah we Christians have, and we thank God, the Father of all mercy, with the full, overflowing joy of our hearts, gladly and readily forgetting all the sorrow and harm which the devil wrought for us in Paradise. For our loss has been richly compensated for, and all has been restored to us through this Messiah. Filled with such joy, the apostles sang and rejoiced in dungeons and amid all misfortunes as did even young girls, such as Agatha, Lucia, etc. The wretched Jews, on the other hand, who rejected this Messiah, have languished and perished since that time in anguish of heart, in trouble, trembling, wrath, impatience, malice, blasphemy, and cursing, as we read in Isaiah 65:14: "Behold, my servants shall sing for gladness of heart, but you shall cry out for pain of heart, and shall wail for anguish of spirit. You shall leave your name to my chosen for a curse, and the Lord God will slay you; but his servants he will call by a different name." And in the same chapter we read: "I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek me. I said, 'Here am I, here am I,' to a nation that did not call on my name (that is, who were not my people). I spread out my hands all the day to a rebellious people."

We, indeed, have such a Messiah, who says to us (John 11:25): "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die." And John 8:51: "Truly, truly, I say to you, if any one keeps my word, he will never see death." The Jews and the Turks care nothing for such a Messiah. And why should they? They must have a Messiah from the fool's paradise, who will satisfy their stinking belly, and who will die together with them like a cow or dog.

Nor do they need him in the face of death, for they themselves are holy enough with their penitence and piety to step before God and attain this and everything. Only the Christians are such fools and timid cowards who stand in such awe of God, who regard their sin and his wrath so highly that they do not venture to appear before the eyes of his divine Majesty without a mediator or Messiah to represent them and to sacrifice himself for them. The Jews, however, are holy and valiant heroes and knights who dare to approach God themselves without mediator or Messiah, and ask for and receive all they desire. Obviously the angels and God himself must rejoice whenever a Jew condescends to pray; then the angels must take this prayer and place it as a crown on God's divine head. We have witnessed this for fifteen hundred years. So highly does God esteem the noble blood and circumcised saints because they can call his son *Hebel Vorik*!

...


Petr

[Petr]

The Jews ask no more of their Messiah than that he be a Kokhba and worldly king who will slay us Christians and share out the world among the Jews and make them lords, and who finally will die like other kings, and his children after him. For thus declares a rabbi: You must not suppose that it will be different at the time of the Messiah than it has been since the creation of the world, etc.; that is, there will be days and nights, years and months, summer and winter, seedtime and harvest, begetting and dying, eating and drinking, sleeping, growing, digesting, eliminating - all will take its course as it does now, only the Jews will be the masters and will possess all the world's gold, goods, joys, and delights, while we Christians will be their servants.
"A rabbi" whom Luther was talking about was probably none other than Moses Maimonides, whose influence was great in secularizing and materializing the Jewish concept of Messiah and the kingdom of God - more on that here:

http://www.moshiach.com/discover/index.php?page=index_v2&id=199&c=13


MAIMONIDES AND THE RATIONALIST APPROACH TO MESSIANISM

...

Maimonides was well aware of the average public opinion of who the Messiah would be, which was ridden with supernatural powers. To an extent, this may have been influ*enced by the Christian culture in which the Jews were sub*merged. But more important, it added a dimension of roman*ticism and glory to the messianic figure. Thus Maimonides writes:

One should not entertain the notion that the messianic king must work miracles and wonders, bring about new phenomena within the world, resurrect the dead, or perform other similar deeds. This is definitely not true. A proof can be brought from the fact that Rabbi Akiva, one of the greatest sages of the Mishnah, was one of the supporters of King Ben Kozeba, and would describe him as the messianic king.... The sages did not ask him for any signs or wonders. [Introduction to Helek]

...

In perhaps his most astounding pro*nouncement concerning the messianic age, Maimonides wrote:

But the Messiah will die but people will live for 1,000 years. The Messiah will die, and his son and son's son will reign in his stead. God has clearly declared his death in the words, "He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth." His kingdom will endure a very long time and the lives of men will he long also, because longevity is a consequence of the removal of sorrows and cares. Let not the fact of the duration of his kingdom for thousands of years seem strange to you, for the sages have said that when a number of good things come together, it is not an easy thing for them to separate again. [Introduction to Helek]



"Our common Judeo-Christian tradition," yeah right!


