Any ethnically Jewish mamas who found Christ? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-29-2006, 01:56 AM
 
Snowdrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikva18
tie-dyed, may I ask you a question?...
thank you so much for the opportunity to ask these questions; I have wondered about this for a long time, but generally do not have the right person to ask. Again, I mean no offense in any way.
I do not intend to engage in debate on these issues. I'm sorry several PP's have seen this thread as an opportunity to do so. I particpated in this thread because the OP applied to me, not because I was interested in the worst sort of debate: one in which the participants do not and cannot agree on the definitions of essential terms.

I agree with Janelovesmax that there is no point to the debate this thread has become, both for the reason she cites and the whole definition-of-terms issue.

To the Christian participants in this thread: I'd love to discuss our various journeys in a support-oriented thread. Would there be any interest in one?
Snowdrift is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-29-2006, 02:22 AM
 
tikva18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: midwest
Posts: 1,904
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Tie-dyed, I was not trying to start any type of debate - I was sincerely curious about your situation. I also am not in a position to be critical, as I am not you and have not had your experiences and it is not my place to be critical.

Rivka, mommy to 3 big boys and a set of b/g twins
tikva18 is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 02:53 AM
 
Snowdrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikva18
Tie-dyed, I was not trying to start any type of debate - I was sincerely curious about your situation. I also am not in a position to be critical, as I am not you and have not had your experiences and it is not my place to be critical.
My situation is not one that will be understood through a discussion on how messianic ideas in Judaism are or are not reflected in Christianity.

I am a Christian, not a Christian apologist. If you wish to have your questions answered about salvation history and what the relationship is between Jewish scriptures and history and Christian scriptures and history there are some pretty good books out there on the subject. I'm not really up on my history/religion scholarship these days, but any university library should have several options available.
Snowdrift is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 03:01 AM
 
Rico'sAlice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Berkshire County, MA
Posts: 1,535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla
Abraham and Moses weren't the Messiah- they were great men, but not the Messiah. How does Jesus putting himself in the same catagory as Abraham and Moses make him the Messiah?

Maybe I should not reply, since this was not originally meant as a debate thread...but I just can't help it. Anyway in the previous post (by Anuska) Abraham/Moses was actually irrelevant to the point, they were simply the men to whom God was speaking when he named Himself. (FWIW it was Moses) The point was that God went by the name "I AM" and nobody besides God ever went by that name in the OT. That Jesus later called Himself by the same name gives strong implication that He is God.
Rico'sAlice is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 04:14 AM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico'sAlice
The point was that God went by the name "I AM" and nobody besides God ever went by that name in the OT. That Jesus later called Himself by the same name gives strong implication that He is God.
Now I'm interested. B/c the original Hebrew is not "I am". It is 'ehiyeh asher ehiyeh' - 'I will be what I will be'. So wondering if the "I am" part is mistranslated from the Greek of the NT or if it is refering to something else.

FWIW - religious studies is the debate forum, spirtuality is the support forum.
crazy_eights is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 04:17 AM
 
Snowdrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2seven
FWIW - religious studies is the debate forum, spirtuality is the support forum.
Hence the suggestion for a new thread.
Snowdrift is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 04:27 AM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have more questions, but I will ask them in another thread.

If your intent was simply to find other people in your situation, but not to ask or answer any questions like the one that I ask, your post would have been better placed in Spirutuality, rather than Religious Studies. This particular forum is dedicated to asking and answering questions (which is what studies are all about).

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 04:29 AM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry, x-post.

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 04:51 AM
 
Snowdrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eilonwy
I have more questions, but I will ask them in another thread.

If your intent was simply to find other people in your situation, but not to ask or answer any questions like the one that I ask, your post would have been better placed in Spirutuality, rather than Religious Studies. This particular forum is dedicated to asking and answering questions (which is what studies are all about).
Although I did not start this thread, I'd like to comment that the OP was specifically addressed to "ethnically Jewish mamas who found Christ" and then mentioned Jews for Jesus.

