Can Judaism and Christianity coexist

Post Reply New Topic

Currently there is a debate going on where Hebraic Christians claim that their religion is a fulfillment of Judaism, while Jews claim that the two faiths are incompatible. The debate surrounds the issues whether or not Jesus matches the Jewish concept of Messiah. Thus, any similarities between Jesus and Jewish messiah would imply that the two faiths can coexist, while any differences between the two implies that they can't.

However, I am going to take a very different approach. I am going to say that antichrist is the Jewish Messiah, and I will show how this can fit within BOTH Judaism and Christianity. Judaism never denies that their messiah is antichrist, while Christianity claims that antichrist is the one who will fulfill whatever Jews are looking for in messiah. In light of this, I will be unique in that I will AGREE about the differences between Jesus and Jewish messiah, BUT I will use these differences in order to claim that the two faiths CAN perfectly coexist! After all, if presidents are different enough from cosmonaughts then Bush being a president doesn't negate Gagarin being a cosmonaught.

So, now that I have outlined where I am going, lets start from scratch. Lets go back to the whole idea of Messiah=Jesus and list all the arguments that Jews bring that oppose that concept:


1)Jewish messiah is supposed to make a world piece and prosperity. Jesus didn't.

2)Jews don't expect their messiah to be divine. Likewise, Jews don't expect their messiah to be imortal. The word "messiah" means simply a king, so there were many messiahs including King David and others. It is mere convention that when they say "the" messiah as opposed to "a" messiah, they are referring to the particular king who will be ruling during that age of prosperity. But, just like any other king, he will die at some point.

3)Jews expect the Messiah to rebuilt temple and to partake in sacrifices. On the toher hand in the end of book of revelation it says there will be NO temple because the god and the lamb are the temple

4)Christianity claims that non-Christians are going to hell. On the other hand, Judaism never makes such a claim. On the contrary, Jews claim that it is EASIER for non-Jews to be saved since they have less of responsibility before God. Furthermore, Jews never say that their path is the only one. They only say that it is the only one FOR THE JEW.

5)In light of the above, Christianity seeks conversts, while Jews would turn you around three times before allowing you to convert in order to see if you are ready to take upon yourself this responsibility

6)On the other hand, Judaism DOES claim that obeying God will lead to God rewarding you IN THIS LIFE. Christianity, however, never makes such a claim. On the other hand, it says that their followers will endure persecution and they have to "bear a cross daily".

7)In Judaism all the rewards and punishments have time constraints to them. For example, time in gehena is limitted to a year, the time of curses for disobedience is limitted to 3 generations, etc. On the other hand, Christianity speaks of eternal consequences.

Judaism is work based while Christianity is faith based.


Now, most people see these arguments as evidence AGAINST the concept of the two faith coexisting. Of course, people who believe in coexistance of the two faiths will make a claim that these arguments have holes in them. In particular, they would say that while Jesus haven't fulfilled these prophecies in the first comming, he will fulfill them in the second one. However, no one that I know had ever tried to use these things as something that would HELP them in connecting the two faiths together. Well, I am going to be the first one who will do just that.

Yes, as a Christian I do agree with a more standart Christian response. However, for the purposes of this article I am going to look at it from a different angle. In particular I am going to focus at the time UNTILL the second comming and show how these arguments can be dealt with differently. In fact, I am going to be opposite to everyone else, and will be the first person who will USE these exact arguments in order to show how Judaism and Christianity can easilly coexist. After all, due to the fact that there are SO MANY differences, the two faiths simply talk about two different things. So surely they can both be right, why not?

If we go to the item 2 listed above, we are going to see that Jews are NOT talking about any eternal king that Christians are talking about. The Jews are merely saying that there WILL be a time of world piece and prosperity (item 1) and a certain person will be holding TEMPORARY office during that time (item 2) and for the sake of having a word to refer him by they will call him "the messiah". So, none of this negates an eternal king comming AFTER all this. And in case this does happen, that eternal king can be anything and everything, since Jews never said a word about him. In particular, it might as well be Jesus.

Now, as far as temporary king, Christians agree with Jews 100%. Christians too say that there will be a world piece, namely when antichrist will establish one, and they also agree with Jews that someone will be holding the office during that time, namely the antichrist himself. Now, like I just said, Jews never said that their messiah will be immortal. In other words, he will die some time like everyone else. Now, none of the Jews say WHY he will die, so this leaves a room for him to die because Jesus will kill him. Furthermore, since none of the Jews are saying anything of what happends AFTER their messiah dies, it is entirely possible that what happends is that all of the ex-followers of the messiah will be tortured with fire and brimstone forever and ever.

