Convince Me!

[daddyugi]

Hello chair,

Thanks for your response. So, we agree on point # 1. God created the heavens and
earth. I agree, the Bible is not a cookbook. I can barely make a cake, I wouldn't try to
make a world.
We also agree on # 2. Adam sinned. I realize that you don't believe that that sin nature
was not passed on and I'm not going to take a long time adressing that. I'm just going to
ask a question for you to answer to yourself. Did you ever have to teach a chilid to be
selfish, to lie, or to steal?
On question #3, most of what we find in Genesis from Adam to Abraham, with the
exception of Noah, is generations. So and so begat so and so and they died, etc. With
Noah and the Flood, there is evidence in fossils and fuel deposits that supports the Flood
but that is for another thread.
On question #4 we agree that the Messiah is the King and Redeemer of the Jews, where
we differ on is whether this is just a physical redemption or spiritual redemption. This is
where we will start. What does Scripture (Old Testament) say about the Messiah. I'm
going to start with what Scripture says about the spiritual redemption that the Messiah
brings. We go to a very familiar passage, Isaiah. I'm not familiar with how the Jewish
Bible is separated as far as chapters and verses, but I'm hoping that it's very similar to
how the NASB and the NIV are separated. If so, I'm going to ask you to read Isaiah,
chapter 52 and starting with verse 13 and reading through chapter 53 verse 12. Please
let me know when you're done and we'll continue our dialog with some more questions.

God bless you.

[Mustard Seed]

Well, sometimes there are things that appear silly, but are true. But very often something that looks silly actually is. Rewritiing the story of the Old Testament into a Mormon story is an interesting form of fiction.

No rewritting required, more correct translation perhapse. Look at the statements of one who's studied at depth the more gnostic realms of judaism and my faith, one Harold Bloom--aclaimed literary critic, and see his admiration of Smith. Now certainly he doesn't care much for his legacy--the present church that is thriving from such-- but he has great admiration for Joseph Smith--

Other Americans have been religion makers....but none of them has the imaginative vitality of Joseph Smith's revelation, a judgment one makes on the authority of a lifetime spent in apprehending the visions of great poets and original speculators.... So self-created was he that he transcends Emerson and Whitman in my imaginative response...

...The God of Joseph Smith is a daring revival of the God of some of the Kabbalists and Gnostics, prophetic sages who, like Smith himself, asserted that they had returned to the true religion....Mormonism is a purely American Gnosis...

Bulls (and my time) are expensive. I won't waste them on every alternate religion or cult that shows up.

Bulls not required. And with the words of potentially the formost combined authority on Jewish Gnosticism and a great literary/cultural critic comparing Joseph Smith, and the God he described, as on par with Kabbalists and Gnostics and the God some of them ascribed to.

Clearly Bloom still holds the views of Smith as fiction, if he didn't his lack of conversion would turn some heads. Even so, it stands to reason that not all groups thrown into the cult classification grab bag are of the same stature. Can you name any other 'alternate religion' or 'cult' that has managed to use and develope what some have called (such as the present Israeli Ambassador to the US if I recall correctly his words while visiting here) some of the best real estate in Jerusalem to build a center that doubles as a university branch and a religious structure?

http://ce.byu.edu/jc/

Also consider the fact that this 'cult' has a university that is one of the top three world wide authorities on ancient texts. You have one there in Israel and there's the other I believe in Italy.

Not trying to do this out of boasting. I simply wish to use rational to talk you out of the notion that our religion is just some run of the mill alternate religion or cult that's no more deserving of your attention than a new pastry thought up by the baker down the street. It's not a variation on a theme. And it's done far more than many realize and has far more linking it to you, your faith, your land, and your heritage than you know. If I may suggest an analysis of such done by a Jew who is not a member of my faith--

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=589

Again, not trying to sound pompus, I just feel that you should not brush this off when it merits closer examination.

