Liberal Christianity 2

[Bro. Hex]

Hey Hex, what's an "average Jew?"

7/12 Reformed 1/6 Hasidic, 1/6 Orthodox 1/12 Secular

That would be pretty average...in NYC.

(In truth, I think I may have BADLY underestimated the Secular! )

Edited July 5, 2010 by Hexalpa

[Bro. Hex]

I'd ask you that if most liberals don't believe Jesus died for our sins, whether or not you also don't believe he was resurrected from the dead?

I think you misunderstand, Dan, if you conclude that most Liberal Christians don't believe that Jesus died for the remission of sin. I don't think we can conclude "one way or the other" on that issue. I think that a "head count" might yield a 50-50 split as to what an average population of Liberal Christians actually believe on this issue. More importantly (from my perspective) is that a Liberal Christian would not feel obliged to profess such a belief.

I don't understand how a person professes to be Christian if they are in denial of those 2 essential tenants of the faith?

Interestingly, with regard to these

two essential tenets of the faith,

Neither of these were taught by Jesus.

Neither, therefore, have any bearing

on whether one tries to live their life

in accord with the teachings and example of Jesus.

[RevRainbow]

7/12 Reformed 1/6 Hasidic, 1/6 Orthodox 1/12 Secular

That would be pretty average...in NYC.

(In truth, I think I may have BADLY underestimated the Secular! )

I was only playing word games with ya! Just like average Christian...havent seen one lately!

[Fawzo]

I was only playing word games with ya! Just like average Christian...havent seen one lately!

I thought the problem was that they all were avergae and thats why they aren't performing the same miracles Yeshua did and more

[mark 45]

My point was that there is no remission of sin accept through Christ. Its not a question of; "if you do not obey him you will fry". I agree with you in the sense that the is of no consequence for Christians who have firmly established their faith in God through Christ. But the devil is of influence in those who are wishy-washy in their belief. "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:16). I'd ask you that if most liberals don't believe Jesus died for our sins, whether or not you also don't believe he was resurrected from the dead? I don't understand how a person professes to be Christian if they are in denial of those 2 essential tenants of the faith?

i think you mean they are essential tennets of your faith(and are shared by others).that deos not make them essential to any others beliefs.i wish rev cali was still active.he believed in the resurection and that christ died for everyones sins,and would say so if asked.but is he also a liberal?i would say maybe.i do know he had an equal"love" for everyone he communicated with.something i see missing in quite a few of the posts in this thread.

[Brother Michael Sky]

Oh please, can I answer this one?

I know that I am not supposed to

(because Pete is right; only you can truly answer this),

But I sense that you are really asking

"am I all alone in this perspective?"

(I don't believe that he rose from the dead, either,

even though I readily acknowledge that "resurrection"

is a wonderful mythic theme...

but you didn't ask that one!)

( IMO )Before the Christ Spirit was Bestowed upon the planet it was in a sort of limbo from the previous betrayal... The Bestowal of the Christ Spirit once again " jumpstarted " the continuing evolution of man - physically and spiritually.. The MAN... Immanuel... was the first of the Earthbound Spirits to experience this " jumpstart "... and he was able to allow witnesses.... because he came as a Pure spirit and left the same way - his roadmap to success for each of us...

If I understand you correctly, you believe that

"the Christ Spirit" was visited upon "the man Jesus",

and this was "the most recent such "incarnation"

(that we are aware of). That's pretty much

how I see the matter too. Of course, for me

this isn't dogma, it's just my way

of talking about something truly incomprehensible.

here I mostly agree wth you.... there have been many, many enlightened souls who have left the place better than it was when they came, however the Christ " occupation " is a singular event in the development of man ( which follows on the heels of another singular event - the betrayal...)

So, are you a Liberal Christian, Michael?

Do you try to live your life in accord

with the teachings and example of Jesus?

I think you do.

That makes you a Christian.

and the stuff we have just here discussed

makes you a Liberal Christian.

Now about those fire flies...

I see those fireflies as frequently as I am able, my friend....

Fundalmentalist ChristBud with a beautiful flower about to spring forth.

do I smell a new profile name for Fawzo?... bit long but.....

[Brother Michael Sky]

Well, your definitely very liberal. You don't believe Jesus had to die for our sins? Your right, he didn't have too, but he did so that we won't need to die for our sins.

