[QUOTE=Liberal]
A disingenuous definition of “Jew”? And your choice of definition, as an atheist, is somehow ingenuous, is it. :dubious:
[/QUOTE]
I was using the JEWISH definition, and why should my lack of belief have anything to with my ability to know something about Jewish theology?
[QUOTE=FRDE]
Castration 
[/QUOTE]
Today I am a MEOUCH!
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Atheists for Jesus is not a religious movement. They don’t worship Jesus. Messianics do.
[/quote]
And so…? What’s that to you?
A gratuitous assertion gratuitously denied. There is no one Borgian Jewish theology any more than there is one Borgian Christian theology. There are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Chasidim, Sephardic, Traditional, Reconstructionist, Humanistic, and Karaite — and that’s just in the US, and that’s just in modern times.
That’s simply ridiculous. You may as well say that Gays and Lesbians cannot be Jewish because the Bible forbids homosexuality.
Than that’s the issue you ought to stick with.
What you know is not an issue. My problem is with what you declare to be Jewish. It is in fact a contradiction to declare that only a particular subset of Jews can decide what is Jewish while you yourself are not Jewish but are making declarations about who is and who is not. If only they can declare, then you cannot. If you can, then so can anyone else.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
And so…? What’s that to you?
[/quote]
I’m pointing out that your analogy was flawed. That’s what we do here. The same contradiction in definitional terms does not exist with Atheists for Jesus because that’s a group which recognizes Jesus only as a secular figure and does not worship him as a God.
All of them share the same theological belief in one, indivisible God. All of them reject the idea that the Messiah is God. All of them reject the idea that Jesus was the Messiah. All of them say that Messianics are not religiously Jewish. Are they all wrong?
It’s more like saying you can’t be an atheist and worship ten gods. It’s a flat contradiction in terms. If a devotional religion can be holistically defined by anything, it can be defined by what it worships. There is nothing ridiculous about saying that the Jewish religion, by definition, only worships one God and forbids the worship of others (including Messiahs).
Why, because you say so? I’ve answered some questions asked by others. Everything I’ve posted has been factual, GQ information.
This is absurd. First, I never said that only a “particular subset of Jews” can decide who is Jewish. I’ve pointed out that ALL Jewish denominations reject Messianics as religiously Jewish. That is a fact. they do. Secondly, I don’t have to be Jewish to know what does or does not conform to Jewish theological beliefs and you know as well as I do that the worship of Jesus does not, never has and never will conform to that theology.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I’m pointing out that your analogy was flawed. That’s what we do here. The same contradiction in definitional terms does not exist with Atheists for Jesus because that’s a group which recognizes Jesus only as a secular figure and does not worship him as a God.
[/quote]
Speaking of disingenuous, I did not see you attack the Vegetarians for Meat analogy on the same grounds. No analogy is a perfect match for what it analogs; otherwise, it would be the original. That’s the nature of analogics.
You didn’t read the list very carefully. Humanists do not believe in one indivisible God.
Trinitarian theories do not posit Christ as a separate God. Christianity is a monotheistic religion, and in that regard is not incompatible with Judaism. Appropriately, “One God now and forever” is part of the lenten liturgy.
No, it hasn’t. You’ve made declarations, choosing one side over another, with the unilateral presumption that your choices are rational while other choices are not. There quite obviously is disagreement over this matter of Messianic Jews. Factual claims are not controversial.
The Messianic Jews and the Jews for Jesus “demoninations” do not. Just because you define them out of the picture doesn’t mean a thing. I mean, I can prove that pigs fly by defining fly to mean “wallow in mud”.
Once again, there is no one single Jewish theology. There is no Jewish Pope. And if there were, you wouldn’t be it.
[QUOTE=It’s Not Rocket Surgery!]
Thanks for all your replies. Good stuff there! I’ll let you know how it shakes out.
-Steve-
[/QUOTE]
Thinking back to an experience of mine with someone who wouldn’t take no for an answer it could be that your’e in for a long haul.
An insurance man sitting next to me at a bar one night turned to me and said,
"Dave, I’d like to talk to you about insurance some time.
