Again, not true. We know NOT if you or anyone else will or will not enjoy the glory of Heaven. We share knowledge my friend, for instance me sharing the knowledge with you that Jesus is the only path to Heaven is not saying you will burn in hell, or anything directly to you in general. It is just a general knowledge. Don't know why you take it so personally towards you. Especially in this forum, things posted in this forum is not directed to the person that made the original post that the one is responding to. It is a response to what is said, not the speaker of these words.

Like I say, I truly can't believe how blind people can be when it comes to proselytizing their religion.

They can't see the forest for the trees.

It's makes no sense to scream "foul" or proclaim religious prosecution in reverse, when people point out the obvious flaws in a religious doctrine.

My favorite cartoon says it all:



Let me spell it out for you:

The first guy is accusing those who do not believe in Christianity of being unholy. That's criticism, judgment, and emotional persecution of others in the name of Christianity.

The guy who is attempting to break the cross over his knee merely symbolizes the rebuttal argument that the Christian doctrine has no merit and is full of absurdities and contradictions. (i.e. the questioning of the merit of the Christian Doctrine)


Then the Christians scream FOUL ("Let's have a little respect!)

Why?

The Christians clearly do not offer anyone else this kind of respect. They constantly accuse people of "rejecting Christ as the son of God" as though that accusation has some sort of merit.

So the Christians are only getting back precisely what they DISH OUT - disrespect for the beliefs of others!

How can you not see that Cowboy?

It's a plain as DAY.

Your constantly proselytizing of the religion toward other people causes them to question the validity of the doctrine of your religion, and when they do that you act like they are attacking your beliefs.

But they wouldn't be doing that if you weren't already attacking them by demanding that "Jesus is the only way to God".

And that's PRECISELY WHAT YOU DO CONSTANTLY!

It's hypocritical for you to say that you aren't attacking their beliefs when you are constantly in their face screaming, "Jesus is the only way!"

Like I say, you can't see the folly of your own ways.

To proclaim to people that your religion is the "only way to God" is no different at all from proclaiming that their religion is totally meaningless gibberish.

Pretending that this is not what is being implied is the great Christian Proselytizing fallacy.

It's a lie.

When you tell people that your religious beliefs are "The only way to God" you are absolutely insulting their religious beliefs as being "NOT the way to God".

If you think otherwise you're only kidding yourself.

What are you talking about? No one has to accuse anyone of anything. You don't believe Jesus to be the only begotten son of God and that he is not the only path to Heaven. You have specifically said this. You do not accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour, again you have specifically said this. So with not accepting Jesus as Lord and Saviour, you then have rejected him. Sorry to use you as an example for this, but it was the easiest and clearest way I could think of while explaining.



A "Christian" does not do that. A Christian is one whom practices the teachings of Jesus. Jesus has told us not to judge. This right there would be judging another, so with that it would be contrary to what Jesus has said. And if it's contrary to what Jesus has said, it's not Christian. "Christian" is more then just a title one gives someone or themselves. It is a way of life, it is actions, not just beliefs.



Not true. You specifically do not "question" the belief. You belittle it, jump to conclusions over one or two verses, you take things out of context, and you refuse to listen when someone tries to explain.

This word "persecution" should NOT be used to describe being criticized or judged. It is a very strong word not to be used lightly for the purpose of propaganda or emphasis.

When you do that, it trivializes and reduces the seriousness of real persecution that Jews and others have gone through, and by that I mean execution, banishment, death, torture, jailed etc.

Also the word "attacked" should NOT be trivialized and used to mean criticism.

This kind of claims and accusations is what is called propaganda.

But even so, the question STILL REMAINS.

WHO HAS DONE THIS?

If your definition of "persecution" means to criticize and/or judge, then the harshest criticism and judging is coming from the Jewish Rabbi's who write this kind of article and criticize the Messianic Jews.

So your claim is that Orthodox Jews are "persecuting" Messianic Jews.

Those are very strong accusations not to be taken lightly if persecution is taken as being Jailed, tortured, murdered, etc.

So I would suggest you do not repeat those kinds of claims with such strong words as persecution. Change that to "criticize or judge."

I realize someone has told you this stuff using the word "persecution" but this is fluff and propaganda.

The term persecution is more than criticism or judging. It is actually doing something like jailing, threatening, torturing, murdering, genocide, etc.

These people believe in Jesus as savior same as other Christians
because they ARE Christians the same as other Christians!



There is no such thing as a "Messianic Jew". Jews do not believe
that the Messiah has come yet.

Messianic Jews are simply Christians. They are the same as the
other Christians who call themselves "Jews for Jesus". There is
no such thing. Once they accept Jesus as the messiah they are no
longer Jews.