Petr

[wintermute]

I personally found this to be the most moving part of Martin Luther's anti-Judaic pamphlet Von den Jüden und ihren Lügen (1543). He really lays out the fundamental difference between the Christian worldview of spiritual hope and the materialistic dreams of Talmudic Jews.


http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm



"Finally I wish to say this for myself: If God were to give me no other Messiah than such as the Jews wish and hope for, I would much, much rather be a sow than a human being. I will cite you a good reason for this. The Jews ask no more of their Messiah than that he be a Kokhba and worldly king who will slay us Christians and share out the world among the Jews and make them lords, and who finally will die like other kings, and his children after him. For thus declares a rabbi: You must not suppose that it will be different at the time of the Messiah than it has been since the creation of the world, etc.; that is, there will be days and nights, years and months, summer and winter, seedtime and harvest, begetting and dying, eating and drinking, sleeping, growing, digesting, eliminating - all will take its course as it does now, only the Jews will be the masters and will possess all the world's gold, goods, joys, and delights, while we Christians will be their servants.

Petr,

Here's a beautiful essay on the same subject from a contemporary Orthodox perspective. I will admit that the visions of a this-worldly eschaton are part of my - at times - aggravated disdain for the Abrahamic faiths, and also make me distrust writers like Joe Sobran and Michael Hoffman who try to defend or rehabilitate Orthodox Judaism (also dependant on Maimonides) as something holy or good in contrast to 'secular' or 'reform' Judaism, when in fact Judaism in all its varieties is just as spiritually dessicated as Luther describes above. How much difference is there between Kokhba and the Commisars?

(Apropos Luther's comments about preferring to "be a sow" than enjoy the Jewish Messianic Age, the Platonist Celsus once memorably commented about the Jewish ideal of physical resurrection, "Is this not a dream for worms?")

I hope you enjoy the essay.

http://www.stvladimirs.ca/library/bnei-noach.html


Answering the B'nei Noach

By "The Heavenly Abode"

It is not uncommon for judaisers to post anti-Christian messages on Orthodox Newsgroups and Messageboards. Most of these posters are from a Judaised Gentile group called the B'nei Noach or Children of Noah. There is a missionary movement among some Jews to attract non-Jews away from Christianity and into a pro-Jewish "Noachide" religion which supports Judaism. The author of the following article is an Orthodox Christian who was educated in Orthodox Jewish institutions and had a first hand education in Orthodox Judaism. Hopefully this article will clarify what some of the issues are and provide answers that a non-Christian may be able to hear.
I believe it is necessary to refrain from any mention of the New Testament as arguments from the New Testament will have no effect on one who does not believe in it. To accept ZC's arguments, several assumptions have to be made:

Talmudic Judaism is the form of Judaism that has existed from the the time of mesias ha torah m'har sinai - the granting of the Torah from Mt. Sinai.
The Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Scripture is the most exact text of this occurrence

Salvation/Redemption means that the Jews possess the land of Israel, wipe out the race of Amalek (i.e. anyone who opposes the Jewish right to the land and the Kingly and Priestly rulership of the Jews) and rebuilds the temple to reinstitute the animal sacrifices. The Jewish People are to become the kings and Priests of the earth and the goiim/B'nei Noach their servants. As stated previously, anyone who opposes this is to be executed according to the Talmud. Those who possess the picture of the woman with the child are to be executed for idolatry. So too are Gentiles who study parts of the Torah and Talmud that are not intended for them.