Me, “I’m not interested in insurance. I’ve got enough insurance.”
Him, “No you haven’t.”
Me, “How much have I got?”
Him, “I don’t know but it probably isn’t enough. I really would like to talk to you about it.”
At the time Thursday night was my wifes’s night out and I stayed home to take care of two small children. Since I had that night free I told him to come on over then.
He showed up, went through his spiel and when he was finished I told him I needed to talk it over with my wife. I never called him back.
A month or so later I again saw him at the same bar.
Him, “Dave, I haven’t heard back from you about insurance.”
Me, “That’s right. I have no intention of buying any insurance.”
Him, “Then why did you have me come over?”
Me, “Because you wouldn’t take no for an answer. I told you when this began that I don’t want any insurance. I don’t need any insurance. I’ve got enough insurance.”
Him, “No you haven’t.”
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Trinitarian theories do not posit Christ as a separate God. Christianity is a monotheistic religion, and in that regard is not incompatible with Judaism. Appropriately, “One God now and forever” is part of the lenten liturgy.
[/quote]
While Christianity may be a monotheistic religion, at some level, God is composed of (or expressed as, or aspected as) the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, each separate from the other two. Such divisions (even within the same God) are antithetical to Jewish belief and philosophy.
You’re quite right that there is no one definition of Judiasm. On the other hand, however, it isn’t an “open-source” religion either whereby anyone can define his own. Every other group of Jews rejects the idea of a divine Jesus as the messiah.
Zev Steinhardt
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Speaking of disingenuous, I did not see you attack the Vegetarians for Meat analogy on the same grounds. No analogy is a perfect match for what it analogs; otherwise, it would be the original. That’s the nature of analogics.
[/quote]
A vegetarian who eats meat is not a vegetarian. What’s to attack?
Humanist Jews are not religious Jews and therefore don’t belong on your list. Having said that, even Humanist Jews will tell you that the worship of Jesus is not compatible with religious Judaism.
Trinitarianism is incompatible with Jewish theology and is rejected by all religious Jews. The definition of the Messiah is also completely different. No matter how you slice it, the Jewish Messiah is by definition a human king, not God. God and the Messiah are distinctly different entities. Any attempt to define them synonomously is incompatible with Jewish theology. Ask any Rabbi.
No, Lib, there is NOT any disagreement among religious Jews and never has been.
It’s not me who defined them as theologically separate, they did explicitly do that themselves by saying that the worship of Jesus is REQUIRED to be “authentically Jewish.” That’s what they claim. They claim the theological difference THEMSELVES, ok? Traditional Jews and Messianic Jews alike AGREE that there is a theological difference. So who is right? The entire mass of all theological heirs to 2000 years of Rabbinic Judaism and the state of Israel itself, or a few hundred thousand converts and Gentiles? Is it permitted, in your mind, to say that anything can be categorically defined as religiously Jewish? If I decide that I’m a Jew for Jimi Hendrix, should Israel grant me the Right of Return?
This is actually wrong. There IS an essential Jewish theology. There are difference in practice. but practice and theology are two different things. Theology deals specifically with the definition and understanding of God, not with details of worship and practice.
/hijack
I once got into a discussion with a Messianic Jew and used logic to make him admit he was really a Christian. I was very proud of myself. 
/endhijack
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
Mouse fritters.
[/QUOTE]
Well mouse fritters would never be kosher. While leaven would just not be kosher (or there’s another term, actually, but I forget) durng passover. So those wouldn’t work. Not that the cats care. They have a very tenuous grip on theology, about like mine.
[QUOTE=zev_steinhardt]
Every other group of Jews rejects the idea of a divine Jesus as the messiah.
[/QUOTE]
Except for the two already mentioned (and possibly others, lesser known). You’re certainly entitled to disown whomever you wish, just as many Christians disown Mormons and even Catholics. But there is no reason that the label the disowner applies is any more valid than the label the owner applies. Quite honestly, at its root, it’s a No True Scotsman fallacy.
“No, thanks. We worship at __________ synagogue, but thank you for thinking of us. Would you like to come by for drinks next week?”
