College Professor Calls Christmas Story Creepy and Predatory

[TheOneAndOnly]

I have popcorn ready for when the story of Lot and his family hits the news.

[nolongerIFBx]

On 12/14/2018 at 12:20 PM, Terrie said:

For starters, you just used the past tence in relation to talking about Jewish people who are alive, well and still Jewish. Second, the concept of a messiah in Judism is very different from the modern Christian concept. You're taking a story that was written down by Chrisitans a good hundred years after the supposed events to determine Jewish views. Judism isn't "Christianity pre-Jesus." If you want to talk about what the Gospels say about Mary, go ahead. But do not project it onto an entire people. The whole thing smacks of Ann Coulter's comments on Christians being "perfected Jews."

Right- I didn't want to imply that any Jewish women of today want to be the one to birth the Messiah which was why I had used the past tense. I realize that times and how one lives their faith have changed (although are fundies in every faith). Judaism like Christianity, Islam, etc. has seen many changes in the last 2000 years.

[AmazonGrace]

IMHO  whenever Catholics or others make a big deal out of how faithful and obedient Mary was... well what choice did she have. It's not like she had easy access to an abortion pill or could have refuse to give birth. Her faith and obedience would have been a bigger deal If the angel came down and said, "hey Mary we need a virgin to give birth to God, are you up to the job? You won't like all that it entails", and Mary thought about it and said yeah.

The way it went, if Mary hadn't been faithful and obedient, how would we even know? She was already pregnant and would have given birth to God regardless.

[Terrie]

@nolongerIFBx Did your arm get tired hand waving away the rest of my comments? You said they were awaiting the birth of "the Savior." That is not what the Jewish concept of a messiah is at all. Please put down the shovel and stopping digging. Rewriting the history of an entire people to fit your narrative is not appropriate. Using the New Testament to talk about Jewish views is about as appropriate as using the Book of Mormon to talk about Protestants. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

5 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Her faith and obedience would have been a bigger deal If the angel came down and said, "hey Mary we need a virgin to give birth to God, are you up to the job? You won't like all that it entails", and Mary thought about it and said yeah.

she was given a choice in the Catholic narrative and accepted.

[singsingsing]

6 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

IMHO  whenever Catholics or others make a big deal out of how faithful and obedient Mary was... well what choice did she have. It's not like she had easy access to an abortion pill or could have refuse to give birth. Her faith and obedience would have been a bigger deal If the angel came down and said, "hey Mary we need a virgin to give birth to God, are you up to the job? You won't like all that it entails", and Mary thought about it and said yeah.

The way it went, if Mary hadn't been faithful and obedient, how would we even know? She was already pregnant and would have given birth to God regardless.

No, she wasn't already pregnant. An angel appeared, told her she was going to be pregnant and how it was going to happen, and she said, "Cool, I'm down with that." Whether she actually had a choice in the matter is debatable, but she was given a head's up and she did agree to it before she became pregnant.

[AmazonGrace]

I stand corrected about the being already pregnant part but she definitely wasn't given a choice. The angel came and told her what will happen and she said okay. That's different from, hey this could happen if you're interested, how about some messiah-birthing?

Oh well but if she said she didn't want to she'd probably have gone to hell huh.

[Soulhuntress]

9 hours ago, Terrie said:

@nolongerIFBx Did your arm get tired hand waving away the rest of my comments? You said they were awaiting the birth of "the Savior." That is not what the Jewish concept of a messiah is at all. Please put down the shovel and stopping digging. Rewriting the history of an entire people to fit your narrative is not appropriate. Using the New Testament to talk about Jewish views is about as appropriate as using the Book of Mormon to talk about Protestants. 

Chabad seems to think the Rebbe Menachem Schneerson was Messiah and there is this from My Jewish Learning:
 

Quote

The belief in a messiah, a person who will redeem the people Israel and usher in a more perfect era, is often considered one of Judaism's defining characteristics.

