PDA

View Full Version : A Jewish response to Obama's Cairo speech


NateR
08-07-2009, 05:50 AM
I was looking for some videos of Rabbi Chaim Richman because I used to watch this guy on TV all the time when I lived in New Mexico. He's an Orthodox Jew who lives in Israel and he also believes that Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMaschiach) is the Messiah.

I haven't seen anything from him recently, but I think he has a great message here and an excellent counterpoint to the lies and revisionist history that Obama presented in his speech:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyBZhTaf1oU

Vizion
08-08-2009, 02:07 AM
Obama sounds almost exactly like the antichrist.

He's just plain evil.

and..

he has no clue who he is dealing with.

Tyburn
08-10-2009, 12:07 AM
He's an Orthodox Jew who lives in Israel and he also believes that Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMaschiach) is the Messiah.
You cant be Both.

The thing which makes an Orthodox Jew, Orthodox and not Messianic is their disbelief that Christ was the Messiah. If he believes, therefore he is Messianic

NateR
08-11-2009, 12:08 AM
You cant be Both.

The thing which makes an Orthodox Jew, Orthodox and not Messianic is their disbelief that Christ was the Messiah. If he believes, therefore he is Messianic

I think he would disagree with that and his reasoning would probably be that it's the "Orthodox Jews" who deny Christ that should not be referred to as "orthodox."

Now, according to the world's standards of labeling and categorization, then you're right, Orthodox Jews don't typically accept Christ as the Messiah. However, GOD never wanted His people to deny Him, so in a way, the "orthodox" Jewish religion actually died out in 70 AD, when they completely rejected Jesus and cut off all contact with Christ's followers. It was then replaced with something else that was Judaism in name only.

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 12:24 AM
I think he would disagree with that and his reasoning would probably be that it's the "Orthodox Jews" who deny Christ that should not be referred to as "orthodox."

Now, according to the world's standards of labeling and categorization, then you're right, Orthodox Jews don't typically accept Christ as the Messiah. However, GOD never wanted His people to deny Him, so in a way, the "orthodox" Jewish religion actually died out in 70 AD, when they completely rejected Jesus and cut off all contact with Christ's followers. It was then replaced with something else that was Judaism in name only.
Yes you could argue that. But you would then be saying that there is no difference between Orthodox Judaism and Christianity at all....because you would say that Orthodox Jew were meant to receive the extra revelation about Christ.

The difficulty in that arguement is that if GOD had meant for the Jews to know this...then they would not have Crucfied him to begin with, and thus there would be no salvation. I essence, Christ Counted on the Jews Denying him. Whether he made it happen through spiritual blindness...or whether he just knew the decisions they would make and thus only needed to appear at a specific point in time, is debateable.

Has anyone put that to your friend. I'd be VERY interested to hear what he has to say about that...because its the only reason why I dont completely aggree with him. :)

NateR
08-11-2009, 04:51 AM
Yes you could argue that. But you would then be saying that there is no difference between Orthodox Judaism and Christianity at all....because you would say that Orthodox Jew were meant to receive the extra revelation about Christ.

The difficulty in that arguement is that if GOD had meant for the Jews to know this...then they would not have Crucfied him to begin with, and thus there would be no salvation. I essence, Christ Counted on the Jews Denying him. Whether he made it happen through spiritual blindness...or whether he just knew the decisions they would make and thus only needed to appear at a specific point in time, is debateable.

Has anyone put that to your friend. I'd be VERY interested to hear what he has to say about that...because its the only reason why I dont completely aggree with him. :)

Well, I don't believe that the Jews of Jesus' day were truly orthodox. They were more legalistic than orthodox. Which means they loaded down GOD's Law with so many extra man-made laws that they had essentially written a whole new religion.

Also the Bible is clear that Israel's "blindness" toward Jesus the Messiah was intentional. Jesus deliberately spoke in parables to conceal his identity and, when someone did recognize him as the Messiah, Jesus told them to keep it quiet and not spread the word around. However, that doesn't change the fact that Jesus had upwards of 100,000 followers in Jerusalem. The numbers that were loyal to the Pharisees were more like 6000. It was because the Pharisees were so heavily outnumbered that they only made their moves under the cover of darkness.

It also doesn't change the fact that Jesus came to the "Jew first" and then to the Gentiles. Also, the vast majority of Jesus' followers in the earliest days were Jewish and they didn't strike out and build their own churches. They worshipped right alongside their non-believing Jewish bretheren inside the Temple.

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 01:00 PM
Well, I don't believe that the Jews of Jesus' day were truly orthodox. They were more legalistic than orthodox. Which means they loaded down GOD's Law with so many extra man-made laws that they had essentially written a whole new religion.

Also the Bible is clear that Israel's "blindness" toward Jesus the Messiah was intentional. Jesus deliberately spoke in parables to conceal his identity and, when someone did recognize him as the Messiah, Jesus told them to keep it quiet and not spread the word around. However, that doesn't change the fact that Jesus had upwards of 100,000 followers in Jerusalem. The numbers that were loyal to the Pharisees were more like 6000. It was because the Pharisees were so heavily outnumbered that they only made their moves under the cover of darkness.