“I find it’s best if I don’t discuss religion with neighbors or co-workers.”
Repeat as needed. Use a slightly regretful tone as appropriate.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Except for the two already mentioned (and possibly others, lesser known). You’re certainly entitled to disown whomever you wish, just as many Christians disown Mormons and even Catholics.
[/QUOTE]
People say that Catholics aren’t Christians? Like who?
[QUOTE=guppy]
People say that Catholics aren’t Christians? Like who?
[/QUOTE]
Southern baptist christians, I think.
[QUOTE=guppy]
People say that Catholics aren’t Christians? Like who?
[/QUOTE]
A lot of the very conservative christian branches believe that Catholics worship Mary, saints and the like. They consider that idol worship/having another god besides…well God and therefore that Catholics are not truly christian.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
A vegetarian who eats meat is not a vegetarian. What’s to attack?
[/quote]
It’s not religious. That’s the problem you alleged to have with my analogy. It apparently does not bother you that vegetarianism is likewise not a religion. Furthermore, it strikes me that defining Jews as “those people who reject Christ” flirts dangerously close to even more insidious definitions.
Is there a living soul for whom you do not speak? As I told Zev, what you choose to call someone does not trump what they choose to call themselves.
Okay, how about a rabbit from the Observant Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Association? They say they are not Christians, but conservative observant Jews. Why should what you say trump what they say?
I just linked to you religious Jews who disagree with you.
Contrary to the (rather cubist) portrait you’re painting, Messianic Judaism didn’t just pop up yesterday from Baptist churches. Leopold Cohn, an orthodox rabbit from Hungary, was one.
Red herring. What I said is that there is no single Jewish theology. I listed quite many that are particular to modern Amerca. There have been many others throughout history.
Anyway, what you’re discussing is only a tangent of the point I originally made. All these things are debatable, as we are clearly here debating them. I realize you may think you’re having a monologue and that you disagree with everything I say, but that does not make my posts disappear. You can’t say that there is no controversy by plugging up your ears and claiming that no one thinks differently from you. The etiquette question of the OP may have a factual answer, but I doubt it. This thread doesn’t belong in this forum, and didn’t from its beginning.
I’ve heard the whole “Mary as an idol” thing but I didn’t think it went so far as to defy the meaning of words. Isn’t anyone who worships Christ as the son of God a Christian by definition(whether or not they self term themselves and Jews for Jesus or not)?
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Except for the two already mentioned (and possibly others, lesser known). You’re certainly entitled to disown whomever you wish, just as many Christians disown Mormons and even Catholics. But there is no reason that the label the disowner applies is any more valid than the label the owner applies. Quite honestly, at its root, it’s a No True Scotsman fallacy.
[/QUOTE]
Its been a long time since I cracked open a prayer book, but I still remember the Shma, in Hebrew. The Lord is our God, the Lord is One. Notning about a trinity in there, nothing about Jesus being God.
I’m an atheist now, and if I started trying to tell people that my brand of non-religion was true Judaism, I’d be a dick, and dishonest. There can be Messianic Jews, I suppose, but not if they believe that Jesus was the Messiah, since he did not fulfil the prophecies, and, I’ll repeat, the Messiah is not God, God’s son, or God’s step-nephew.
Zev, would you agree that anyone not believing in the words of the Shema is not religiously Jewish?
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Except for the two already mentioned (and possibly others, lesser known). You’re certainly entitled to disown whomever you wish, just as many Christians disown Mormons and even Catholics. But there is no reason that the label the disowner applies is any more valid than the label the owner applies. Quite honestly, at its root, it’s a No True Scotsman fallacy.
[/QUOTE]
Only one of the two already mentioned attempts to self-identify as religious Jews. J4J’s self-identify as Christians with a missionary goal to convert Jews.
The theological differences between Messianics and all other Jews are much more sifnificant than what is exemplified by your Catholic and Mormon examples. Messianics actually have more in common with both of those groups than they do with Judiasm.
Is there any belief in your mind which can be categorically called “non-Jewish?”