God desires such a salvation for the world, God is the origin of both Good and Evil, Satan is the servant of God (still); he is merely a tempter doing God's bidding. The entire creation was created simply for the sake of the Jews and the Torah (see Rashi's commentary at the beginning of Genesis).
What according to the Ramba"m (it may be Ramba"n, my memory fails me here, in any case both are major commentators in Orthodox Judaism) is the purpose of Judaism? The answer to this question can be found in the commentary to the makom litos (lit. pitfall - a place in the Torah that one would find contradiction and therefore doubt the authenticity of the Torah) in Exodus where Pharaoh's magicians successfully turn their rods into serpents. The commentator deals with the inyanei kishsuf or the matters of magic. We are told that the Egyptians once posessed the true religion of the Goiim (non-Jews). In order for the world to continue, certain ritual/magical practices must be performed and the Egyptians posessed these practices. In otherwords, prior to the transmission of the Torah, this was a form of true religion! However, the Egyptian religion had become perverted and contained many difficult and lenghty rituals which made it necessary for a better form to replace it. Enter the Torah with its 613 command ments. According the the commentator, these commandments are condenced forms of the previous magic of the Egyptians and thus are effective in maintaining the world. The Jew does not need to understand why certain things are commanded (i.e. sha'atnez the prohibition of mixing wool and linen), but merely that such rituals are necessary for keeping up the world. In essence, Talmudic Judaism is the true magic. The Orthodox Jew believes that the world's existence itself depends on his keeping of the commandments, which of course includes animal sacrifice in the temple.

What needs to be discussed is not passages from the New Testament, but whether such an interpretation as described above is the true meaning of the Hebrew Scripture, salvation, redemption and God. If the above is true, then Zionist Conspirator is indeed correct. On the other hand, if such ideas are false, one must pray for and pity such a one who believes these things.
Looking at Judaism in history, it is clear that there have been many interpretations and "denominations" of Jewish Faith. In early times, there was the separation of the Judeans and the Israelites. There was the separation of the Samaritans. Later there were Sadducees, Pharasees, Zealots, Essenes and Hellenic Jews to name a few. In other words, Judaism itself has never been a monolithic entity. Even after the destruction of the 2nd Temple, there were divisions. Talmudic Judaism (i.e. Orthodox Judaism) did not really triumph until the middle ages. Even today there exist remnants of the Samaritans and the later Kra'im (Kararites), the latter who rejected the Talmud as inauthentic Judaism. The Pharasees were notable in that they believed in resurrection whereas the Sadducees rejected it. The Sadducees accepted only the Hebrew Bible and not the commentary which later coalesced into the Mishna and Talmud. Hellenic Jews interpreted the Hebrew Bible as allegory (i.e. Philo Judaeus). Christianity is rooted in Hellenistic Judaism and not Pharasaical or Talmudic Judaism. Early Christian Fathers were never Fundamentalists, having been rooted in the allegorical tradtion to begin with.

From a historical perspective, ideas of the Messiah (Persian shaoshant "The Obedient One") and the Resurrection (fravashi "renewal") did not enter Judaism until Jewish contact with the Persians who already believed in such things. The early Persians were also, incidentally, Monotheists. Like the Jews, they admitted that supernatural powers - i.e. Moon god, River God - (Hebrew sarim) existed but such powers are not to be worshiped. Like the Jews at times, the Persians eventually degenerated into polytheistic worship. Incidentally Modern Zoroastrians have recovered their older Monotheism and also use a seven light lamp in their temples.

A mention of the canon of the Jewish Bible also needs to be made at this point. At the time of the fall of the 2nd Temple, the most widely used text was actually the Greek Septuagint. The Masoretic text was not even in existence yet. Hebrew is a language that is written without vowels. For example vyhi kn would be written, while it would be read "vayahi ken" (and it was so). This, of course, leaves the text open for variant readings and one relies on tradition to determine which is the correct reading. We also know that the script used in a sefer torah or Torah scroll today is not the same Hebrew script used even in the time of the 2nd Temple. To make a claim the the writing of the letters themselves came down from Mt. Sinai is cannot be supported. The Samaritan script, likely older than the current Hebrew, is very,very different. The Dead Sea Scrolls use a different script.
There are wide variants in older texts of the Hebrew Scriptures and variants between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text. Which are authentic? The Septuagint, or "The Seventy" was the Greek text of the Hebrew Ca non that was commissioned for the Great Library in Alexandria. Tradition relates that 70 Jewish scholars were called upon to translate the Canon and produced 70 identical Greek translations. Whether or not this is true is not the point. What is important here is that the Septuagint was certainly accepted as a bona fide translation. Historically, the Septuagint is older than the Masoretic text. There are significant differences in many passages relating to the coming Messiah. Accusations that the early Christian writers changed the texts to support their claims cannot hold water because these writers were relying on the older text of the Septuagint. If any changes were made, they would have to be in the Masoretic which was produced after the Common Era and at a time when the rising sect of the Notzrim (Nazarines, i.e. Christians) was gaining strength and was perceived as a threat to the Pharasees.
This divergence between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text is the real problem with any debate or dialogue between Orthodox Jews and Christians. The former rely on the Masoretic and the latter on the Septuagint. It is a proverbial case of "apples and oranges." Fundamentalist Christians used the Hebrew (likely Masoretic) KJV translation for the Hebrew Canon. It is not surprising that most arguments of Judaism against Christianity can appear valid when this is relied on. Early Christians strictly used the Septuagint, knowing the Masoretic to be a text that wiped out the messianic references found in the Septuagint.