If you only believe in a self-imposed judgment, then I'm guessing your future is in pretty good hands? The difference between liberalism and fundamentalism is that liberals agree with many sayings of Jesus the man, while fundamentalist embrace Jesus as the Christ (Emanuel), the only begotten Son of God. The question then becomes; Is agreeing with the teachings of Jesus enough to gain salvation, or is it a necessity to believe and accept Christ as our personal savior? I believe we are all dead to sin until we believe Jesus paid for our transgressions. We can all appreciate Jesus, but if we deny the cross, we deny Christ.

"...The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 John 1;7-10)

I'll step in front of this freight train.....

I'll be your huckleberry...

No I DO NOT believe that the man had to die to bring his message....

No, neither do I believe that his death did anything useful for us at all... how much more might we have learned from a live messenger over the course of a long life?

here's where I start hearing the train's whistles.....

Can you think of one group of people who have suffered atrocity repeatedly over the past couple thousand years? while still survivng to suffer? Could it have something to do with racial or group Karma? I'm just saying..... an argument COULD be made..... not that I am making it....

and because I believe in self-judgement I know that the right man is on the job... I am completely up to date with my transgressions.....

and for the rest, my friend Dan... we won't start arguing text.... I definitely see things differently there... I believe you are hanging on the words written by a monk in a cave, who never met the man himself.... who quite possibly was following orders at javalin point.... maybe even at the orders of the prostitute Theodora or her nasty, nasty husband Constantine...

[Brother Michael Sky]

Other notes on Hell:-

The threat of eternal heaven or eternal hell?

The threat of eternal hell is one of vengeance and serves no part in justice which seeks to reform a person by punishment.

The threat of hell is not justifiable proof in God.

If one does not believe in hell that the threat holds no threat to the non-believer and serves no purpose.

If hell is used to separate evil from good then what would be the point because people are already dead before they get there and there is little point in reviving someone just separate them from others.

Hell is revenge without rehabilitation and therefore serves no purpose that can be described as good and its threat does not serve to justify a belief in a God who said to be good.

To eternally punish someone is not justice and would say more about the sadistic nature of the person inflicting it rather than the good of them.

If we argue that God is all powerful then we have to say that evil exists because God has allowed it or there would not be evil. It therefore follows that God who would have us believe he is only good should be seen to hold some of responsibility for the existence of evil and therefore if punishment for exists for evil then God is also guilty.

If we are to believe that the way is narrow then we are also to believe that most will not make it and therefore we are met with a God who punishes many and gives pleasure for the very few. If that is so then justice is imbalanced against humanity and the very creation of God and which is said to have been created in God's prior knowledge. How does that make God good.

Religions that believe in some sort of punishment for not believing are mainly from Fundamental Christianity or Fundamental Islam. Judaism from which they both declare they grow from. interestingly does not. see:- http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/215,164/Does-Judaism-believe-in-Heaven-and-Hell.html

Hell in the Bible see:- http://www.tentmaker.org/books/TheBibleHell.html

I personally have had OBE experiences with fire - go figure, huh Dan? - In each one Fire has been a PURIFYING agent ( not in the least way associated with pain or suffering....) which is manifested in different ways for different reasons, but universally ( In my experience, now...) as a purifying agent.... to clear the dross which adheres even though you have progressed beyond it... to clear UNWARRENTED negativity...

I have also had experiences with CHRISTIANS who die consumed by guilt and find their HELL when they pass.... of their own choice and by their own creation, creating a circumstance where others must assist and attempt to get through to these poor souls who are lost IN THEIR OWN MISERY... as the Angels look on with concern and LOVE, giving an enormous amount of energy to the cause.... but they must first give up their FEAR of their Father.... ironic, no?

Am I aware that there are beings out there whose names will be erased from the Book of Life? ( for those who do not know - this is referring to what is called the Akashic Record ) Yes, they are out there.... and they will be there until the end of the Yuga.... and then they will be erased and will have never been.... until then they do the Lord's work... as everything in the Lord's creation must - by very nature...

But there is only a burning pit in the Christian claimed portion of the afterlife....

[Coolhand]

Olam Ha-Ba: The World to Come

The spiritual afterlife is referred to in Hebrew as Olam Ha-Ba (oh-LAHM hah-BAH), the World to Come, although this term is also used to refer to the messianic age. The Olam Ha-Ba is another, higher state of being.