[chair]

Hello chair,

Thanks for your response. So, we agree on point # 1. God created the heavens and
earth. I agree, the Bible is not a cookbook. I can barely make a cake, I wouldn't try to
make a world.
We also agree on # 2. Adam sinned. I realize that you don't believe that that sin nature
was not passed on and I'm not going to take a long time adressing that. I'm just going to
ask a question for you to answer to yourself. Did you ever have to teach a chilid to be
selfish, to lie, or to steal?
On question #3, most of what we find in Genesis from Adam to Abraham, with the
exception of Noah, is generations. So and so begat so and so and they died, etc. With
Noah and the Flood, there is evidence in fossils and fuel deposits that supports the Flood
but that is for another thread.
On question #4 we agree that the Messiah is the King and Redeemer of the Jews, where
we differ on is whether this is just a physical redemption or spiritual redemption. This is
where we will start. What does Scripture (Old Testament) say about the Messiah. I'm
going to start with what Scripture says about the spiritual redemption that the Messiah
brings. We go to a very familiar passage, Isaiah. I'm not familiar with how the Jewish
Bible is separated as far as chapters and verses, but I'm hoping that it's very similar to
how the NASB and the NIV are separated. If so, I'm going to ask you to read Isaiah,
chapter 52 and starting with verse 13 and reading through chapter 53 verse 12. Please
let me know when you're done and we'll continue our dialog with some more questions.

God bless you.

I have read the famous "suffering servant" bit many times in teh past, and I read it again this morining in response to your post. I have been throguh this part of the discussion before with others, so to save some time and avoid having you waste your own time writing posts, I would like to point out a few things:

1. The servant is not identified in any way as a Messianic figure. A Christian, who has already accpeted Christ would make that connection, but an outsider like myself would not think that Isaiah is talking about the Messiah.

2. Even assuming that the servant is the Messiah, you would have to prove that the New Testament is true, and that Jesus is in fact that servant. That remains a tall order.

Usually these discussion go in the direction of "well, if it isn't Jesus, then who is it?" You may choose to go in a different direction. In any case, my answer to "who is it?" is starightforward: "I don't know". There are a number of traditional Jewish interpretations of the text. It could easily be someone in teh past who we never heard of outside of Isaiah, or someone in the future who we haven't seen yet. And still point #1 would remain.

I will ask you to read Isaiah 11. Is that a Messianic chapter? Can you honestly say that it refers to Jesus?

[chair]

No rewritting required, more correct translation perhapse. Look at the statements of one who's studied at depth the more gnostic realms of judaism and my faith, one Harold Bloom--aclaimed literary critic, and see his admiration of Smith. Now certainly he doesn't care much for his legacy--the present church that is thriving from such-- but he has great admiration for Joseph Smith--

Other Americans have been religion makers....but none of them has the imaginative vitality of Joseph Smith's revelation, a judgment one makes on the authority of a lifetime spent in apprehending the visions of great poets and original speculators.... So self-created was he that he transcends Emerson and Whitman in my imaginative response...

...The God of Joseph Smith is a daring revival of the God of some of the Kabbalists and Gnostics, prophetic sages who, like Smith himself, asserted that they had returned to the true religion....Mormonism is a purely American Gnosis...

Bulls not required. And with the words of potentially the formost combined authority on Jewish Gnosticism and a great literary/cultural critic comparing Joseph Smith, and the God he described, as on par with Kabbalists and Gnostics and the God some of them ascribed to.

Clearly Bloom still holds the views of Smith as fiction, if he didn't his lack of conversion would turn some heads. Even so, it stands to reason that not all groups thrown into the cult classification grab bag are of the same stature. Can you name any other 'alternate religion' or 'cult' that has managed to use and develope what some have called (such as the present Israeli Ambassador to the US if I recall correctly his words while visiting here) some of the best real estate in Jerusalem to build a center that doubles as a university branch and a religious structure?

http://ce.byu.edu/jc/

Also consider the fact that this 'cult' has a university that is one of the top three world wide authorities on ancient texts. You have one there in Israel and there's the other I believe in Italy.

Not trying to do this out of boasting. I simply wish to use rational to talk you out of the notion that our religion is just some run of the mill alternate religion or cult that's no more deserving of your attention than a new pastry thought up by the baker down the street. It's not a variation on a theme. And it's done far more than many realize and has far more linking it to you, your faith, your land, and your heritage than you know. If I may suggest an analysis of such done by a Jew who is not a member of my faith--

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=589

Again, not trying to sound pompus, I just feel that you should not brush this off when it merits closer examination.