It also doesn't change the fact that Jesus came to the "Jew first" and then to the Gentiles. Also, the vast majority of Jesus' followers in the earliest days were Jewish and they didn't strike out and build their own churches. They worshipped right alongside their non-believing Jewish bretheren inside the Temple.
Well then when did the Orthodox Jew dissapear? Are you saying the Orthodox Jew died out in the Time Between Testaments? This would mean that when Christ came, the Jews of that Day would in essence not really be Jews except for name. It would also free them from having to realize that extra bit of Revelation since they were not orthodox even if they called themselves.

That Argument would work. But I would need to know abit more about the time between Testaments to have in my mind where the Orthodox Jews went...or rather, when, they went. :laugh:

VCURamFan
08-11-2009, 02:44 PM
Well then when did the Orthodox Jew dissapear? Are you saying the Orthodox Jew died out in the Time Between Testaments? This would mean that when Christ came, the Jews of that Day would in essence not really be Jews except for name. It would also free them from having to realize that extra bit of Revelation since they were not orthodox even if they called themselves.

That Argument would work. But I would need to know abit more about the time between Testaments to have in my mind where the Orthodox Jews went...or rather, when, they went. :laugh:Well, there's about 400yrs (right Nate?) between the end of Malachi & the beginning of the gospels & it's during that time that Israel is conquered by the Romans. In response to the religious & cultural pluralism of Roman culture, the Jews tended to try & pull together to preserve their cultural heritage. Unfortunately, as often happens with sinful, fallen man, they took it too far to the extreme & the Pharisees arose. They hoped that by buffering the Law with hundreds of new laws, they would protect themselves from even getting close the sinning. It began as "Well, the Law says not to do X, and to protect myself, I'm not even going to do W. That way, I'll never get close enough to X to be tempted into sin." Since that seemed like a good idea, they eventually W with V, V with U & U with T. Now instead of the Law pointing them to God, the law was pointing them to how amazing a Jew they were for doing all this great work to be holy. It became works- and man-centered, as opposed to God-centered.

Basically, there's probably not a hard & fast date that can be set as the "Death of Jewish Orthodoxy" that you're looking for, but it certainly happened (as I understand it) during the Silence.

rearnakedchoke
08-11-2009, 02:45 PM
Well, I don't believe that the Jews of Jesus' day were truly orthodox. They were more legalistic than orthodox. Which means they loaded down GOD's Law with so many extra man-made laws that they had essentially written a whole new religion.

Also the Bible is clear that Israel's "blindness" toward Jesus the Messiah was intentional. Jesus deliberately spoke in parables to conceal his identity and, when someone did recognize him as the Messiah, Jesus told them to keep it quiet and not spread the word around. However, that doesn't change the fact that Jesus had upwards of 100,000 followers in Jerusalem. The numbers that were loyal to the Pharisees were more like 6000. It was because the Pharisees were so heavily outnumbered that they only made their moves under the cover of darkness.

It also doesn't change the fact that Jesus came to the "Jew first" and then to the Gentiles. Also, the vast majority of Jesus' followers in the earliest days were Jewish and they didn't strike out and build their own churches. They worshipped right alongside their non-believing Jewish bretheren inside the Temple.
So what is the Christian stance on circumcision?

Crisco
08-11-2009, 03:30 PM
So what is the Christian stance on circumcision?

My stance is you should definately do it.


It's gross if you don't trust me the girls agree.

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 06:54 PM
Well, there's about 400yrs (right Nate?) between the end of Malachi & the beginning of the gospels & it's during that time that Israel is conquered by the Romans. In response to the religious & cultural pluralism of Roman culture, the Jews tended to try & pull together to preserve their cultural heritage. Unfortunately, as often happens with sinful, fallen man, they took it too far to the extreme & the Pharisees arose. They hoped that by buffering the Law with hundreds of new laws, they would protect themselves from even getting close the sinning. It began as "Well, the Law says not to do X, and to protect myself, I'm not even going to do W. That way, I'll never get close enough to X to be tempted into sin." Since that seemed like a good idea, they eventually W with V, V with U & U with T. Now instead of the Law pointing them to God, the law was pointing them to how amazing a Jew they were for doing all this great work to be holy. It became works- and man-centered, as opposed to God-centered.

Basically, there's probably not a hard & fast date that can be set as the "Death of Jewish Orthodoxy" that you're looking for, but it certainly happened (as I understand it) during the Silence.
Yes we can standardize and say the Jewish Orthodoxy Truly Died out the Date of the Roman Conquest, and say that it did not arise in Messianic Form until Christ. That would work.

Of course it really means that All Christians are Jews, and all Jews who call themselves Messianic, or call themselves Orthodox but believe in Christ are Jews...and those who call themselves Orthodox Jews are actually not even Jewish.