I'm not surprised real Jews find this misrepresentation of their
religion outrageous and offensive. Christians should not call their
preachers "Rabbi" which is someone who is trained in Judaism or
misrepresent the religion in any other way. It is completely
disrespectful and wrong.



It is like Jews celebrating Christmas and calling it Hebrewmas
and celebrating Easter as a Jewish holiday commemorating the death
of a fake messiah! Of course Jews don't do that. They don't have
a movement which practices Judaism with Rabbis called "Priests" who
call themselves "Christians against Jesus" either.



"Messianic Jewry" is a kind of dishonorable religious fraud.
They should just call themselves Messianic Christians and practice
Christian rites and rituals instead of trying to co-opt Jewish
rites and rituals.

Slowhand you are contradicting one of your previous posts that stated that if a person has a Jewish mother, then they are considered Jewish.

Now you are saying that Jewish is strictly the religion.

Make up your mind.



That is what I said and I agree.

But there are some people who do not practice any religions who have Jewish Mothers who claim to be Jewish.

cowboy said:




First of all, the "belief" that Jesus is the son of God and the "only way to heaven" is a belief based on faith.

IT IS NOT KNOWLEDGE. IT IS A BELIEF BASED ON FAITH.

NOT KNOWLEDGE.

Second, in reference to the above statement by you, the only real way I (OR ANYONE) could personally reject Jesus is if he himself came to my door and asked me personally to be his follower and told me personally that I could only get to heaven (or God) by following him and/or "through him" and I said "no thanks."

But THAT is not even what you are saying. You are making the claim that to reject your BELIEF (that Jesus is the only way to God,) is the same as rejecting GOD ALMIGHTY HIMSELF.

News flash! WE REJECT YOUR BELIEF. WE DO NOT REJECT GOD.

We don't even reject Jesus because we have never seen Jesus or spoken to him and some of us don't believe he even exists.

The fact that this totally goes over your head is proof that you are completely brainwashed and can't think clearly enough to reason.

This is the typical lie put forth by religious proselytizers.

I do indeed "question" the belief, and I have questioned it for many years. I have also come to many "conclusions" concerning the questions that I've had.

You totally LIE when you imply that I "jump to conclusions over one or two verses". That a total misrepresentation of what I do. I point out huge contradictions with the overall big picture of the entire cannon of stories.

I point out why it clearly makes absolutely no sense to believe that the things held out in many of the biblical stories could not possibly have come from any all-wise, all-powerful, omniscient being because they simply are neither wise, powerful, nor suggest that any omniscience is involved.

I also DO NOT "refuse to listen" when other people claim to have explanations for my objections. I simply don't accept their explanations and I even point out why their explanation have no merit.

~~~~

This claim that people are "refusing to listen" when they don't buy into religious proselytizing is itself just yet another technique that the proselytizers use in an attempt to make it appear that they actually have valid explanations, when in fact they don't.

~~~~

You yourself tried to "explain" to me how blood sacrifices were required by God as a means of people "proving their sincerity" to God, because you claim that words are cheap, and people need to prove themselves to God via actions.

Well, on the surface that might sound good, but with just a very slight bit of analysis that "explanation" can easily be shown to have absolutely no merit at all.

First off, a supposedly omniscient God who knows what's in the hearts and minds of men would have absolutely no need to require people to "prove their sincerity" via any physical actions or rituals.

Such an omniscient God would already know whether a person is sincere of heart or not.

So you're so-called "explanation" already falls apart and cannot possibly have any validity.

Moreover, when applied to the crucifixion of Jesus as the sacrificial lamb of God to end all sacrifices it fails again.

What sense would it make for Jesus to be the sacrifice to end all sacrifices if the whole idea of a sacrifice was for the purpose of having men prove their sincerity to God?

~~~~

The bottom line for me Cowboy is that your so-called "explanations" for these ancient superstitious beliefs never make any sense, and can never hold up to even the slightest analysis.

So it's not that I'm "not listening". I hear your excuses for these fables, I just don't see them as having any merit.

If anything, all you continually do is prove to me that even the believes of this religion have no clue how to explain the contradictions and absurdities that it is riddled with.

~~~~

So your "accusation" that I refuse to listen is baloney!

I just don't by into your explanations. They simply don't hold water, IMHO.

In Germany, Jews and other civil disobedient citizens and disabled people, were persecuted by being oppressed and not being allowed equal rights, abused, harassed, maltreated etc. Eventually they were arrested, abducted, put in prison, made to work as slaves, experimented on, sold, and slaughtered.

That is the general use of the word persecution.


persecute [ˈpɜːsɪˌkjuːt]
vb (tr)

1. to oppress, harass, or maltreat, esp because of race, religion, etc.

2. to bother persistently <<<----------That's funny.

The second definition is just incorrect and incomplete in my opinion.

On a site called Persecution.com Christians complain about being persecuted for their religion.