In the Mishnah, one rabbi says, "This world is like a lobby before the Olam Ha-Ba. Prepare yourself in the lobby so that you may enter the banquet hall." Similarly, the Talmud says, "This world is like the eve of Shabbat, and the Olam Ha-Ba is like Shabbat. He who prepares on the eve of Shabbat will have food to eat on Shabbat." We prepare ourselves for the Olam Ha-Ba through Torah study and good deeds.

The Talmud states that all Israel has a share in the Olam Ha-Ba. However, not all "shares" are equal. A particularly righteous person will have a greater share in the Olam Ha-Ba than the average person. In addition, a person can lose his share through wicked actions. There are many statements in the Talmud that a particular mitzvah will guarantee a person a place in the Olam Ha-Ba, or that a particular sin will lose a person's share in the Olam Ha-Ba, but these are generally regarded as hyperbole, excessive expressions of approval or disapproval.

Some people look at these teachings and deduce that Jews try to "earn our way into Heaven" by performing the mitzvot. This is a gross mischaracterization of our religion. It is important to remember that unlike some religions, Judaism is not focused on the question of how to get into heaven. Judaism is focused on life and how to live it. Non-Jews frequently ask me, "do you really think you're going to go to Hell if you don't do such-and-such?" It always catches me a bit off balance, because the question of where I am going after death simply doesn't enter into the equation when I think about the mitzvot. We perform the mitzvot because it is our privilege and our sacred obligation to do so. We perform them out of a sense of love and duty, not out of a desire to get something in return. In fact, one of the first bits of ethical advice in Pirkei Avot (a book of the Mishnah) is: "Be not like servants who serve their master for the sake of receiving a reward; instead, be like servants who serve their master not for the sake of receiving a reward, and let the awe of Heaven [meaning G-d, not the afterlife] be upon you."

Nevertheless, we definitely believe that your place in the Olam Ha-Ba is determined by a merit system based on your actions, not by who you are or what religion you profess. In addition, we definitely believe that humanity is capable of being considered righteous in G-d's eyes, or at least good enough to merit paradise after a suitable period of purification.

Do non-Jews have a place in Olam Ha-Ba? Although there are a few statements to the contrary in the Talmud, the predominant view of Judaism is that the righteous of all nations have a share in the Olam Ha-Ba. Statements to the contrary were not based on the notion that membership in Judaism was required to get into Olam Ha-Ba, but were grounded in the observation that non-Jews were not righteous people. If you consider the behavior of the surrounding peoples at the time that the Talmud was written, you can understand the rabbis' attitudes. By the time of Rambam, the belief was firmly entrenched that the righteous of all nations have a share in the Olam Ha-Ba.

Gan Eden and Gehinnom

The place of spiritual reward for the righteous is often referred to in Hebrew as Gan Eden (GAHN ehy-DEHN) (the Garden of Eden). This is not the same place where Adam and Eve were; it is a place of spiritual perfection. Specific descriptions of it vary widely from one source to another. One source says that the peace that one feels when one experiences Shabbat properly is merely one-sixtieth of the pleasure of the afterlife. Other sources compare the bliss of the afterlife to the joy of sex or the warmth of a sunny day. Ultimately, though, the living can no more understand the nature of this place than the blind can understand color.

Only the very righteous go directly to Gan Eden. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom (guh-hee-NOHM) (in Yiddish, Gehenna), but sometimes as She'ol or by other names. According to one mystical view, every sin we commit creates an angel of destruction (a demon), and after we die we are punished by the very demons that we created. Some views see Gehinnom as one of severe punishment, a bit like the Christian Hell of fire and brimstone. Other sources merely see it as a time when we can see the actions of our lives objectively, see the harm that we have done and the opportunities we missed, and experience remorse for our actions. The period of time in Gehinnom does not exceed 12 months, and then ascends to take his place on Olam Ha-Ba.

Only the utterly wicked do not ascend at the end of this period; their souls are punished for the entire 12 months. Sources differ on what happens at the end of those 12 months: some say that the wicked soul is utterly destroyed and ceases to exist while others say that the soul continues to exist in a state of consciousness of remorse.

This 12-month limit is repeated in many places in the Talmud, and it is connected to the mourning cycles and the recitation of Kaddish. See Life, Death and Mourning.