From the disparity of the two versions of the Jewish Canon, one also arrives at differing views of redemption and salvation. In the earlier Septuagint, a clear indication of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit is present. It is clear that only God can affect salvation for the Human Race. In both versions, we learn that in redemption a New Law will be given. Also, the psalmist sings: Trust ye not in princes nor in the sons of men in whom there is no salvation. There is, especially in the Greek, a prophetic progression from the materialist redemption (i.e. the possession of the land and kingship over the world) to the universal redemption and triumph of God. At this point we must ask, is redemption simply the enthronement of the Jewish people (to allow their magical practices) or is redemption a healing of the human condition, which was altered with the proverbial Adam and Eve? Is salvation political or internal?

On a practical level, in order for the Talmudic Salvation to be effective one of two things must occur:

Free will must be eradicated

If #1 is not the case, the "peace" must somehow be enforced.

Since free will is essential to Talmudic Judaism, the 2nd option is more likely the case. The Talmud is full of all the executions that must take place for failure to abide by this peace. In reality, the Talmudic redemption appears to be a tyranny by the Jewish race and is not much different than that Nazism. Indeed the evil Hitler was simply envious of the Jews and wanted their style of redemption for the Germans!

Since the human condition is not healed, there can be no real redemption for all humanity. Every tyrant believed that his way would create peace for the world if only his words and ideas were heeded to! What makes the Orthodox Jews any different?!

There is one way for peace - the healing of the human inclination to evil and the healing of the consequences of death. Fear of death is a cause of sinfulness. No magic wand can change this. Peace can be obtained by God's grace reaching out to Man and Man acting on this grace. Redemption is a person by person process and not something that can be obtained by political rule. The free will response to God's grace is necessary. God's redemption heals sin and death. If every human would chose this, there would be peace. It comes from within and not from without.
Change of the inner heart is the most difficult task. No one wants to hear it. It is easier to believe that we are saved by rituals and mitzva magic. It is easier to strive for political hegemony and New World Orders. Even when people have heard the truth, they don't necessarily follow it.

One could say that the historical lesson of the Hebrew Canon is precicesly the above. God was continually reaching out to the Jewish People. He led them out of Egypt, parted the Sea and sprung water from a rock. Still, they built and worshiped a golden calf. God dwelled among them in the tabernacle and temples. Still they brought ido ls into the temple. Prophets warned them of their sinfulness, still they continued. God loved man and the Jews so much that He walked in the flesh but He was still ignored. A woman recovers the glory of Mother Eve and is able to conceive without a man (In Orthodox Judaism, parthenogenesis was to be the mode of creation before the fall). Her son submits to that which befalls all men, He submitted to crucifixion - but defeated this evil by rising on the Third Day - a truth that his followers went to their own deaths in testimony to. Man can be renewed and can reject sin and become a remade Adam! Man can reach the lost Garden of Eden having undergone this transformation! Man is healed and Death is defeated! Now this is redemption! We can die to sin and rise to new life.
Alas! This salvation and redemption has been reduced to magic also in later times. Simply say you believe (ignoring the real meaning of the word) in something and voila! You are healed - no change of the inner heart. No continual response to grace. Many who claim in the name of the messiah to be His followers, have simply reverted to the custom of the Jews of old and look for magical solutions.