In a country that does NOT practice freedom of religion like Maldives, they have laws against teaching anything but Muslim religion.

And yet some people (Christians) persist to break that law and when they get deported, they claim that they are being persecuted.

Being Deported for breaking their laws, was not really persecution for their religion, it was for breaking their laws and actually teaching Christianity to Muslims. The evidence was a Bible and other Christian related things in his house.

He was deported for breaking a law. Not imprisoned, not killed. They just tossed him out the door. No more than I would do if he had come into my home and tried to preach to my children without my knowledge.

The man was "bothering" the people of that place by breaking their laws. They simply forced him to leave.

***********************************************************

Here is the article:

MALDIVES:


After teaching at a school in Maldives for two years, 30-year-old Indian Christian Shijo Kakkattu was deported on Oct. 14, 2011, after police found a Bible in his house, according to Compass Direct News. A co-worker reported Kakkattu to the National Administrative Center after finding Christian materials on a school computer.

According to Minivan News, an independent news agency based in Maldives, Kakkattu accidentally transferred material from his flash drive onto the school’s computer. Mohamed Shiraj, the principal of Raafainu School in Raa Atool, told Minivan News, “The videos were in Indian, so I don’t know what they were saying, but the images were Christian.”

Police raided Kakkattu’s house and discovered a Bible and other Christian materials. They then charged him with preaching the Christian faith in the Muslim nation of Maldives, which recently tightened restrictions on preaching and practicing non-Islamic faiths. Police took Kakkattu to another island for interrogation and held him for 15 days before deporting him back to India.

Last month, the Ministry of Islamic Affairs published new regulations under the Protection of Religious Unity Act of 1994. Anything that represents a religion other than Islam is strictly prohibited, according to Compass Direct News. Web sites, blogs, newspapers and magazines are forbidden from publishing anything contradictory to Islam. Violators face two to five years in prison, house arrest or banishment. As in Kakkattu’s case, foreigners accused of proselytizing will be deported.

You just didn't understand the article. It says that those are
considered Jewish are either practicing Jews (converts), or Jews
who have a parent who is Jewish. This is like being born Baptist or
Buddhist or Taoist or Hindu if your family is that religion. It is no big
deal.

Traditionally it was just if the mother was Jewish but more
recently either parent or both qualifies etc.

Just read the jewfaq article again a bit more carefully below.
I am not contradicting myself though. I just understand what they
meant. The defining characteristic is a tie to the religion but if
someone is born to jewish parents then they are naturally considered
jewish.

Here you go:

http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm

Who Is a Jew?

Level: Basic

• In the Bible, Jews were called Hebrews or Children of Israel
• The terms "Jew" and "Judaism" come from the tribe or kingdom of Judah
• "Jew" now refers to all physical and spiritual descendants of Jacob
• A person can be Jewish by birth or by conversion
• Traditionally, Jewish status passes through the mother, not the father

Origins of the Words "Jew" and "Judaism"

The original name for the people we now call Jews was Hebrews. The word "Hebrew" (in Hebrew, "Ivri") is first used in the Torah to describe Abraham (Gen. 14:13). The word is apparently derived from the name Eber, one of Abraham's ancestors. Another tradition teaches that the word comes from the word "eyver," which means "the other side," referring to the fact that Abraham came from the other side of the Euphrates, or referring to the fact Abraham was separated from the other nations morally and spiritually.

Another name used for the people is Children of Israel or Israelites, which refers to the fact that the people are descendants of Jacob, who was also called Israel.

The word "Jew" (in Hebrew, "Yehudi") is derived from the name Judah, which was the name of one of Jacob's twelve sons. Judah was the ancestor of one of the tribes of Israel, which was named after him. Likewise, the word Judaism literally means "Judah-ism," that is, the religion of the Yehudim. Other sources, however, say that the word "Yehudim" means "People of G-d," because the first three letters of "Yehudah" are the same as the first three letters of G-d's four-letter name.

Originally, the term Yehudi referred specifically to members of the tribe of Judah, as distinguished from the other tribes of Israel. However, after the death of King Solomon, the nation of Israel was split into two kingdoms: the kingdom of Judah and the kingdom of Israel (I Kings 12; II Chronicles 10). After that time, the word Yehudi could properly be used to describe anyone from the kingdom of Judah, which included the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, as well as scattered settlements from other tribes. The most obvious biblical example of this usage is in Esther 2:5, where Mordecai is referred to as both a Yehudi and a member of the tribe of Benjamin.

In the 6th century B.C.E., the kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyria and the ten tribes were exiled from the land (II Kings 17), leaving only the tribes in the kingdom of Judah remaining to carry on Abraham's heritage. These people of the kingdom of Judah were generally known to themselves and to other nations as Yehudim (Jews), and that name continues to be used today.