So, the only difference between Christian and Jewish views is the usage of the word Messiah. Christians use it exclusively to refer to eternal king, while Jews use it to refer to all the temporary kings, including King David. Precisely this usage difference is what allows them to both be right in case of calling Jesus the messiah verses calling antichrist the messiah. This linguistic difference might be considered a non-issue just like a difference between French speaking Christians verses German speaking christians. If I want, I can call table a chair and chair a table, and there is nothing wrong with doing that as long as everyone understands what I am doing.

Furthermore, even in terms of linguistics, Christians don't have to disagree with the Jews. If you look at Luke 9:18-22 Jesus himself refused to be referred to as Messiah because AT THE TIME he was anything but the king:

In other words, he was employing a JEWISH definition of messiah in that statement. Like we all know, in many other verses he used a Christian definition of messiah and that is where he admitted to be the one. But, this didn't stop him from using the Jewish definition this one time. In other words, Jesus would agree with me that linguistics is just that, and the words can be used differently depending on the puropse of the statement. So if we use the same definition that Jesus was using in Luke 9:18-22 then in much the same way as Jesus wasn't a messiah YET because he was going to suffer, we can likewise say that antichrist WILL be the messiah FOR A WHILE given that he will be rulling the earth FOR A WHILE.

This brings us to part 7. Given that in Judaism all the rewards and punishments have time contraints, it has NO SAY about anthing that will happen eternally. All it says is that as a reward of following Judaism, God will bring happiness FOR A TIME PERIOD. Indeed, this is what happends with followers of antichrist, FOR A TIME PERIOD they are rewarded, while the followers of Christ are persecutted.

Now, in order to see whether both Jews and Christians are right, we should also see whether in both cases the blessings and curses come from God just like the two groups claim it to be. Indeed, this is the case! Jews are right that the temparary things they are talking about are comming from God, since God is the one who gave antichrist power, as can be seen from this verse:



Now look closely at the word GIVEN. Given by whom? By God. After all, God is the one who created the devil.

Also consider 2 Th 2: 1-12 :



As you can see, what it says is that GOD will be the one who will send people "strong delusion" and thus force them to follow the antichrist. Now, the antichrist wouldn't have had any power if he didn't have such a huge following (after all thats how any leader has a power). So, by sending non-believers "strong delusion" GOD had given antichrist the power that is needed to reward antichrist's followers AND persecute Christians!

Once again, it was God who GAVE the power to antichrist to persecute people who don't obey him FOR A TIME PERIOD, just like Judaism says that God is the one who rewards/punishes obedience/disobedience to Judaism.

Now, one can still object that there is a difference between God TESTING people verses God rewarding or punishing them. However, before being too quick to say it, lets consider Romans 13:1-8



So how do you deal with it if you apply it to antichrist? Simple. You appeal to the dualism between curses/blessings for loyalty to earthy powers verses curses/blessings for loyalty to God. YES IN BOTH CASES CURSE OR BLESSING COMES FROM GOD. But the key is that the CONTENT of the curse or blessing is different -- even though it comes from the same God. In the case of earthy powers, GOD is going to bless you with earthy rewards/punishments, while in the case of God, that same God will bless you with heavenly rewards/punishments. Since earthly verses heavenly is one of the dichotomies clearly stressed by Jesus, there is no contradiction between the two.

This whole idea might look quite a bit off base to a lot of Christians, so before proceeding further with an argument I am going to digress a little and study some verses that might support my point of view.

So lets start off from Matt 5:16




As we all know, Jesus was speaking of Jews in that verse. Naturally you would take "they have their reward" as sarcasm. But lets try to take it literally and see what happends. If we do that, then we would see that Jesus recognizes "the world" as something that CAN give people rewards. He simply says that you will get your reward here on earth AS OPPOSED TO in heaven. Given that "the world" is identified with a spirit of antichrist, this can be taken a bit further and we can say that antichrist himself rewards people, just with a different kind of reward. This would support my point.

Now, lets look at Matt 22:16-- 22



The above passage implies that Jesus DOES give credibility to the earthly reward (i.e. money). His deal is to basically SEPARATE the material reward verses spiritual reward and give each to where it is due. Now ceizar was a type of antichrist, given that he demanded people to worship him and most of the ceizers were deified upon their death. Thus, as far as his salvation goes, he is clearly going to hell. However, Jesus still consider it appropriate to give him "reward" in a form of money. In much the same way, Jesus would certainly condemn the followers of antichrist to hell, but at the same time he will consider them worthy of the material reward that they gotten for their "good works.