 

[Briefly]

On 12/15/2018 at 7:51 AM, smittykins said:

I could be wrong(feel free to correct me if I am), but I think it's only Catholics who believe that Mary was conceived without sin.  I've heard fundagelical types say that "Mary was a sinner who needed a Saviour, just like the rest of us."

I heard that in a United Methodist church.  But the UM is an off-shoot of the Anglican church which is an off-shoot of the Catholic church.  But it is definitely NOT taught in the Baptist or Southern Baptist church.

[nolongerIFBx]

11 hours ago, Terrie said:

@nolongerIFBx Did your arm get tired hand waving away the rest of my comments? You said they were awaiting the birth of "the Savior." That is not what the Jewish concept of a messiah is at all. Please put down the shovel and stopping digging. Rewriting the history of an entire people to fit your narrative is not appropriate. Using the New Testament to talk about Jewish views is about as appropriate as using the Book of Mormon to talk about Protestants. 

No, not at all. I acknowledged that religion changes. Even by the time Jesus was born, Judaism had changed from its early days and there were different sects and Pharisees who had added extra rules--the Mishnah--to the law protect followers from even getting close to breaking the law. 

I'm not trying to be argumentative and I had used past tense intentionally because I did not want to cause offense to those who practice Judaism today. Neither am I making any attempt to rewrite history. What I understand you saying is that you believe that verses such as Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2 in the Old Testament were added by Christians or misinterpreted by them as references to a Messiah- is that right?

[SusanAtTheLastBattle]

3 hours ago, nolongerIFBx said:

No, not at all. I acknowledged that religion changes. Even by the time Jesus was born, Judaism had changed from its early days and there were different sects and Pharisees who had added extra rules--the Mishnah--to the law protect followers from even getting close to breaking the law. 

I'm not trying to be argumentative and I had used past tense intentionally because I did not want to cause offense to those who practice Judaism today. Neither am I making any attempt to rewrite history. What I understand you saying is that you believe that verses such as Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2 in the Old Testament were added by Christians or misinterpreted by them as references to a Messiah- is that right?

So, here’s what I would say, as a practicing Jew + someone with some academic training in Bible:

Judaism in the period when Jesus was born (Second Temple Period) was sectarian and ideology diverse. There was no “what Jews believed”—it was already a “two Jews, three opinions” situation, as the old joke goes.

It’s important to note that the Mishnah wasn’t published until 200 C.E. The Pharisees are the sect from Jesus’ time that was closest to what later rabbis and believed and how they did things, but it’s not exactly the same group.

The Messiah was an important idea in Second Temple Judaism, but the Gosels are not the best source for what Jews before Jesus thought the Messiah would be like (because they were written by people who already believed Jesus was the Messiah). Generally earlier Jews thought the Messiah would be descended from the house of David and be born in Bethlehem (where David’s family was from), and that he would become a great leader and king. But there are not really stories/expectations about the Messiah’s conception or birth or mother before the Gospels.

The Gospels read certain verses in the Hebrew prophets as being about the Messiah that ancient rabbis and modern Jews would not read that way. In general, the rabbis and later Jews tend to read the prophets as talking historically about their own day, even if their moral messages still apply for us. But they’re not seen to be predicting the distant future. Isaiah 7:14 is a famous area of disagreement for Jews and Christians. Jewish interpreters from the rabbis on see no reference to a virgin, and read the child Emanuel as someone who has to be born in the time of King Ahaz for the message about “two kingdoms” (the Ephraimite-Syrian coalition, in the geopolitics of the day) to make any sense. So no, Jews do not interpret Isaiah 7:14 as being about the Messiah.

Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2 I think Jews would agree are about the Messiah. They talk about those key elements of 1. Descended from David, 2. Born in Bethlehem.

Big picture, I would say:

- The best sources for understanding what Jews thought before Jesus are neither the Gospels nor the Mishnah/the rabbis, but things written before Jesus, (e.g. the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish writers like Philo and Josephus)

- We should expect that ancient Jews of different sects, the early Christians, the early rabbis, Christians of various sorts today, and Jews of various sorts today will all understand various verses in the Hebrew Bible differently.