We Jewish Christians tend to have widely differing views on all sorts of things, like, for example, Jews for Jesus and the celebration of Passover among others.

I cannot presume to speak for others, but I personally find it a bit offensive that certain posters seem to feel welcome to turn anything that involves the words "Jew" and "Christian" in the same sentence into a debate on the legitimacy of Christianity. I'd really like to discuss and yes, even debate, perspectives on our faith with the other Christian posters on this thread.

Sure it's a debate forum, but it ain't *your* debate.

No, it does not violate the UA to hijack a debate. But it's a bit frustrating for those of us who were interested in the original OP.
Snowdrift is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 05:02 AM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tie-dyed
Although I did not start this thread, I'd like to comment that the OP was specifically addressed to "ethnically Jewish mamas who found Christ" and then mentioned Jews for Jesus.
Forgive me; It was in the Religious Studies forum. As an "ethnically Jewish mamma," I thought that the thread might be interesting and provide more insight into a subject about which I had questions.

Quote:
I cannot presume to speak for others, but I personally find it a bit offensive that certain posters seem to feel welcome to turn anything that involves the words "Jew" and "Christian" in the same sentence into a debate on the legitimacy of Christianity. I'd really like to discuss and yes, even debate, perspectives on our faith with the other Christian posters on this thread.

Sure it's a debate forum, but it ain't *your* debate.
Wait... you're not offended that it became a debate, but that Jews who still identify as Jews became involved? You only wanted to debate with other Christians?

Sorry, I didn't ask my questions to offend you, and I wasn't really debating the legitimacy of Christianity itself, only Messianic Judaism (which isn't exactly the same thing). I'm also very curious about the origins of Christianity as they derive from Judaism, and how Christianity and Judaism relate to one another today.

Quote:
No, it does not violate the UA to hijack a debate. But it's a bit frustrating for those of us who were interested in the original OP.
Um, I wasn't hijacking anything, I was just asking questions. You're the first person to make anything like an attack on this thread.

Once again: if someone is posting for support or for a more insular sort of discussion/debate, it really belongs in Spirituality. Putting it in Religious Studies is inviting questions from "outsiders."

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 11:36 AM
 
tikva18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: midwest
Posts: 1,904
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2seven
Now I'm interested. B/c the original Hebrew is not "I am". It is 'ehiyeh asher ehiyeh' - 'I will be what I will be'. So wondering if the "I am" part is mistranslated from the Greek of the NT or if it is refering to something else.

FWIW - religious studies is the debate forum, spirtuality is the support forum.
It would not be too surprising to have a few mistranslations here or there as there was a text which was widely used to translate from the Hebrew into Greek. The downfall in this was that the translators did not go back to the original Hebrew when they then proceeded to translate into Latin. Again, the translation went on going from Latin to French; from French to German, and lastly German to English. To my great dismay, I cannot recall the name of this fantastic text which has the translations laid out side by side. To get the most accurate translation one should return to the original language. I know that many Christians rely on the Septuagint, but again I feel that the best means of understanding should be gained from reading the original.

Rivka, mommy to 3 big boys and a set of b/g twins
tikva18 is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 11:50 AM
 
SaraFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,671
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikva18
It would not be too surprising to have a few mistranslations here or there as there was a text which was widely used to translate from the Hebrew into Greek. The downfall in this was that the translators did not go back to the original Hebrew when they then proceeded to translate into Latin. Again, the translation went on going from Latin to French; from French to German, and lastly German to English. To my great dismay, I cannot recall the name of this fantastic text which has the translations laid out side by side. To get the most accurate translation one should return to the original language. I know that many Christians rely on the Septuagint, but again I feel that the best means of understanding should be gained from reading the original.
If I remember correctly, there are actually christians who wanted to learn Hebrew as they were aware of th confusion caused by the [mis]translations.
SaraFR is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 07:09 PM
 
Rico'sAlice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Berkshire County, MA
Posts: 1,535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikva18
The downfall in this was that the translators did not go back to the original Hebrew when they then proceeded to translate into Latin. Again, the translation went on going from Latin to French; from French to German, and lastly German to English.
Heh? Which translation was this? I have never heard of this before.
[ETA: OK, I did some more mouse hunting and found that there are several Old English, Middle English translations that were based in the Vulgate. Although, these are obviously not translations relied upon by Modern Christians, nor were they ever in great circulation. For the most part, these translations would not be readable, or at least not easily understandable, to modern English speakers.
I still can't find anything though about translating to French or German and then into English though.]