The Septuagint books missing in the Masoretic Text foretold of the true salvation. Intertestimental literature (i.e. the Book of Enoch) certainly does tell us that many Jews expected to see the Son of God who sits at the Right hand of the Father. Indeed, this is not a Christian invention. Somehow, I don't believe that salvation comes with genocide (wiping out the race Amalek) but rather with wiping out the evil of one's own heart - the internal Amelek that denies God. What makes Orthodox Jewish salvation any different than Hitler's or Napoleon's or Lenin's? Something is wrong with the Talmudic picture.

Now let's say that the Talmudic Jews are right and salvation does mean Jewish hegemony and animal sacrifice. Is such a god worthy of our worship? I think not. Personally I would prefer to have my soul extinguished (the ultimate Jewish hell - all others are temporary) rather than serve such a tyranical god. God can be a tyrant in Judaism because he authors good and evil alike. The Talmudic Jewish god and the god of John Calvin are very similar and it is not hard to see why some who follow in these traditions are easy prey for the B'nei Noach. A good life on earth with an end here and now is preferable to eternity under the author of evil. Humanity itself can be greater than this false god. It is precicely the Calvinistic revival of the false Talmudic god that has been the cause of such irreligion in society. It is the abandonment of real Christianity which has led to society's decline. Intuitively one knows such a god is not worthy of reverence and worship. Without an alternative, man has fallen into materialism. But most have forgotten the True God revealed by the prophets of the Jewish People and the God that God Himself revealed Himself to be - The Lover of Mankind. A God that wishes the healing of our human condition and the peace of all in His Kingdom (not on earth) is the only God worthy of worship. Christianity can only be successful when each and every believer practices it, which has not been the case. The result has been the relapse into Talmudic Jewish modes of thinking that require military conquest to get the message across. This is not Christainity but False Judaism. True Christianity is the continuation of True Judaism. True Judaism is the revelation of God to man and man's response to this revelation. God reveals what people can understand for the time.

On animal sacrifice: Does God demand blood, even the blood of the Son of God? In Genesis we see that Cain and Abel made sacrifices. Cain's vegetarian sacrifice was rejected and Abel's animal sacrifice was pleasing. Is it that God likes blood? The ancients certainly thought so. Here is the real matter. A person's god is that or whom one m akes most important in life. What you serve is what you worship. In ancient times, wealth was measured by animals. There was no money. The principle of sacrifice is that one gives something considered important to one who is more important as a way of showing what/who is really important. Today this would be money. Animals were the money of yesteryear. God does not want blood, but our acknowlegement that He is greater than our material attachments. Indeed in the Talmudic Age to come, it will be easier to give animals that aren't worth much anymore than one's money. Money and weath must be sacrificed lest we become too dependent on it and make it our god. Where blood comes into the picture, however is in an allegorical sense. Just as the spilling of blood preceeded the giving of the the first law, the spilling of blood is prelude to the second giving of the law. (This is remez , or allegory, and an example of the Talmudic precept of ma'asei avos simon l'banim "the deeds of the fathers are a sign for the children.").

As for the sacrifice of the Son, this is a free will offering. He did not undergo death because an angry bloodthirsty god demanded it, but because He loved us enough to become Man. Man undergoes death, therefore He had to undergo death in His humanity. This of course changes nothing to the nature of Divinity. Death is the result of sin which was added to humanity on account of Adam. Death was given as a mercy to prevent tyrants from living forever. All humanity shares in the consequence of Adam (but not in his guilt). Sin is healed by healing death - a transforming death that leads to resurrection. He dies because of our sins (The Greek word is gia). This word does not mean "in place of" but rather "because" or "on account of." Sin and Death are not healed by a continuation of revenge (Talmudic Judaism considers revenge to be a virtue) but rather by putting an end to revenge. Constant vigilance against anti-Jewish races and the commandments to extinguish them are key in Talmudic Judaism. Revenge only breeds further revenge. No redemption ever arose out of revenge.