This idea can be further supported with Matt 20:1--16



Given the context of the verse, the servant who was working from the early morning represents Jews, who were "working" since few millenia before christ, while the servant that worked only for an hour represents Christians. In light of this, the idea presented in the verse is that God gives Jews exactly as much as he promised, and whenever it seems like he is "unfair" to them, it is always about the fact that he doesn't give them anything MORE than he promised. Thus, in particular, the fact that Jews who reject Jesus go to hell when they die doesn't contradict the fact that they are still blessed with the earthy rewards promised to Jews, such as land of Israel. It merely stresses the fact of separation between earthy and heavenly rewards. And, of course, I am going to place the followers of antichrist in the same category as Jews on this one.

I believe that this is where faith verses works (part comes in. God judges BOTH and then he gives earthy rewards for works and heavenly rewards for faith. The followers of antichrist are rewarded for the good works of trying to make world piece by God granting them prosperity. At the same time, they are punished for the idolatry of worshipping antichrist by spending eternity in hell. On the other hand, Christians are denied the earthy reward by refusal to participate in building world piece but they are rewarded with eternal life by staying loyal to Jesus. Yes, in this picture it is true that the best of both worlds will be being loyal to Jesus AND doing world piece. But unfortuantely it isn't possible since antichrist is so obsessed about forcing everyone to worship him that you better stay out of his sight completely if you want to be loyah to christ, and, unfortunately, it is impossible to help him build world piece while staying out of his sight.

One might ask how can Christians be punished for anying, even on this earth, if they are covered with Jesus' blood? The answer is this. There is a parallel between death of Jesus and persecutting of Christians -- Jesus himself when he was explaining to his followers why they are going to be persecutted, he quoted that no servant is greater than the master. On the other hand, the idea of someone else paying for your sins might seem a little misterious in a sense that it is like cheating. So the parallel of death of Jesus verses persecution of christians bridges that gap. Namely, as a consequence of Jesus paying for your sins, YOU are going to pay for them IN THIS LIFE, which means that you don't have to pay for them in the life to come. In fact this of why ppl hate Christians. THey say Christians DID this or that in the name of Christ. So, if Christians were perfect, no one would of hated them, and they won't be having to go through great tribulation. But, it is precisely BECAUSE of the sins of christians that public opinion is against them which set up a stage for antichrist to rule an office.

Either way, back on topic, I was saying that Judaism and Christianity agree on the issue of great tribulation. Jews are right that followers of antichrist are being rewarded IN THIS LIFE (part 6) the reward will be TEMPORARY (part 7) and the reason for reward will be GOOD WORKS (part . On the other hand, Christians are right that true followers of Jesus will be rewarded IN THE LIFE TO COME (part 6) the reward will be ETERNAL (part 7) and the basis for the reward will be FAITH (part . And Christians also admit that their followers are going to be on receiving end of punishment in terms of part 6, part 7 and part 8. The basis for the great tribulation against Christians will be LACK of good works which caused the world to hate them (part , but the punishment will only be IN THIS LIFE (part 6) and it will be TEMPORARY (part 7).

So far I have established that Judaism doesn't negate Christian charges against itself since the two faiths talk about different things. Now, let me go a bit further and say that Judaism CONFIRMS to some extend the very things that Christians will bring in its accusation! Apart from the fact that Judaism doesn't promise eternal salvation to its adherents, it does something opposite. It claims that it is EASIER for non-Jews to attain salvation than it is for the Jews, because non-Jews don't have as much of a responsibility before God. Non Jews can be saved through a lot of different religions, however Jews can only be saved through Judaism. In other words, the reason it is harder for the Jwes is that they are in a type of bondage -- WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT CHRISTIANS ARE SAYING.

For that reason, while Christians actively seek converts, Jews do the opposite. They never encourage any non-Jew to convert. When non-Jew volunteers to be converted they turn him around three times and only convert him if he still persist. The most common arguments they would tell him when they turn him down is whether or not he really wants to take upon himself more responsibility before God, since this would make it harder and not easier to be saved.