I don't mean to label Mormons as a "cult", in the extreme negative sense that the word has, any more than I label Christianity as a cult. But that doesn't mean that the premises of Mormonism or Christianity, for that matter, make any sense to me.

Thsi "experiential" method of choosing a religion is really not up my alley, as I have pointed out before. So let's leave it alone for now.

[Delmar]

I have never tried to conviince anybody here to become Jewish, and I ain't gonna start now. Many have tried to convince me of the truth of Christianity, thoiugh, which is why I opened this thread.

Just so you know, It isn't my job to convince you of the truth! I is simply my job to tell you the truth, and I have done that! I am aware that if you don't believe it there isn't one thing I can do about it!

[Kimberlyann]

Chair,

This morning I was reminded of a commentary I read that said the Messiah came at the appointed time according to the prophecy in Gen. 49:10 . I have been searching all morning but I couldn't find it.

I found this instead:

(Gen. 49:10) The sceptre shall not depart from Judah till Shiloh come - Jacob here foretels,

(1.) That the sceptre should come into the tribe of Judah, which was fulfilled in David, on whose family the crown was entailed.

(2.) That Shiloh should be of this tribe; that seed in whom the earth should be blessed. That peaceable prosperous one, or, the Saviour, so others translate it, shall come of Judah.

(3.) That the sceptre should continue in that tribe, till the coming of the Messiah, in whom as the king of the church, and the great High - priest, it was fit that both the priesthood and the royalty should determine. Till the captivity, all along from David's time, the sceptre was in Judah, and from thence governors of that tribe, or of the Levites that adhered to it, which was equivalent; till Judea became a province of the Roman empire just at the time of our Saviour's birth, and was at that time taxed as one of the provinces, Luke 2:1, and at the time of his death the Jews expressly owned, We have no king but Caesar. Hence it is undeniably inferred against the Jews, that our Lord Jesus is be that should come, and we are to look for no other, for he came exactly at the time appointed.

(4.) That it should be a fruitful tribe, especially that it should abound with milk and wine, Gen 49:11,12, vines so common, and so strong, that they should tye their ***** to them, and so fruitful, that they should load their ***** from them; wine as plentiful as water, so that the men of that tribe should be very healthful and lively, their eyes brisk and sparkling, their teeth white. Much of that which is here said concerning Judah is to be applied to our Lord Jesus. He is the ruler of all his Father's children, and the conqueror of all his Father's enemies, and he it is that is the praise of all the saints. He is the lion of the tribe of Judah, as he is called with reference to this, Rev 5:5, who having spoiled principalities and powers, went up a conqueror, and couched so as none can stir him up when he sat down on the right hand of the Father. To him belongs the sceptre, he is the lawgiver, and to him shall the gathering of the people be, as the desire of all nations, Hag 2:7, who being lifted up from the earth should draw all men unto him, John 12:32, and in whom the children of God that are scattered abroad should meet as the centre of their unity, John 11:52. In him there is plenty of all that which is nourishing and refreshing to the soul, and which maintains and chears the divine life in it; in him we may have wine and milk, the riches of Judah's tribe, without money, and without price, Isa 55:1.

49:8-12 Judah's name signifies praise. God was praised for him, chap. 29:35, praised by him, and praised in him; therefore his brethren shall praise him. Judah should be a strong and courageous tribe. Judah is compared, not to a lion raging and ranging, but to a lion enjoying the satisfaction of his power and success, without creating vexation to others; this is to be truly great. Judah should be the royal tribe, the tribe from which Messiah the Prince should come. Shiloh, that promised Seed in whom the earth should be blessed, that peaceable and prosperous One, or Saviour, he shall come of Judah. Thus dying Jacob at a great distance saw Christ's day, and it was his comfort and support on his death-bed. Till Christ's coming, Judah possessed authority, but after his crucifixion this was shortened, and according to what Christ foretold, Jerusalem was destroyed, and all the poor harassed remnant of Jews were confounded together. Much which is here said concerning Judah, is to be applied to our Lord Jesus. In him there is plenty of all which is nourishing and refreshing to the soul, and which maintains and cheers the Divine life in it. He is the true Vine; wine is the appointed symbol of his blood, which is drink indeed, as shed for sinners, and applied in faith; and all the blessings of his gospel are wine and milk, without money and without price, to which every thirsty soul is welcome. Isa 55:1.

http://bible.cc/genesis/49-10.htm

[chair]

Chair,

This morning I was reminded of a commentary I read that said the Messiah came at the appointed time according to the prophecy in Gen. 49:10 . I have been searching all morning but I couldn't find it.

