Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jamey who wrote (26067)	7/8/1999 11:29:00 AM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39621

James, It is far more simple than that. To say that a Christian doctrine claims the "mantle" so to speak fo Judiasim is meaningless. How is it different than a differnt religion laying claim to some aspect of christianity? As a Christian you would find their claim to be baseless. A Jew would give no more authority to a christian cliaming to be the current day Jew, than a christian would to a Moslem saying that Mohameds words are the end result of christian doctrine. There are Judaic and even christian scholars all ovewr the world that would disagree vehemently with Emile's contention. Far more than would agree. I would also like to see you respond to my earlier post about your motivations in this regard. I notice you have not responded to it. Does it bother you that this event has strenghtened the beleif in Judiasim within the boy who was shot? does it bother you that Jews are persecuted for their beiefs, and historically have been to a far greater degree than Christians? Do you think it even matters in any fashion? BTW, I notice you didn't stick up for emile or his doctrines when he used them to attack your denomination and your personal history. In fact you were quite against them. Mark

To: Jamey who wrote (26067)	7/8/1999 2:53:00 PM
From: hal jordan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39621

Brightstar, If you have ten people in a room, probably nine will give you different interpretations about phrases taken from the bible. Using a bible to justify race hatred is sick, twisted and cowardly. The kinds of people that wrap themselves in the cloak of a bible to further their own agenda of racism (and I mean from all religions)stoop very, very low indeed. They will manufacture hate filled propaganda and try to make it look legitimate because the lie is laced with quotes from the "good book". Use your head and think for yourself. Why are negative portrayals constantly brought up from the bible from the same individual. Why would somebody do that. Think man, you've got a brain. Don't be an ostrich. Would someone you would consider a "good" Christian do that?. Ask your minister, priest, or the appropriate individual from the denomination you belong to. I'd be interested in his or her perspective. Incidentally, ask Vidrine what denomination he belongs to and try and get a straight answer. You will not. I have asked him in the past, as other have, and he will not respond. Hal

To: Jamey who wrote (26067)	7/8/1999 10:42:00 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 39621

Brightstar, The concept of the Church as the "New Israel" which inherits "Old Israel's" position with God is a spiritual concept. That's what Paul is talking about - the church as a spiritual Israel. I doubt you would disagree with this - note the reference in the passage you quoted to circumcision of "the heart, in the spirit". Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not going to debate this because it is not the point of controversy. The problem comes in from Emile's claim that this SPIRITUAL teaching makes illegitimate and unacceptably evil the PHYSICAL existence in the modern world of "Old Israel" i.e. Jews, Jewish institutions, and a Jewish country. Therefore he must post over and over and over again that Jews existing today have NO physical descent from ancient Israel, that the Jewish country in the middle east is by its very nature evil, that Jews and Jewish institutions are satanically evil and responsible for all sorts of bad things like communism, the assassination of JFK, etc., etc. I don't think Paul's teaching which you quoted in Galations "There is neither Jew nor Greek..." means that Christians are required to deny the continued legitimate existence in the flesh of Jews as Jews anymore than they have to deny the same about Greeks or male or female. Clearly Jews, Greeks, male, and female continue to exist and retain their physical identity. Paul is asserting that the distinctions between Jews and Greeks, male and female are non-existent in a SPIRITUAL sense, not a physical sense. To sum up, it is not necessary for Christians to deny, denigrate, oppose, or in any way have a problem with the continued physical existence in the world of "Old Israel" and/or "Old Israel's" physical descendents in order to assert their own status as spiritual descendents of Abraham. Lastly, Brightstar, I am posting this to you because 1) you requested that someone debate his doctrine and 2) your post contained a couple of scriptural passages which I wanted to mention and 3) experience has taught me that Emile likely won't respond to a critical post unless the poster really tears into him and I want to keep this as civil as I can. (I suspect this a thought out tactic designed to make those who disagree with him appear to be driven by emotion and not reason or values.) Although addressed to you, Brightstar, this is a public post which will be read by just about everyone who monitors this thread and I welcome any response from anyone. Bruce

To: Jamey who wrote (26067)	7/9/1999 12:48:00 AM
From: DLL	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 39621

Dear James; I do not disagree with the scriptures you posted however I do disagree with the Replacement Theology / Covenant Theology that you seem to be supporting. I will be happy to discuss this with you with only a few ground rules. First please refrain from adding words to the scriptures you quote. It is not necessary to make your point and it can only add to confusion. Secondly I would ask that we can accept one another as brothers in Messiah who simply wish to reason together from the scriptures as we are encouraged by God to do. I believe it is unfair of the church to claim the blessings God promised to Israel without dealing with the curses that have come with Israel's disobedience. Often God pronounces judgement and acknowledges their sin in the same passages He reiterates His promises to them. See Deu 4:26-31,Deu 30:1-5, Jer. 31,32,33 Eze 16:59-62. When the promises of God towards Israel are claimed to have been forfeited it makes God's love conditional and does not fit his character of Grace. I also am offended because it makes God out to be a liar because he has promised with perfect foreknowledge not to turn away from them. Eze 16:59-60 For thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even deal with thee as thou hast done, which hast despised the oath in breaking the covenant. Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. I also would ask if we could look at the scriptures you posted in the light of Romans 11. What do you think Paul meant when he spoke of natural branches and wild branches? I won't go on an on now as I am afraid I may start to ramble. Please look at the scriptures I cited and I will allow you to lead our discussion as much as I can. I would welcome discussing this with Emile as well. I have simply requested that he apologize for the harsh words he has used against other believers on this thread. I have offered an apology to him and have read many others who have likewise apologized. I pray that he will do the "Christian" thing and apologize as well. I would welcome the opportunity to go from there reasonably and with the love of Messiah Yeshua. Shalom uv'rachah b'Yeshua HaMashiach - Peace and blessings in Messiah Yeshua - DLL