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

An interesting conversation is also taking place with a Jewish Rabbi on the topic of Daniel which appears to say that the term everlasting is referring to the summing up of this world and not the afterlife.

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/1261

That is interesting Pete, but it does not answer the question asked regarding how that verse should be interpreted. Can you summarize?

[Bro. Hex]

That is interesting Pete, but it does not answer the question asked regarding how that verse should be interpreted. Can you summarize?

If you are trying to get at

"what did the author intend to communicate?"

I think we would need for a Jew to answer that question for us.

I don't think that we Gentiles

have an appropriate frame-of-reference.

[Coolhand]

If you are trying to get at

"what did the author intend to communicate?"

I think we would need for a Jew to answer that question for us.

I don't think that we Gentiles

have an appropriate frame-of-reference.

Would this be Jewish enough:

˓olam hazeh … ˓olam haba, “this world … the world to come.” These concepts are part of rabbinic Judaism. The latter can mean either the Millennial Age (Revelation 19–20; see 1 Th 4:15b–17N) or the Eternal Age following Judgment Day (Revelation 21–22). David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary : A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament, electronic ed. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1996, c1992), Mt 12:31.

About the Author

David H. Stern was born in Los Angeles in 1935, the great-grandson of two of the city’s first twenty Jews. He earned a Ph.D. in economics at Princeton University and was a professor at UCLA, mountain-climber, co-author of a book on surfing and owner of health-food stores. In 1972 he came to faith in Yeshua the Messiah, after which he received a Master of Divinity degree at Fuller Theological Seminary and did graduate work at the University of Judaism. He was married in 1976 to Martha Frankel, also a Messianic Jew, and together they served one year on the staff of Jews for Jesus. Dr. Stern taught Fuller Theological Seminary’s first course in “Judaism and Christianity,” organized Messianic Jewish conferences and leaders’ meetings, and served as an officer of the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America. In 1979 the Stern family made aliyah (immigrated to Israel). They are now living in Jerusalem with their two children and are active in Israel’s Messianic Jewish community. This commentary is a companion volume to Dr. Stern’s Jewish New Testament, which is his translation of the New Testament from the original first-century Greek into enjoyable modern English in a manner that brings out its essential Jewishness by its use of Hebrew names and Jewish terminology and by its correction of antisemitic renderings found in other translations. The Jewish New Testament Commentary discusses, verse by verse, Jewish issues raised in the New Testament—questions Jews have about Yeshua, the New Testament and Christianity; questions Christians have about Judaism and the Jewish roots of their faith; and questions Messianic Jews have about their own identity and role. The Jewish New Testament and the Jewish New Testament Commentary are available singly in hard or soft cover or as a boxed hardcover matched set. The Jewish New Testament is also available on 16 audio cassettes. Dr. Stern is also author of Messianic Jewish Manifesto, which outlines the destiny, identity, history, theology and program of today’s Messianic Jewish movement, and of Restoring the Jewishness of the Gospel: A Message for Christians, an abridgement of the “Manifesto” meant for those unaccustomed to thinking of the Gospel as Jewish. Finally, scheduled for publication in 1998 is the Complete Jewish Bible, a new version of the Tanakh (“Old Testament”) bound together with the Jewish New Testament.

David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary : A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament, electronic ed. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1996, c1992), Re 21:27.

[Coolhand]

These would lead you to believe that the "olam haba" does have a connotation of at least heaven in the eternal sense:

29 Yeshua answered them, Yes! I tell you that everyone who has left house, wife, brothers, parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 will receive many times as much in the ‛olam hazeh, and in the ‛olam haba eternal life.

David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament : A Translation of the New Testament That Expresses Its Jewishness, 1st ed. (Jerusalem, Israel; Clarksville, Md., USA: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1989), Lk 18:29-30.

28 Kefa began saying to him, Look, we have left everything and followed you. 29 Yeshua said, Yes! I tell you that there is no one who has left house, brothers, sisters, mother, father, children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the Good News, 30 who will not receive a hundred times over, now, in the ‛olam hazeh, homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and lands with persecutions! and in the ‛olam haba, eternal life. 31 But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first!

David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament : A Translation of the New Testament That Expresses Its Jewishness, 1st ed. (Jerusalem, Israel; Clarksville, Md., USA: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1989), Mk 10:28-31.