Remarkably, this is EXACTLY the argument that Paul was using AS A CHRISTIAN in Gal 5: 1--6



This is the same as any rabbi would say except that he will say "as a gentile" in a place of "in christ" and he will say "difficult" in a place of "impossible". But the rest of the message is going to be the same. Now, as much as the Jews would turn around someone three times, that is only something they are doing RIGHT NOW. On the other hand, when their Messiah will come, everyone will be forced to be Jewish on the fear of some sort of EARTHY punishment. Now, how do these two contradicting things sum up? Well they sum up in that when the Jewish messiah comes Jews will be fully aware that they are dealing with a CHOICE between easier time gaining salvation in case of rejecting of Messiah verses the earthy blessings in case of following him. In other words, they will be agreeing with Christians except that they will side with different choices out of these two options.

So far I have established that Judaism admits to being a religion of antichrist. Now I am going to similarly show you that Christianity admits to all the Jewish accusations against it. Like you have seen a little bit earlier, Jesus denied being a Messiah in Luke chapter 9. on top of this, Christianity admits a FAR MORE SEVERE accusations of Judaism! Jews claim that the moment you worship Jesus, your soul dies. Guess what. Christianity fully admits to it. In book of Romans, Paul was saying over and over that Christians are "dead to the law" which can mean "dead ACCORDING to the law", i.e. dead according to Judaism! Paul never tosses it out as a myth or somthing. On the contrary, he claims it to be the very thing with which you "purchase" your salvation!

Jesus himself admitted to being one of the dangerous false prophets within Jewish framework.



Now "I will strike the shepherd and the flock will be scattered" is a quote from Zec 13:7. Now lets look at the preceeding verses:



AFTER THAT comes the verse that Jesus was quoting:




In other words, the passage was speaking about the false prophets, and by applying these verses to himself Jesus admitted to be one! Incidentally, if you are going to look closely at the verses, you will see that the false prophet was having "wounds in his hands" which again identifies him with Jesus. Finally, in the last verse quoted, God will turn his hands AGAINST the "little ones" while Jesus was the one saying "let the children come to me and forbid me not for such is the kingdom of heaven".

So how can Jesus be a false prophet given that he is son of God? Well, first of all, God himself can lie, as indicated in 2 Thess 2:11 God himself sends strong delusion to the followers of antichrist. So if he can send strong delusion to them, why can't he do it to others? Indeed he DID do just that to the disciples of Jesus. While the disciples were right in assuming that Jesus will be the eternal Messiah in a Christian sense of the word, they were deceived in thinking that he would be Messiah in Jewish sense of the word as well. In particular, it was HIDDEN from them that Jesus was first going to be crucified (Luke 9:43 -- 45)



Now why were they deceived? Because they weren't saved YET -- the holy spirit was only going to come to them after the Pentacost. This again goes right into the theme of now verses later. As for NOW Jesus is NOT the messiah and his followers are NOT saved. But later on he WILL be a messiah and his followers WILL be saved. Judaism = now but temporary; Christianity = later but eternal. According to John 20:17 when Jesus was resurrected specifically told a woman NOT to worship him because he haven't yet ascended to the father!

On any event, I will sum it up as follows:

A)Judaism admits all the Christian slandar against it
B)Christianity admits all the Jewish slandar against it

Therefore,

C)Both religions speak of the same exact thing

Christians are right that Jews are deceived. Judaism never says that they aren't -- in fact in Judaism you don't KNOW what happends after death, which leaves plenty of room for Christians to be right. And to boost it up Jews admit that it is HARDER for them to be saved given that they are under bondage, which is exactly the christian claim against them.

As a matter of fact, when Paul was proving why jews can't be saved without Jesus he was NOT appealing to the fact that rejection of Jesus is a sin, rather he was saying that under the JEWISH law no one is justified since we all sin, so unless you have Jesus' blood to cover you, you will be condemned AS A JEW. Likewise Jesus was saying "I don't have to accuse you, you have one accuser who is Moses". So, yah, Christian and Jewish accusation of Judaism is the same and they agree on it.

On the other hand, Jews are right that Christian apostles were deceived since it was hidden from them that Jesus was going to suffer, hence they viewed Jesus as a Jewish version of messiah; and Jews are right he wasn't. Furthermore, Jews are right that ocne a person believes in Jesus, his soul is going to die. Christians fully admit it and base their faith on it.

Jews talk about now and temporary, Chrisitans talk about later but eternal. They talk about two different things, so how can they possibly disagree. Each group knows, and admits, of exactly what they are talking about. They are simply assuming by mistake that the other group talks about the same thing, perhaps due to language confusion, and that is all.

Religion is a 5000 year old game of "Telephone". Since we're talking about constructs and interpritations, how could you possibly expect to conclusively prove anything??