In common speech, the word "Jew" is used to refer to all of the physical and spiritual descendants of Jacob/Israel, as well as to the patriarchs Abraham and Isaac and their wives, and the word "Judaism" is used to refer to their beliefs. Technically, this usage is inaccurate, just as it is technically inaccurate to use the word "Indian" to refer to the original inhabitants of the Americas. However, this technically inaccurate usage is common both within the Jewish community and outside of it, and is therefore used throughout this site.

Who is a Jew?

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship. See What Is Judaism?

This has been established since the earliest days of Judaism. In the Torah, you will see many references to "the strangers who dwell among you" or "righteous proselytes" or "righteous strangers." These are various classifications of non-Jews who lived among Jews, adopting some or all of the beliefs and practices of Judaism without going through the formal process of conversion and becoming Jews. Once a person has converted to Judaism, he is not referred to by any special term; he is as much a Jew as anyone born Jewish.

Although all Jewish movements agree on these general principles, there are occasional disputes as to whether a particular individual is a Jew. Most of these disputes fall into one of two categories.

First, traditional Judaism maintains that a person is a Jew if his mother is a Jew, regardless of who his father is. The liberal movements, on the other hand, consider a person to be Jewish if either of his parents was Jewish and the child was raised Jewish. Thus, if the child of a Jewish father and a Christian mother is raised Jewish, the child is a Jew according to the Reform movement, but not according to the Orthodox movement. On the other hand, if the child of a Christian father and a Jewish mother is not raised Jewish, the child is a Jew according to the Orthodox movement, but not according to the Reform movement! The matter becomes even more complicated, because the status of that children's children also comes into question.

Second, the more traditional movements do not always acknowledge the validity of conversions by the more liberal movements. The more modern movements do not always follow the procedures required by the more traditional movements, thereby invalidating the conversion. In addition, Orthodoxy does not accept the authority of Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis to perform conversions, and the Conservative movement has debated whether to accept the authority of Reform rabbis.

About Matrilineal Descent

Many people have asked me why traditional Judaism uses matrilineal descent to determine Jewish status, when in all other things (tribal affiliation, priestly status, royalty, etc.) we use patrilineal descent.

But that to me, is silly. Just because my mother is Christian, does not mean that I am Christian.

Being raised in a Christian family does not make you Christian for life. It may seem so more for Catholics because when Catholic marry they promise to raise their children as Catholics.

Meaning, they spend their lives being indoctrinated into that dogma.

But a Jewish mother, who does not practice Judaism and is married to an atheist, has children, and they are still considered to be Jewish by blood according to Israel Law.

I'm with you on this, I don't accept that, and I don't agree with that.

I think its ridiculous.

The way I read this, they are saying that there is such a wide range
of religious observance that it does not matter how religious you
are - very religious (Orthodox) or less religious (Reform or secular).
If your mother is Jewish then you are born Jewish
according to traditional Jewish law (not Israel law) and if either
parent is Jewish then you are considered to be born Jewish by more
modern reform considerations.

Obviously if someone renounces Judaism and starts practicing
something else altogether such as converts to another religion
then they aren't really Jewish anymore.

I don't find it particularly ridiculous or objectionable though.

which came first, the chicken or the egg?,,,lol

where will we find evidence of who 'persecuted' whom first,,,and who will be brave enough to be the last,,,,?

I don't find that objectionable either. But the Messianic Jews (who are really Christians) are still annoying Orthodox Jews by calling their ministers "Rabbi" etc.

I have heard some of their ideas and objections about orthodox Christianity and they are clearly deviating from both Orthodox Judaism and Orthodox Christianity and annoying both of those groups.

And they are still claiming to be Jews for Jesus or whatever they call him.

So I'm still confused.

There is one thing that separates Judaism from Christianity and that is that Judaism does not try to convert people. So clearly the Messianic Jews picked up that bad habit from Christians with their seminars that attempt to attract confused Jews.

Do we even need to know?

All we need to do is to quit proselytizing religion in general and the question of who persecuted whom first would be a moot point.

You do not have the answer the question, just food for thought. Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour? If not you have then rejected him as your Lord and Saviour.



What is the difference? Do you know for a fact that Billy the Kid was someone who existed? Do you know for a fact Columbus was also someone who existed? Have you ever met either one at any time? If not, you only go on faith either one existed. You do not have to answer the questions, again they are used for food of thought and making a point.

It wasn't necessarily to "show" it. It was more or less a punishment. They did something they weren't suppose to, they lost something valuable eg., their biggest lamb, ect. It was to put a bit of consequence on their actions they took.



The sacrificing and the crucifixion have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Jesus was here to fulfil the old covenant which required blood sacrifices, why would he then be acting accordingly to the old covenant?

Soldiers killed in action are often described as sacrificing their lives for their country. In this sense, one may speak of Jesus sacrificing his life for his passion, namely, for his advocacy of the kingdom of God.