30 Those who are not with me are against me, and those who do not gather with me are scattering. 31 Because of this, I tell you that people will be forgiven any sin and blasphemy, but blaspheming the Ruach HaKodesh will not be forgiven. 32 One can say something against the Son of Man and be forgiven; but whoever keeps on speaking against the Ruach HaKodesh will never be forgiven, neither in the ‛olam hazeh nor in the ‛olam haba.

David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament : A Translation of the New Testament That Expresses Its Jewishness, 1st ed. (Jerusalem, Israel; Clarksville, Md., USA: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1989), Mt 12:30-32.

Edited July 6, 2010 by Coolhand

[Bro. Hex]

Would this be Jewish enough(?).

I cannot answer for the Jewish people.

And I cannot accept "one man's answer",

no matter how learned that one man might be.

I can only say that I have never met a Jew who believed in an afterlife,

and I have worked with, socialized with, and been acquainted with

many Jews over the last 40+ years.

I have broken bread with Jews, gotten shnockered with Jews, and I have attended Jewish funerals.

Not once has any belief in an afterlife been expressed...and yes, the subject has "come up"many times

Have you ever met a Jew who believed in an afterlife?

˓

Edited July 6, 2010 by Hexalpa

[Coolhand]

I cannot answer for the Jewish people.

And I cannot accept "one man's answer",

no matter how learned that one man might be.

I can only say that I have never met a Jew who believed in an afterlife,

and I have worked with, socialized with, and been acquainted with

many Jews over the last 40+ years.

I have broken bread with Jews, gotten shnockered with Jews, and I have attended Jewish funerals.

Not once has any belief in an afterlife been expressed...and yes, the subject has "come up"many times

Have you ever met a Jew who believed in an afterlife?

˓

Absolutely! I was taking Hebrew from a Messianic Rabbi for a while; he absolutley believes in an after life; with Jesus.

http://www.kehilatariel.org/wordpress/

[Brother Michael Sky]

I had questions along these lines... but i never got beyond my initial questioning.... no answer was forthcoming...

lets see if this flushes out a helpful fellow....

[Pete]

Absolutely! I was taking Hebrew from a Messianic Rabbi for a while; he absolutley believes in an after life; with Jesus.

http://www.kehilatariel.org/wordpress/

Messianic Jews are a Christian movement and most Jews do not recognise them as part of Judaism and there are so few of them that describing them as average or typical Jews is hardly fitting (IMO).

See:- http://www.religious...rg/mess_jud.htm

Asking Messianic Jews about Judaism and its connection to Christian beliefs is a bit like asking the pope for an unbiased view on Catholicism.

Edited July 6, 2010 by Pete

[Dan56]

Interestingly, with regard to these

two essential tenets of the faith,

Neither of these were taught by Jesus.

Neither, therefore, have any bearing

on whether one tries to live their life

in accord with the teachings and example of Jesus.

Say what? Jesus said; "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). Jesus said; "I am the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25). Jesus said; "Now is My soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father save Me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour" ( John 12:27). Jesus taught it and he did it, that's the faith I'm talking about.

I think the issue is Dan that you are now heaping on more threats but avoiding the discussions that Hex, Tsukino Rei, and myself have given you about those threats.

See:- #370 #371 #373 #375 #376

Throwing more scriptural threats into the discussion does not prove that they are any the more true.

What threats? The biblical quotes simply support what I believe; that Christ was the sacrificial lamb and that he was resurrected. Its seems strange that you guys (liberal Christians) are trying to inject Judaism to support your belief in no hell. Its evident that since you don't want to accept what the NT says about eternal damnation and the lake of fire, that your trying to use Jewish interpretation of the OT to refute what the NT clearly teaches... Seems like quite a stretch to me. Especially since most liberal Christians have less trust in what the old testament teaches than they do the New.

i think you mean they are essential tennets of your faith(and are shared by others).that deos not make them essential to any others beliefs.i wish rev cali was still active.he believed in the resurection and that christ died for everyones sins,and would say so if asked.but is he also a liberal?i would say maybe.i do know he had an equal"love" for everyone he communicated with.something i see missing in quite a few of the posts in this thread.