The one problem with that idea, is that Judaism is not founded by belief. Its founded by a Bloodline. Christians can get over that by saying that From the Return of the True Orthodoxy the definition of a Jew involved a belief in Christ, and thus no bloodline is needed. But it makes it a lot harder to honnestly dissmiss the pretend Orthodox Jews...because they, should be able to trace their roots back to one of the Tribes...thats quite unfortunate for this theory...because GODs Promise was to a people, not a Faith...if a section strayed away from the Faith, they are still part of the people.

So what do you do with a load of Descentents of Orthodox Jews, that call themselves Orthodox but are not by Faith, if we go with the changed definition of Orthodox. Knowing that GOD caused the spiritual blindness, then we are also faced with a terrific Job moment...because it then becomes rather more his chronological will that a load of His chosen be lost to Him.

The only way round this would be to proove that the False Orthodox Jews have not only No Faith relation to the Originals...but more importantly, are not related by Blood.

...and I think you find they will be...or at least claim to be so...unless they are all converts...but I dont think converting to Judaism is a big thing...of course it isnt, when one of the precursors for being a Jew is that you are BORN a particular ethnic Family. Thats why Christ and Saint Paul go on about "Adoption" when it comes down to the Heathen. They have been "Grafted" into/onto Israel, and "Adopted" dont under-estimate the plainess of that. We are Adopted Children, we are not Blood related...for the True Orthodoxy prior to The Romans, that might have prooved a difficulty. They always went and preached to the masses, but those masses were Jews that had Strayed...They were like the Jews that call themselves Orthodox today but lack Christ.

These is of course always the order of Melchizadeck...but I really dont think we need to be confused by a Holy Line Mystically separated from the Blood Jews :laugh:

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 07:00 PM
So what is the Christian stance on circumcision?
The Early Church rulled that for Converts it was not essential. For the Jews already Jewish it was of course. It did come up and is actually mentioned in Acts of The Apostles along with other issues the early Community in Jerusalem faced :)

Personally I am...but thats nothing to do with faith...I had a nasty urinary tract infection when I was a baby...it just made it easier to sheer a bit off at the time to aid with the recovery.

:laugh:

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 07:03 PM
My stance is you should definately do it.


It's gross if you don't trust me the girls agree.
:laugh: :laugh:

Cut certainly looks more Human, then uncut...uncircumcised members are a bit perculiar to behold...I'm sure Criscos girls would aggree :blink:

rearnakedchoke
08-11-2009, 08:18 PM
:laugh: :laugh:

Cut certainly looks more Human, then uncut...uncircumcised members are a bit perculiar to behold...I'm sure Criscos girls would aggree :blink:
LOL .. i have not had any complaints ... personally, i don't see the need for it ... and was not the original reason for "identification" purposes? so how were women "identified" also, islam requires circumcision also does it not?

personally, i don't see a need to have it cut and i didn't get my son cut either ...

Crisco
08-11-2009, 09:17 PM
LOL .. i have not had any complaints ... personally, i don't see the need for it ... and was not the original reason for "identification" purposes? so how were women "identified" also, islam requires circumcision also does it not?

personally, i don't see a need to have it cut and i didn't get my son cut either ...

Yea good job buddy. You better make sure your kid is pretty hush about his equipment.

Kids are brutal and having an ant eater will get you picked on hard.

rearnakedchoke
08-11-2009, 09:29 PM
Yea good job buddy. You better make sure your kid is pretty hush about his equipment.

Kids are brutal and having an ant eater will get you picked on hard.
LOL ... kids don't get bugged about that .. i never did .. plus i already taught him the universal comeback "your mother/sister/both didn't seem to mind last night/this morning"

Crisco
08-11-2009, 09:42 PM
LOL ... kids don't get bugged about that .. i never did .. plus i already taught him the universal comeback "your mother/sister/both didn't seem to mind last night/this morning"

Well played sir

Tyburn
08-11-2009, 11:14 PM
LOL .. i have not had any complaints ... personally, i don't see the need for it ... and was not the original reason for "identification" purposes? so how were women "identified" also, islam requires circumcision also does it not?

personally, i don't see a need to have it cut and i didn't get my son cut either ...
:blink: WTF Identification purposes???

Who is going to pull down a Jews pants to make sure he is a Jew by seeing if he's circumcised or not :mellow:

I think you find its more to do with making oneself set apart for GOD. I dont exactly know...but its not going to be shown off like an ID badge...thats for certain :laugh:

Play The Man
08-11-2009, 11:34 PM
So what is the Christian stance on circumcision?

You should read "Galatians".

rearnakedchoke
08-12-2009, 01:13 AM
Can you give me a description of what it says?

Also, if God made man in His own image and saw what He made was good, why would He then want us to alter it?

Tyburn
08-13-2009, 12:02 AM
Can you give me a description of what it says?

Also, if God made man in His own image and saw what He made was good, why would He then want us to alter it?
Can you not read if for yourself? :blink:


type online bible into Google...there is little excuse :ninja:

rearnakedchoke
08-13-2009, 12:55 AM
Can you not read if for yourself? :blink:


type online bible into Google...there is little excuse :ninja:
yes .... you are right ...