How much longer will we have Christmas in America?

[Longhorn85]

"Judeo-Christian" is a historical misnomer invented to overlook the historical savagery of the church towards Jews. It is another version of Christian supersessionism, the belief that Christianity is the supreme monotheiitc religion.

But Jews and Christians share a large part of their faith. They are in lockstep agreement on everything in the old testament. It's just that Jesus thing...

Is see the term Judeo-Christian as a way to emphasize what the two religious traditions have in common.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

But Jews and Christians share a large part of their faith. They are in lockstep agreement on everything in the old testament. It's just that Jesus thing...

Is see the term Judeo-Christian as a way to emphasize what the two religious traditions have in common.

The thing is, there was no Chrsitianty during the Old testament.

Chrisitans would have you believe that the NT just builds on the OT. Jews don't recognize an OT or NT, just the Torah.

The Jewish concept of God's arrival coincides with the end of the world, so clearly, to a Jew, jesus is not God. (simplifying here.....).

"Judeo - Christian" implies that Christianity was built on a foundation of Judaism, and has surpassed it along the road to modern society. Jews reject this out of hand - much of Christianty directly (and intentionally by the foiunders) contradicts Judaism.

In fact, there was no supersession but a schism, and they followers two separate paths.

 

[Longhorn85]

The thing is, there was no Chrsitianty during the Old testament.

Chrisitans would have you believe that the NT just builds on the OT.

Christ was referred to many times in the Old Testament, but of couse Christians didn't exist by definition until after the coming of Christ. The NT is indeed built on the teachings of the old testament, however the new covenant rendered most of the archaic jewish law obsolete as far as salvation is concerned.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Christ was referred to many times in the Old Testament, but of couse Christians didn't exist by definition until after the coming of Christ.

Not in the Torah, which is the "Jewish Bible". Old Testament is a Christian term ONLY. The rest of the OT was put there and assembled into the "Old testament" by Christians (romans, really) after Jesus to "justify" Jesus as Messiah. Those writings were by Jewish prophets but are not regarded as sacrosanct to Jews. Only the Torah is.

For example, Maimonides was a great Jewish scholar. His commentaries are studied by jews. His words are not on par with the Torah to jews.

Christians want us to believe that Jews were sitting around reading the book of Jeremiah or Isaiah and inspecting every baby born in Bethlehem to see if it was the Messiah.

This is nonsensical. Jews don't even believe in a human Messiah - the idea of a "holy man" is a contradiction to Jews.

Jews believe Messiah = end of world. "End of world" to a Jew does not mean Armageddon, but when man has perfected himself through following God's laws. When man has done this, God can return to earth, as it will be perfect and suited to God. This is vastly different than the Christian belief.

The NT is indeed built on the teachings of the old testament, however the new covenant rendered most of the archaic jewish law obsolete as far as salvation is concerned.

Froma historical standpoint, it was only rendered obsolete if you are Christian . Jews did not stop existing and their religion was not superseded. Chrsitianity was a "split off" from it, and it does not "replace" anything unless you are a Christian.

Thus the inherent contradictionin the phrase "Judeo-Christian".

 

[Longhorn85]

Jews believe Messiah = end of world. "End of world" to a Jew does not mean Armageddon, but when man has perfected himself through following God's laws. When man has done this, God can return to earth, as it will be perfect and suited to God. This is vastly different than the Christian belief.

...and Christians believe this is were Jews were mistaken. That the scriptures were misinterpeted by the Jewish Priests who were diappointed in the unglamorous and undramatical coming of the messiah compared to their expectations.

Jesus' insistence that he was the Messiah was enough to make these religious bueracrats call for his death.

Cleary, the two religions don't see eye to eye on the Messiah, but I think enough of their traditions are common to keep "Judeo-Christian" from being an oxymoron.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

...and Christians believe this is were Jews were mistaken. That the scriptures were misinterpeted by the Jewish Priests who were diappointed in the unglamorous and undramatical coming of the messiah compared to their expectations.

Jesus' insistence that he was the Messiah was enough to make these religious bueracrats call for his death.

Cleary, the two religions don't see eye to eye on the Messiah, but I think enough of their traditions are common to keep "Judeo-Christian" from being an oxymoron.

I've gotta run - good stuff.

Check out the book "revelation in Judea" if you can - forgot the author.

good perspective on the supersessionism issue.

 

[Longhorn85]

I've gotta run - good stuff.

Check out the book "revelation in Judea" if you can - forgot the author.

good perspective on the supersessionism issue.

I'll check it out.

 

[atlantabiolab]

Totally disagree. Judeo-Christian tradition, Western Culture, however you wish to describe it, exists. Is it perfect? No. Does it have it's historically blemishes, mistakes and tragedies? Yes.

It is however, the root of democracy and our way of life in the US, and as a result we enjoy the very best civilization in the history of the world.

Do not fall into the incorrect idea that because Christianity was prevalent in early America that it was the foundation of our country. It is only coincidental that Natural Law and Classical Liberalism share some views with Christianity, the majority of views our founders held were not consistent with Christianity. The anti-capitalistic ideology of Christianity is contrary to the pro-capitalistic ideals held by the Founders. Slavery was acceptable by Biblical standards, while most Founders were not accepting of slavery, this was a major debate during the Constitutional Conventions.

Read the works of the Founders, they did not base the ideas of the US government on Christianity or religion, in fact they did what they could to prevent it from controlling legislation.

 

[Longhorn85]

1) The anti-capitalistic ideology of Christianity is contrary to the pro-capitalistic ideals held by the Founders.

2) Slavery was acceptable by Biblical standards while most Founders were not accepting of slavery

3) Read the works of the Founders, they did not base the ideas of the US government on Christianity or religion, in fact they did what they could to prevent it from controlling legislation.

1) See Luke 19:11-27. Capitalism is encouraged.

2) The bible commented and dealt with the reality that was slavery. Christians led the fight to end slavery.

3) Having experienced religious persecution in Britian, of course they were careful not to allow Christianity to control the legislation, although it was arguably it's greatest influence.

 

[atlantabiolab]

1) See Luke 19:11-27. Capitalism is encouraged.

While the written word may have advocated a "private property" concept, the organized church was not a champion of capitalism. And since the common man received his information from the clergy, he was not well informed.

The above is analogous to our Constitution and the present day government. They pay lip service to the document but wipe their ass with it at every turn. This constant re-defining of our legal system along with an uneducated masses allows the rulers to tell the populace anything they wish.

2) The bible commented and dealt with the reality that was slavery. Christians led the fight to end slavery.

But it is still an acceptable practice under the Bible. You can't go against the word of God.

3) Having experienced religious persecution in Britian, of course they were careful not to allow Christianity to control the legislation, although it was arguably it's greatest influence.

It is not arguably the greatest influence, for you would then have to discard all of the philosophical foundations of Western Europe, John Locke, Grotius, Aristotle, Roussoue, Hume, Spinoza, etc. These authors argued reason over mysticism, liberty over tyranny, rational thought over blind faith.