Jesus Christ, you don't expect me to read all that do you?

All I know is I know a lot of jews who are good people and their religion/culture is compatible with mine.

I don't think you can say the same for Islam (but I know very few moslems and LePetitePrince will call me prejudiced, which I am).

You could also say that the Book of Revelation's decription of "the beast" is Allah and Mohammed, but that too would be wrong. Revelation was relevant to Roman times. IMHO you are taking things more literally than they are meant

"See, we're both right"

Well, that's an amazingly misleading statement. Because the key reasons Jews justify their way of life by _totally deny_ your assumptions. For example, you say "the Jews believe their reward is in this world, so do the Christians"...as though the Jews are expecting obedience to halakha (their conception of the commandments and related behaviour) to _purchase_ them good treatment. But there is a Jewish term for that : Avodah Zerah, literally "Foreign Service" (that is, labor given to any agency outside the L*rd, G*d, king of all the universe) or, more conventionally: IDOLATRY.

Talmud, the summary of the Jewish beliefs about the meaning of the Instruction that is Torah states: the purpose of Torah at its most basic is to prevent idolatry. What is idolatry ? it's more than worshipping idols. Why did people worship idols ? To get something for nothing. Instead of working with the world of cause and effect, physically surviving by "the sweat of their faces"....instead, they tried to take _shortcuts_. They built these temples and statues and fed and housed and clothed these priests and priestesses and other hangers on. They did this because they thought it would get a "better return on investment" than honest labor.

To deviate from your natural behaviour and ONLY follow Torah because you will be rewarded (in a similar manner, presumably to the Protestant "Prosperity Gospel" which is basically "The Secret" dressed up in Christian trappings and is as idolatrous as it gets)...that would be idolatry too. The Rambam, Judaism's greatest Rabbi, said regarding the prayer "Aleinu" (which describes the Jewish view of the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies): it will not be good enough that the non Jews of the world come to do the same things and believe the same things because of common sense. They will have to admit that the Jews were right about the _reasons_ and _causes_ for these beliefs, too". While there are few unanimous views in Judaism, he had vast influnece. It can be reasonably inferred that he scorned the idea that Jews are rewarded for following the commandments like a cookbook recipe for "success". He already had great scorn for people who only did things because they were traditional. (Even though he revered tradition as a concept necessary for proper education of the community.)

All you're doing is saying "you poor blind Jews, you're right in a very limited, narrow sense, but we Christians are right in the expansive sense, and you're all damned because of it".
I'll admit that could be a foundation for peace since the Jews would be happy to be left alone by "Messianic Jews" and Christian missionaries. But it would be a very unhealthy peace. Because by conceding to the Christians "sure, you can say you're right, we do believe what you say" this is just laying the bedrock for more persecutions. Because the Christian Bible and the writings of Christian figures like Martin Luther call for severe oppression of the Jews. Then you can point to the "peacefully coexisting Jews" and say "see, they don't contest our claims, so they can't protest when we visit G*d's judgement upon them!"

I admit, it probably wouldn't make much of a difference if/when things get that bad again. But I like to think Jews are smart enough to see the value of your conditions of peace. And conscientious enough to be vigilant in their commandment to refute deniers of even an iota of Torah's divinity.

I find it revealing that in fact your'e making something of a strawman in the first place. Are Jews going out there advocating prejudice against Christians or engaged in an attempt to marginalize Christian culture? No. There are however Christian churches which do these things to Jews. Your displacement of wrongdoing is profound "ah, we're both in a fight here, let's call it quits" "but you Christians are the only ones fighting!"

Of course Judaism and Christianity can peacefully coexist...as long as Christians continue to observe the laws of the land and continue to abstain from passing discriminatory laws against the Jews. As far as Judaism is concerned, peace is a penultimate value. It is a great enough prize that even idolatry can be forgiven, in a pinch. That is, at least if there is peace. "Ephram is joined to idols, leave him alone" describes one tribe being spared the divine wrath (according to the Jewish study of the phrase). This mercy falls because at least there was peace between that tribe and their idol worshipping subpopulation. I haven't read how they defined peace, but to me, a peace based on disrespect is an unstable peace. I allow that if your assumptions are right, then everything is as you say. _You_ owe the reciprocal respect in order for there to be true pace. And there is no respect in saying "you Jews are right" with the addenda "in a penny wise, pound foolish sense...you'll be sorry!" Our proofs and sources of our ways satisfy us, your sources and proofs for your ways satisfy you, let's just leave it at that, shall we?

