I dedicate the following
turgidity to Belinda....
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 11:26 pm 1. Judaism does consider the coming of the Messiah as a person, an 'annointed one', consideration of this entity as God incarnated in person form is irrelevant. (Jesus is not entirely considered God incarnate by many Christians, and I don't think he ever stated he was in the Gospels...not beyond probably saying something like the Father is in me, cas in certainly is in all of us GOD).
Jesus is considered god incarnate by Christianity
generally. If there are exceptions they are irrelevant. Other proposals were considered heretic. The moshiach will also be a man but not an incarnation of god.
Attofish: 2. Perhaps Jesus opposed elements of what Judaism had become, I doubt he opposed ALL of its 'construct'. That Orthodox Jews believe that Judaism 'construct' at the time was PERFECT, and would not be criticised in any way by their Messiah is rather short sighted.
I'd suggest that Jesus can be seen in a few different ways. One, similar to a fictional figure in a novel. In the novel (the Story) the incarnated god of the Jews comes down and expresses near-total dissatisfaction with what his flock had achieved. In the Story he comes meekly. Because he is (apparently) weak he is easily destroyed. Ah but god is more tricky than those devilish ones imagined! Killing him does a number of mysterious and magical things. One, the temple constructed by god's instruction is struck with an expression of divine wrath:
And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Typically, this rending of the cloth is interpreted as indicating that with Jesus' 'perfect sacrifice' that now there is no cloth or veil separating man from atonement -- no mediators are now required. God took back (I guess one would say) the power of mediation that had been given to his servants who were obviously found to be not only inadequate but fundamentally opposed to 'god's plans'.
And therefore with this action taken by god himself Judean religious authority was overturned. God himself overturned it. The implications are extensive. Note that E Michael Jones (a radical Catholic) says that it was 'at the foot of the cross' when Jews thereby became eternal rebels. The (novelistic) logic is easy to see: if you opposed god's entry into the world to recover the lost sheep and restore the Earth (i.e. the Jewish mission), then it stands to reason that you are out of communion with god and, in fact, god's enemy.
What I am trying to explain is not *reality* necessarily but Story and Story's implications. There are further implications: the Exile.
Jesus is said to have said: As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Jesus predicted it 37 years before it happened. Herod Agrippa II and his sister Bernice, who heard Paul’s testimony at Caesarea (Acts 26), tried hard to prevent it, as did the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (our main source of first-century information). But the fall of Jerusalem and the burning of the Temple in A.D. 70 happened nevertheless, and it was a catastrophe with almost unparalleled consequences for Jews, Christians, and, indeed, all of subsequent history. It compelled a whole new vector for synagogue (not Temple) Judaism, it submerged the Jewish homeland for the next 19 centuries under foreign domination, it helped foster the split between church and synagogue, and it set the stage for rampant prophetic speculation about the End Times that continues to the present day. Few episodes in history have had that sort of impact.
In a novel you have to follow *implications*.
Who burned the Temple?
Who is the author of the Exile? But everything hinges on *who* is doing
the interpreting. Here for example is the Jewish version (according to Chabad.org)
The Roman Empire brought the final blow for Jewish sovereignty in Israel and the final exile for the Jews, one that has lasted for nearly 2,000 years and has not yet ended.
The Jewish people during that time were split into four factions: the Pharisees, Sadducees, Sicarii and Zealots. Some of these groups began rebelling against the mighty empire.
The Emperor Nero saw this as treason and sent his best general, Vespasian, along with his son, Titus, and 60,000 Roman soldiers to quell the revolt.
Finally, in the year 3829 (69 CE), an oppression that started with heavy taxes ended with mass murder. The Jewish people were butchered and slaughtered, their homes ransacked and the Holy Temple burnt to the ground. And since then, the Jewish people have been persecuted and exiled.
Here is the Jewish definition of
Moshaich:
The Messianic Era will be ushered in by a Jewish leader generally referred to as the Moshiach (messiah: Hebrew for "the anointed one"), a righteous scion of King David. He will rebuild the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and gather the Jewish people from all corners of the earth and return them to the Promised Land.
Atto writes: So Orthodox Jews believe any Messiah from God (who created ALL men) would be exclusive to them.
You need (we need) to see things as those who define the interpretation of these prophetic visions see them. To do this we have to step aside. If you define a god who is the creator of everything and the owner of everything, and if that god gives *authority* to a specific people for a specific mission, you then have to define what that mission is and what the end result is supposed to be, right? Is there an alternative? The implication is that god ownes destiny. Fate is god's possession. Again the
implications are extensive.
Atto writes
: 3. So let me get this right. Jesus, considered Christ and forming predominantly Christian nations, one of which assisted the Jews by assuring them a place to live, establishing Israel...and now these Jews ARE able to reconstruct the temple are still not satisfied that Jesus was the Messiah! Perhaps they were impatient and thought the Messiah was going to start laying stones and mortar (again, rather short sighted of them).
Here you enter difficult territory. You are referring to Zionism and the ways and means that the Zionist project led to the reestablishment of a Jewish state in the Holy Land. To understand Jewish Zionism it is necessary to understand Christian Zionism which, in certain senses, predated it. In the simplest terms the storyline goes like this: If man (people) take 'push to shove' and precipitate the Return of the exiled Jews to Israel, that will (to put it vulgarly) jumpstart the process of god's reclaiming of the Earth and establishing a 'holy kingdom' with its political center in Jerusalem.
All of these things were 'predicted' in prophetic scripture.
Atto writes: Hang on! What's the "Jewish mission"?
This is precisely what I have just been talking about.
So what I say is: to understand Immanuel Can here in this thread, he who defines himself as the ultra-true and the really-true Christian, you really have no choice in the matter but to understand the *structure of belief* that is inherent in Judaism.
Now what is interesting is to consider the following: If one 'believes' in the core tenets of Judaism, and if one sees these re-expressed or perhaps clarified is the term (?) in Christianity, then it is not hard to understand that one is, through one's belief, actually a participant in the creation of the Story. And to create the Story is to engineer the fate through a sort of
participatory enactment.
Now let's consider -- in contrast -- those
who do not believe. One has to consider the 'plank' (the platform) of those who have arrived at non-belief. No god. No overseeing intelligence at least not the Christian one. A very different unfolding therefore of world history. The catastrophic Jewish and Christian 'vision' is thereby opposed -- but what replaces it? Is it actually even possible to eject oneself from this Vision? Is it possible to extricate oneself (that is Occidental man and all who are brought into the fold of belief which means 'the global south') from the consequences of prophetic unfolding?
See how strange and interesting this becomes?
and my estimation of your philosophical abilities is taking quite a beating on the basis of your intransigent inability to see what anybody else can see...that your definition is nonsense, and conduces to nothing but amorality.