I found this instead:
http://bible.cc/genesis/49-10.htm

Thanks.

This is the kind of post that I am not surfe what to do with. It is more an expression of your faith than anything that would attract me to it.

This is essentially a Christian interpretation of the verses, but not one that would convince an outsider.

[Kimberlyann]

Thanks.

This is the kind of post that I am not surfe what to do with. It is more an expression of your faith than anything that would attract me to it.

This is essentially a Christian interpretation of the verses, but not one that would convince an outsider.

Chair,

Your welcome. I understand your point.

God Bless.

[Mustard Seed]

Thsi "experiential" method of choosing a religion is really not up my alley, as I have pointed out before. So let's leave it alone for now.

I'll back out of here then if proof goes beyond attempts at experimentation.

[chair]

I'll back out of here then if proof goes beyond attempts at experimentation.

I would not call it experimentation. maybe hallucination.

Think for a minute. If I ask God, then one of three things may happen:

1. No answer
2. God says Christianity is the way to go
3. God says that another religion is the way to go

Many people have asked, and they have come up with all three answers. So how is one to know form this "experiment" what is truth?

[Benjamin]

If didn't have class I would attempt to discuss this with you- since I love Jews so much!

The US needs to bomb Iran's nuclear sites!

[Mustard Seed]

I would not call it experimentation. maybe hallucination.

Think for a minute. If I ask God, then one of three things may happen:

1. No answer
2. God says Christianity is the way to go
3. God says that another religion is the way to go

Many people have asked, and they have come up with all three answers. So how is one to know form this "experiment" what is truth?

By the answer they get or don't get. If God doesn't seem to answer you then there are several options to chose from--

1) God doesn't care (justice)
2) God can't (which would throw the whole omnipotence thing into question)
3) You are not asking the way God wants you to
4) God, being omniscient, may find some aspect of your motivation or driving desire in asking and may not wish to condemn you by providing you with more knowledge, and thusly more accountability
5) God's non-answer is a negative for the specific thing you asked about.

Perhaps you can think of other possible reasons for a non-answer, an atheist would posit the lack of existance of God. Basically, if you're any kind of a theist you can only come to such a conclusion based on some subjective judgement that's not essentially different from taking the very test I posit here. As you seem to believe in the God of Israel with your Jewish perspective I imagine you've already made subjective determinations of the very kind you placed as being an excuse for not trying this experiment.

So, not wanting to press you where you don't want to be pressed, but wishing to say things as they are seen by me, I say that the only kind of proof you could ever get on any question dealing with the subject you are asking would be subjectively based, and hence would provide an environment in which the test I've proposed, though not empirical or interpersonal (you can't share it really with anyone else--just between you and God) it's still a valid experiment in terms of deductive reasoning. All systems we apply deductive reasoning to demand assumptions be made at some level. That's where the subjective material unavoidably enters to a degree.

So bypass my proposition if you wish. I just think it's silly to expect proof in a situation in which actual real experimentation on your part is excluded from the picture simply because the initial proposition is 'silly'.

Perhaps you can explain a better method for finding the divine and coming to know of it's certainty and specificity to a sufficient level for it to benefit a human.

[Mustard Seed]

BTW--

simply because different people claim to have different results doesn't mean the test is invalid. It may simply be due to a lack of consistant testing conditions or proper experimentation similarities between claiming investigators.

Do you believe in God?

If so then how?

If other people have witnessed, or think they have witnessed, the same circumstances used in your 'how' explanation and still come to a divergent conclusion does that make your belief less valid or ultimately true?