I understand that reading the original Hebrew is the number one option. But, I know that in my Bible (New International Version) the text is translated directly from the Hebrew. (The NT is translated directly from Aramaic & Greek) There is no intermediary Latin, French, German, etc.
The primary source text is the Masoretic Text "as published in the latest editions of the Biblia Hebraicia " My understanding is that this text is the Tenach accepted by Judaism.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic


There were a number of other sources consulted such as the Samaritan Pentateuch, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.
Most Christian Bibles have a long introduction explaining which sources were used and who did the translating. Even the King James Version of 1611, used the Masoretic text and did not rely upon translating from the Latin (Vulgate) And certainly it didn't go into French or German first.
Rico'sAlice is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 07:41 PM
 
christianmomof3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 878
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I don't understand this at all. If you feel no spiritual connection in Judaism, why wouldn't you seek out different Jews before looking to another religion entirely? Is it just easier to relate to a person than to God directly? If you want to relate to a person, why a person who chooses to call themselves God-or-something-like-him, why not Muhammed, or someone else?
Actually, I did nto seek out anyone. I read some New Age books when I was in college and it sounded interesting, but somehow wrong to me.
The Lord called me and drew me to Himself in love.
I became a born-again Christian because Jesus is God and He revealed Himself to me as such and He lives in me as my life and my life supply and my everything. As a born-again Christian, I can now relate to God directly.
Also, I am interested in the whole "I Am" verse because in my
Jewish Bible it is also translated as I Am in English.
christianmomof3 is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 08:43 PM
 
tikva18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: midwest
Posts: 1,904
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico'sAlice
Heh? Which translation was this? I have never heard of this before.
[ETA: OK, I did some more mouse hunting and found that there are several Old English, Middle English translations that were based in the Vulgate. Although, these are obviously not translations relied upon by Modern Christians, nor were they ever in great circulation. For the most part, these translations would not be readable, or at least not easily understandable, to modern English speakers.
I still can't find anything though about translating to French or German and then into English though.]

I understand that reading the original Hebrew is the number one option. But, I know that in my Bible (New International Version) the text is translated directly from the Hebrew. (The NT is translated directly from Aramaic & Greek) There is no intermediary Latin, French, German, etc.
The primary source text is the Masoretic Text "as published in the latest editions of the Biblia Hebraicia " My understanding is that this text is the Tenach accepted by Judaism.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic


There were a number of other sources consulted such as the Samaritan Pentateuch, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.
Most Christian Bibles have a long introduction explaining which sources were used and who did the translating. Even the King James Version of 1611, used the Masoretic text and did not rely upon translating from the Latin (Vulgate) And certainly it didn't go into French or German first.
I'm sorry that I can't recall the name of this - my religion professor in college and I used to spend a lot of time together and he showed me many, many things - he specialized in biblical languages and was absolutely brilliant.

Rivka, mommy to 3 big boys and a set of b/g twins
tikva18 is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 10:10 PM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
She is correct - the King James version was based on the translation of a Jew who converted to Christianity. However, that does not mean that 'accepted' errors (such as Isaiah's 'virgin' or psalms 'kari' which does not mean pierced, but 'like a lion') were not repeted in the text. The world in which the King James version of the bible was produced was not the world of today. To change something so accepted and relied upon as a proof text would have been considered an act of heresy. We also do not know who produced the English prose and various theories abound, including that it was Shakespeare who wrote it.
crazy_eights is offline  
Old 05-29-2006, 10:46 PM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
*posted to wrong thread! :
crazy_eights is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off