- Jewish culture tends to see disagreeing with someone about the Bible as a complement  so I hope you take my wordy reply in that light!

[Terrie]

@SusanAtTheLastBattle Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. What was bothering me was the idea that Christians texts, written well after the fact, copied, translated, copied again, translated again, etc., by people working from the assumption that the Old Testaments books were referring to Jesus, because they "knew" Jesus was the foretold figure, had anything to say about the day to day worldview of people prior to the Gospel stories. And I think it's important to realize this covers how many Old Testament verses are viewed by Christians.  I've heard people claim that Jesus is referenced even in the Garden of Eden story of Genesis and this is how we know Jesus fulfilled Jewish beliefs and prophecy. I leave you to imagine the look on my face when I heard that.

 

[nolongerIFBx]

9 hours ago, SusanAtTheLastBattle said:

So, here’s what I would say, as a practicing Jew + someone with some academic training in Bible:

Judaism in the period when Jesus was born (Second Temple Period) was sectarian and ideology diverse. There was no “what Jews believed”—it was already a “two Jews, three opinions” situation, as the old joke goes.

It’s important to note that the Mishnah wasn’t published until 200 C.E. The Pharisees are the sect from Jesus’ time that was closest to what later rabbis and believed and how they did things, but it’s not exactly the same group.

The Messiah was an important idea in Second Temple Judaism, but the Gosels are not the best source for what Jews before Jesus thought the Messiah would be like (because they were written by people who already believed Jesus was the Messiah). Generally earlier Jews thought the Messiah would be descended from the house of David and be born in Bethlehem (where David’s family was from), and that he would become a great leader and king. But there are not really stories/expectations about the Messiah’s conception or birth or mother before the Gospels.

The Gospels read certain verses in the Hebrew prophets as being about the Messiah that ancient rabbis and modern Jews would not read that way. In general, the rabbis and later Jews tend to read the prophets as talking historically about their own day, even if their moral messages still apply for us. But they’re not seen to be predicting the distant future. Isaiah 7:14 is a famous area of disagreement for Jews and Christians. Jewish interpreters from the rabbis on see no reference to a virgin, and read the child Emanuel as someone who has to be born in the time of King Ahaz for the message about “two kingdoms” (the Ephraimite-Syrian coalition, in the geopolitics of the day) to make any sense. So no, Jews do not interpret Isaiah 7:14 as being about the Messiah.

Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2 I think Jews would agree are about the Messiah. They talk about those key elements of 1. Descended from David, 2. Born in Bethlehem.

Big picture, I would say:

- The best sources for understanding what Jews thought before Jesus are neither the Gospels nor the Mishnah/the rabbis, but things written before Jesus, (e.g. the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish writers like Philo and Josephus)

- We should expect that ancient Jews of different sects, the early Christians, the early rabbis, Christians of various sorts today, and Jews of various sorts today will all understand various verses in the Hebrew Bible differently.

- Jewish culture tends to see disagreeing with someone about the Bible as a complement  so I hope you take my wordy reply in that light!

Thank you and Terrie. It is always interesting to me when I find that something accepted as fact maybe more accepted tradition than anything. Sort of like the acceptation that the Women at the Well in the gospels was a prostitute. The Bible doesn't say that but someone taught it that way and it became "fact" and people are shocked when you point out that it is only assumed.

[formergothardite]

22 minutes ago, nolongerIFBx said:

It is always interesting to me when I find that something accepted as fact maybe more accepted tradition than anything.

I too was taught that it was a "fact" that the Old Testament had verses that absolutely proved Jesus was the Messiah. It was something I never even thought to question. We were told Jewish people purposely ignored these verses because they didn't want to accept that the Messiah had already come. 

It was in a college Bible class that I was first exposed to the idea that the what I had been taught as a fact, especially about the Isaiah verse, wasn't even close to being so. It was very eye opening. And yes, I was always taught the woman at the well was a prostitute. When you are taught to view things in a certain interpretation, you can read them and see that. I read those verses countless times and never saw that the Bible never called her a prostitute.