[daddyugi]

Hello chair,

Sorry I didn't get back with you sooner, but Tuesdays are busy for me right now. Thank
you for reading and then posting to help me avoid repeating what you've gone through
before.

1) You're right. The Bible doesn't mention who this is, just a servant of God. I asked you
to read these verses not to say this is Messiah, but to say that God's servant bore the
sin of many and interceded for the transgressors (sinners). The main reason I had you
read this now was to point out that to God, the sin issue has to be resolved and that He
would provide His own servant as a resolutioin to that issue.
2) If you want to accept that this is Messiah, that the New Testament is true and that
Jesus is Messiah, God bless you and this would be a really short discussion. I don't
and won't assume that you would accept this.

I won't insult your intelligence or mine. If I'm not mistaken, you, like me, want more than
a man's word to accept something as truth. At this time, I wouldn't try to argue that this
is the Messiah, because the Bible doesn't say it is. It doesn't say this is Jesus either,
this says that this (Is. 52:13) is God's servant. For me to say "if it isn't Jesus, who is it?"
would be showing my ignorance of the Bible. The Bible doesn't name who this is and
neither will I. (I'm wanting to you to tell me who it is, that's why I accepted your
challenge.

I reread Isaiah 10 through Isaiah 12 in order to get context ( remember, everything in
context), and find that this is prophesy. A wonderful prophesy that we are still waiting for.
Yes I believe that this is a Messianic prophesy as does Jews for Judism.com. We read
in Is. 11:1 that a shoot will come form the stump of Jesse. Messiah will be a decendant
of Jesse. As we read further in verse 10 "In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a
banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious."
I'll come back to that point later. As to do I honestly believe that this refers to Jesus,
I'll answer that a little later in another post. I'm not going to draw any conclusions before
I've presented the case you asked for.

Next, I ask you to read Isaiah 9 verses 1 through 7. Is this a Messianic prophesy? We'll
discuss this a little further tomorrow. Thursdays are an easy day for me. I have 6 hours
to catch up on TOL and all the threads I've been posting to. We'll discuss verses 6 and 7
in a little more detail.

God bless you.

[PKevman]

Hello chair,

Sorry I didn't get back with you sooner, but Tuesdays are busy for me right now. Thank
you for reading and then posting to help me avoid repeating what you've gone through
before.

1) You're right. The Bible doesn't mention who this is, just a servant of God. I asked you
to read these verses not to say this is Messiah, but to say that God's servant bore the
sin of many and interceded for the transgressors (sinners). The main reason I had you
read this now was to point out that to God, the sin issue has to be resolved and that He
would provide His own servant as a resolutioin to that issue.
2) If you want to accept that this is Messiah, that the New Testament is true and that
Jesus is Messiah, God bless you and this would be a really short discussion. I don't
and won't assume that you would accept this.

I won't insult your intelligence or mine. If I'm not mistaken, you, like me, want more than
a man's word to accept something as truth. At this time, I wouldn't try to argue that this
is the Messiah, because the Bible doesn't say it is. It doesn't say this is Jesus either,
this says that this (Is. 52:13) is God's servant. For me to say "if it isn't Jesus, who is it?"
would be showing my ignorance of the Bible. The Bible doesn't name who this is and
neither will I. (I'm wanting to you to tell me who it is, that's why I accepted your
challenge.

I reread Isaiah 10 through Isaiah 12 in order to get context ( remember, everything in
context), and find that this is prophesy. A wonderful prophesy that we are still waiting for.
Yes I believe that this is a Messianic prophesy as does Jews for Judism.com. We read
in Is. 11:1 that a shoot will come form the stump of Jesse. Messiah will be a decendant
of Jesse. As we read further in verse 10 "In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a
banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious."
I'll come back to that point later. As to do I honestly believe that this refers to Jesus,
I'll answer that a little later in another post. I'm not going to draw any conclusions before
I've presented the case you asked for.

Next, I ask you to read Isaiah 9 verses 1 through 7. Is this a Messianic prophesy? We'll
discuss this a little further tomorrow. Thursdays are an easy day for me. I have 6 hours
to catch up on TOL and all the threads I've been posting to. We'll discuss verses 6 and 7
in a little more detail.

God bless you.