One favorite accusation against Christianity is that the work of Jesus was not completed and He will have to return to complete it. Isn't this "proof" of His "failure?" This accusation only works with a false interpretation of Christianity. The bottom line again is what the nature of salvation is. Some may erroneously believe that Jesus will come again and create a worldly kingdom. If you believe in this, you might as well join the B'nei Noach because this does indeed make Him a "failure." But this is not the teaching. The second coming is a consummation of the world. The final judgment takes place and THIS world ends. There is a new world and kingdom to come but it is not of this world. Earth is an exile from Paradise. It is a place for us to work out our salvation. Worldly kingdoms do not have a prominent place in Christianity.

In closing, I would like to leave you with a story from the Mikhilta (a Jewish commentary). (quoted from the late Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's The Infinite Light - Kaplan was a fierce critic of Christianity)

It is written, "And God went before them by day in a pillar of cloud...and by night in a pillar of fire." (Exodus 13:21). But how is it possible to say this? Is it not written "The whole earth is filled with His glory"? (Isaiah 6:3).

Rabbi Antonios explained this with the following example:

A king once sat in judgment and remained in court until after dark. His children remained in court so that they would be able to accompany him home.

When the king left for his palace, he took a lantern and carried it, lighting the way for his children. His officers and nobles saw this and offered to carry the l antern for the king.

The king told them, "I do not carry the lamp because I lack someone else to carry it. I carry it to show my love for my children."

Rabbi Antonios explained that the same is true of God. He reveals His glory before His children as an expression of love for them.

Make your own conclusions.

"Intuitively one knows such a god is not worthy of reverence and worship" - now you know why I'm an Hellene (well, with some sympathy for Orthodoxy of course.)

Also apropos, from Julian the Blessed:

"In my opinion there is no reason why their god should not be a mighty god, even though he does not happen to have wise interpreters or prophets. But the real reason why they are not wise is that they have not submitted their souls to be cleansed by the regular course of study, nor have they allowed those studies to open their tightly closed eyes, and to clear away the mist that hangs over them. But since these men see as it were a great light through a fog, no plainly or clearly, and since they think that what they see is not a pure light but a fire, and they fail to discern all that surrounds it, they cry with a loud voice: "Tremble, be afraid, fire, flame, death, a dagger, a broad sword!" thus describing under many names the harmful might of fire. But on this subject it will be better to demonstrate seperately how much inferior to our own poets are these teachers of tales about the gods."

Best,

Wintermute

[Petr]

writers like Joe Sobran and Michael Hoffman who try to defend or rehabilitate Orthodox Judaism (also dependant on Maimonides) as something holy or good in contrast to 'secular' or 'reform' Judaism, when in fact Judaism in all its varieties is just as spiritually dessicated as Luther describes above.
Michael Hoffman at least is doing nothing like you describe, but is, au contraire, drawing as clear distinctions as possible between so-called "Orthodox Judaism" of today and the religion of old-covenant Israelites. Hardly anyone is harsher critic of Maimonides than him:

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/christian2.html

"Maimonides is one of the most notorious haters of Christ in the annals of Judaism."

Here Hoffman actually attacks Joe Sobran for expressing some pro-Judaic notions:

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/sobranphrenia.html


(Apropos Luther's comments about preferring to "be a sow" than enjoy the Jewish Messianic Age, the Platonist Celsus once memorably commented about the Jewish ideal of physical resurrection, "Is this not a dream for worms?")
Apples and oranges. Both Luther and Greek Orthodox church fathers welcomed the idea of physical resurrection. The issue was immortality in the Messianic kingdom, and as we have seen, Maimonides argued against the idea that the coming Messiah would resurrect the dead or that he would live forever.

Despising the body to the extent as to detest physical resurrection (and by implication, the resurrection of Jesus Christ) - now this is rushing to the other extreme, to a docetic Gnosticism with its twisted dualism of flesh and spirit.

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1373

The early Christian church had two main ideological enemy parties - "Judaizers" on the one side and Gnostics, "paganizers," on the other. Judaizer's poisonous teaching was legalism, Gnostic's antinomianism. The straight and narrow path went between them both.


"Intuitively one knows such a god is not worthy of reverence and worship"
A fallen man should not trust too much on his own deceitful heart, or "intuition".


now you know why I'm an Hellene (well, with some sympathy for Orthodoxy of course.)
You never actually answered the question I once posed you - are you actually of Greek descent or just a "wannabee-Hellene"?


