BentNotTwisted

You'll have to excuse me, I'm about as far from a biblical scholar as you can get. There's something that's been bothering me lately about the Christian religion. Christ was born a Jew and seriously studied the Torah. He understood it very well and decided the belief system based on it need some changes. So he came up with his own system of belief to replace it. Yes, yes, he performed miracles along the way and preached his new found belief as well as sending out disciples to continue the preaching after he died. The thing is, Christ had major complaints about the Torah and the religion that sprang from it and wanted a break from it. 2000 years later Christians still (essentially) read the 'Christianized' version of the Torah and incorporate it into their religion. Shouldn't these people have scrapped the Old Testament and just built a religion based on Christ's word? Since they didn't aren't they just some Jewish/Christian combination? Shouldn't the religion becalled Christish or Jewtian or something?

I'm not trying to put down Christianity here. It has a lot of positive influence on the world we live in. I just need some understanding here.

__________________
IS THAT IT ???!!!
Do you even know what 'it' is?

When the last man dies for just words that he said... We Shall Be Free

tecoyah

When you can take the pebble from my hand ,Grasshopper.....Seriously though, I doubt they understand it any better than you. But you will certainly get some interesting comments from followers.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

BentNotTwisted

I doubt I could even see the pebble let alone take it.

chavos

Really? I think the reality is quite otherwise. If offering a critique of temple worhship and the state of religious life in Judah makes you anti-Jewish, so are most of the major Jewish prophets: Isiaih, Hosea, Jerimiah, Amos, Samuel...the list continues. Seeing the New Testament as anti-Jewish stems from serious misunderstandings of the texts...misunderstandings shared by many Christians, unforuntately.

Ultimately, i think the message that Jesus had was of reformation, not to throw out the good with the bad.

Why don't you point to the texts that you think support your arguement, and we'll take a look at them, and if that's consistant with tradtion, or points to a break away movement.

tecoyah

Chavos......are you, ........uh, hmmm....are you God?

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

BentNotTwisted

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Torah about 'An eye for an eye' and Christ came up with the Golden Rule? Again, coming from an ignorant standpoint, are there passages in the New Testament where Christ says one way or the other if the Torah should be scrapped or if it just needed some adjustment?

I can understand the political/social reasons for including the Old Testament. You are going to get a lot more converts from the existing Jewish population if you give them something familiar like Moses and Job than if you tell them, 'Look, we're not doing any of that old stuff any more. We're doing this new thing now.'

chavos

Stop, you flatter. Seriously? I'm a student of the texts, and a person of Christian faith. I guess you can weigh my commentary accordingly.

Concerning the Torah proper, that's not incorrect, though it omits much. Justice was seen as immediate and tangible, and one of the rules was to inflict proportional sanctions on wrongdoers. But...that's not the entirety of the tradition. Given more or less weight, depending on the subset of Judiasm in question, are the Nevim and Ketuvim: Prophets and Writings. These continue the evolution of religious thought with in Judiasm, including the exile and return, which is probably one of the most theologically important events of the entire Hebrew Scriptures. There are contained critiques of temple worship, and the religious state of the people, which Jesus echoes. There is also talk of a new creation, a new kingdom, an inbreaking of God, which Jesus echoes. There is also consolation for the many hardships which have befallen the people, and cries of anguish and hope, which Jesus also echoes. Fundamentally, Jesus' ministry seems very much based in and flowing from the contemporary judiasms of the day. Not to say he wasn't unique or presented new views...but i just don't sense a radical break from a Jewish idenity in what he's saying. Moreover, the Jesus movement stayed primarily Jewish for many years, until 20-25+ years after the crucifixtion and Paul's ministry. Again...not indicative of a schism with Jewish tradition.

grumpyolddude

Matthew 5, 17-18:

"Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled."

It's taught that Jesus was the fulfillment of the promise that God made to the Jews, so it stands to reason that Christianity be bult upon the Jewish faith.

Matthew 16, 18:

"And I say unto thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"

Here, it's said, Jesus is naming Peter as titular head of his church on earth, the first pope, as it were. It's reasonable that Peter, believing that Jesus came to the Jews as Messiah, taught that, to be saved, one must first become Jewish.
This was the root of a fued between Paul of Tarsus and Peter. Paul wanted to adapt Christianity to existing local cultures, while Peter was adamant in his Jewish traditions.

Galatians 2, is extensively about Paul's devotion to the "uncircumsized" while Peter was ignoring them:

(in part)"7] But contrariwise, when they had seen that to me was committed the gospel of the uncircumcision, as to Peter was that of the circumcision.
[8] (For he who wrought in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, wrought in me also among the Gentiles.)"

Some translations even have Paul calling Peter a heretic because of his inflexibility on the matter.

__________________
"Regret can be a harder pill to swallow than failure .With failure you at least know you gave it a chance..." David Howard

BentNotTwisted

Thanks g.o.d.
This is what I was looking for. It actually seems the birth of Christianity almost went through a schism itself with the competing views of Peter and Paul.
Chavos, thank you for your comments as well. They were helpful and very much appreciated.

chavos

its quite a complicated tale...but thank you for asking questions.