Believing in the sacrifice of Christ and his resurrection is Christianity 101. You are correct, they aren't essential tenants of other faiths, which was my point. IMO, liberal Christianity is a different faith when those 2 essential tenants are thrown out.

Don't confuse a lively debate with an absence of respect for others. Having an equal love for others does not mean you can't disagree with them. In fact, not expressing disagreement with others when you think they're wrong, could be construed as not caring about them.

[Pete]

Say what? Jesus said; "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). Jesus said; "I am the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25). Jesus said; "Now is My soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father save Me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour" ( John 12:27). Jesus taught it and he did it, that's the faith I'm talking about.

Interesting when the original Gospel that the synoptic Gospels were based on missed out the resurrection completely.. That was Marks. It is thought that the addition and the rest including acts were very much influenced by Paul's view of things. When we are talking Matthew and John we are talking 80 to 120 years after the events that they are reporting on.

What threats? The biblical quotes simply support what I believe; that Christ was the sacrificial lamb and that he was resurrected. Its seems strange that you guys (liberal Christians) are trying to inject Judaism to support your belief in no hell. Its evident that since you don't want to accept what the NT says about eternal damnation and the lake of fire, that your trying to use Jewish interpretation of the OT to refute what the NT clearly teaches... Seems like quite a stretch to me. Especially since most liberal Christians have less trust in what the old testament teaches than they do the New.

Believing in the sacrifice of Christ and his resurrection is Christianity 101. You are correct, they aren't essential tenants of other faiths, which was my point. IMO, liberal Christianity is a different faith when those 2 essential tenants are thrown out.

I do not know if you know but room 101 in the UK is known as somewhere you junk things, i.e. the waste paper bin. However, that aside, the so called 5 fundamental tenants of the faith do not have a history longer than those who debate them. Hence saying that we are of a differing faith because the we challenge them is as bad as the Catholic church calling Protestants churches as being a differing religion. I would not defend that view and I see no reason to support your view only on the matter.

Don't confuse a lively debate with an absence of respect for others. Having an equal love for others does not mean you can't disagree with them. In fact, not expressing disagreement with others when you think they're wrong, could be construed as not caring about them.

We could say that is why we bother to debate with you too but its more like debating to enlighten rather than correct.. However, your right in that I and others would be right behind you if anyone started saying that Fundamentalists have no place in the ULC or have no right to believe as they do or started saying that fundamentalists were not Christians and only liberals were. .

I wonder if we would get the same?

Edited July 6, 2010 by Pete

[RevRainbow]

Well, I'll just say yes, I have met Jews who believe in an afterlife - maybe not eternal, I don't remember - and not quite the same type of afterlife I believe in, but there are Jews whom I've met who believe there is more out there after death. and, no, they were not Messianic (Christian) Jews.

There are also so-called Christians who do not believe in an afterlife...how can that be?

I think it is confusing at best how we tend to box people in to our convenient little definitions which, by the way, are not compatable one to another. Obviously, a few folks here do not hold the same definition of Liberal, Fundamental, Orthodox, etc, etc, and yet continue to argue before defining, one to another, better definitions of the words they are using.

And then there is the nitpicking: one is asked if he ever knew a Jew who beleived in the afterlife and he says yes and then is rebuked because that Jew is not considered "average or typical" when the question did not mention that specific. I too have known Messianic Jews and we should consider that they are more likened unto the first Christians than we Gentiles who have unraveled Christianity into a hundred or more different sects, many abominations of truth.

To me, the blanket term "Christian," today (not saying I agree) is taken as anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus to some degree. Just as there are many out there who argue a ULC ordination does not make you a "real" minister, so too, we argue what makes a "real" Christian. It is, in the final analysis, a matter of the heart and only God knows what is really in our heart. Many disciples followed Jesus("Lord; rabbi"), some apostles beleived in Him ("Thou art the Messiah").

[Coolhand]

Messianic Jews are a Christian movement and most Jews do not recognise them as part of Judaism and there are so few of them that describing them as average or typical Jews is hardly fitting (IMO).

See:- http://www.religious...rg/mess_jud.htm

Asking Messianic Jews about Judaism and its connection to Christian beliefs is a bit like asking the pope for an unbiased view on Catholicism.

That is the most pharisaical anti-Semitic anti-Christian statement I have heard. Are you suggesting because they are Messianic that they are not Jewish?