Petr

[Petr]

By the way wintermute, your sig quote reminded me - have you already seen this post of mine?

:)


JUNG AND THE KABBALAH

http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3213&highlight=jung+kabbalah


Babylonian Judaism has two faces, and legalistic Talmudism is only one of them - the hidden, esoteric portion of that religion is antinomian Kabbalism...


Petr

[Vindex]

The funny part is the kikes stole most of the Kabbala from ancient Egypt, and inverted it.

[Petr]

The funny part is the kikes stole most of the Kabbala from ancient Egypt, and inverted it.
Can we see some reliable documentation for this? Big claims call for big evidence, you know...


Petr

[Vindex]

First I'am waiting for some reliable proof for the big claims you make like your religion is something other then nonsense on a stick. Then I might be nice and cast some pearls for you.



Can we see some reliable documentation for this? Big claims call for big evidence, you know...


Petr

[Ahknaton]

The funny part is the kikes stole most of the Kabbala from ancient Egypt, and inverted it.
Have you ever thought of a fish as being like a bird that "flies" underwater?

A lot of Judeo-Christian religious symbolism is completely at odds with natural pagan spirituality of humanity. For example, birds represent the divine in countless cultures: the Egyptian sun god Ra is an eagle, American Indians have their "thunderbirds", the eagle & dragon of Norse mythology, Aboriginal Australians have Bungyl, Pacific islanders have their religious myths involving albatrosses etc etc. There are loads of examples.

However, in Jewish tradition, birds are explicitly denoted as a symbol of the profane. Medieval Torah scrolls depicted Biblical figures with the heads of birds to get around the prohibition against depicting images of the divine. It's like their symbolic dictionary is (partly) inverted.

Just a bit of hand-waving speculation.

[Petr]

First I'am waiting for some reliable proof for the big claims you make like your religion is something other then nonsense on a stick. Then I might be nice and cast some pearls for you.
"No, YOU go first."

What a surprise, you chickened out of the scholarly challenge, mere cowardly trash-talker that you are. Now quit polluting this thread.


Petr

[Vindex]

Interesting the view of the Serpent in the bible I find bizzare as it is generally a hostile one, but in the bible moses uses a Serpent wrapped around a stick to heal the hebrews with. As for your observation I really think it is simply because jews hate everything that is not jewish.


Have you ever thought of a fish as being like a bird that "flies" underwater?

A lot of Judeo-Christian religious symbolism is completely at odds with natural pagan spirituality of humanity. For example, birds represent the divine in countless cultures: the Egyptian sun god Ra is an eagle, American Indians have their "thunderbirds", the eagle & dragon of Norse mythology, Aboriginal Australians have Bungyl, Pacific islanders have their religious myths involving albatrosses etc etc. There are loads of examples.

However, in Jewish tradition, birds are explicitly denoted as a symbol of the profane. Medieval Torah scrolls depicted Biblical figures with the heads of birds to get around the prohibition against depicting images of the divine. It's like their symbolic dictionary is (partly) inverted.

Just a bit of hand-waving speculation.

[Vindex]

Well your amusing attempted insults, do not prove your religion as being factual and vaild, it seems your idea of scholarly is debating the merits of a religion you can not even prove as being real in the first place, and can only attempt to shout down those who ask for proof with petty comments. Inbetween massive cut and paste from various websites making sure of course that the subject of such articles agree and back up your own personal agenda first.

Now as for the most interesting topic, a hint is one of the people you before stated it was a great thing they where burned alive for not being catholic enough, stated the same about the kabballa and called the jews the feces matter of Egypt. Even the name is Egyptian in origin. But you need me to lay down the information first so you can run around the net madly on a cut and paste rampage to attempt to refute.lol

The content below is the typical theme of your posts devoid of other peoples cut and pasted work.:222:


"No, YOU go first."

What a surprise, you chickened out of the scholarly challenge, mere cowardly trash-talker that you are. Now quit polluting this thread.


Petr

[Petr]

Well wintermute, aren't you going to make any more comments on this thread? Pity.

Btw, I'd love to hear what you think about this Original Dissent thread: :D

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20621&page=7


Petr