No, they can't coexist. Jews think they are the chosen people, and xians think that only by being xian can you go to heaven.

I dont believe it will ever be possible.

Luckily for Jews and Christians, they have
Muslims to contend with before they can turn
once again on each other.

Can there be coexistence? Yes, of course. The difference is that there will not be acceptance on the infallibility of each other's scriptures, and there shouldn't be. A Jew is not going to accept the gospels as infallible. A Christian is not going to accept the Qur'an as infallible, but they can still coexist.

Unless you live in Saudia.

How can you say such a thing about Allah when your Arab Christian brothers refer to Jesus as Allah al-ibn? So yes, it would be wrong (I'm assuming you're Christian by the "compatible with mine" comment).

Either way, there is a lot of similarities between Islam, Christianity, and Judaism--of which I will not go through the task of typing. It is much easier to deny there are similarities than to admit them.





Is there something keeping you from typing "Christ"?

Meaning is lost when transcribing a text from ancient hebrew, which lacked hundreds of adjectives and nouns that modern languange has for the most basic of concepts (not delving into science or anything that requires you hold knowledge of anyone post-BC)

Besides, many Jewish sects believe Jesus was in fact the Messiah, they just didn't subscribe to the Roman New Testament. Strange, the same society that killed Jesus would be the one to canonize his supposed teachings...

didnt Jesus kill the Jews?
It was in Egypt or something
he meant to but got busy right?
aw hell I cant remember

The Jewish people didn't kill Jesus. The very worst you could say would be that the Sanhedrin (the Temple authorites) did. (See below why I feel that is a dubious claim) Even if the Sanhedrin did, the Jewish people hated the Sanhedrin of that era. The proto-Rabbis of the Mishnaic period carefully stripped the kohanim (priesthood) of their influence and teaching authority. You had to prove your chops by scholarship, having the blood wasn't enough. They succeeded because the bulk of Jewish society loathed the Temple priesthood of 100BCE to 70CE. The priests of that period were nasty and corrupt. There are records of the High Priest not knowing his duties and having to be coached for weeks before the High Holy Days. even so, reports say he still often botched it. One time, the High Priest set Roman soldiers on a crowd that pelted him with etrogs (a lemon like fruit). The crowd did that because he refused to accept the common understanding of the ritual on Sukhot (which involves waving a bundle of three plants and an etrog, as a symbol of the community made up of all manner of people, good, bad, and indifferent).

Just as an aside.

Also, while there were "Jews for Jesus" numerically, of religious Jews they were a minority. It is worth noting that the Jewish Christians were swiftly marginalized and denigated within Pauline Christianity, because they still kept halakha. Paul's great innovation was establishing that non Jewish converts to Christianity did not have to keep the law. The fact that it was non Jewish Christians who wrote the New Testament should cast some doubts on the veracity and knowledgeability of the authors about the Jews of Jesus' time. Particularly when it is rife with blatant misrepresentations or worse of Jewish life and religious thinking.

(For example, the famous bit where Jesus castigates the Jews for the cruelty of "an eye for an eye"...the Jews of the past 200 years at that point (at the bare minimum) (and possibly far longer) taught that this verse meant you did NOT literally tear out an eye for an eye. They taught that it was an injunction to weight damages in money for injury fairly. "Imagine if you lost YOUR eye" was the point of that quote. Jesus was preaching to fix a problem with "the Jewish System" that did not exist (in this case). Rather incongruous.)

Regarding Jews as "Christ killers" Consider how the Jews would kill someone for violating religious law. (Which they rarely (perhaps never) did at that point.) The claim of the New Testament was that Jesus was killed in the name of religious law. You can't say "the Jews were a bunch of stinking legalists who were all letter of the law, with no understanding of the spirit of the law" and then say the following details are insignificant. There are only four acceptible forms of execution in halakha (Jewish religious law). Throwing someone from a height and dropping a stone on them; pouring molten metal down their throat; strangling, and (I think) beheading is the fourth (but you have to drug them to the gills first for that one if so). Crucifiction nor ANYHING resembling it would have been used.

(Metal may have seemed rather nasty but it actually pretty much killed you immediately from the physical shock. The point is, these methods were derived with the criteria of "must not cause undue suffering". Despite what Torah says in plain text, the Jews refused to endorse "stupid execution tricks".)

And you can't go "well the Romans were their murder weapon" when the Romans would (according to the NT) let the Jews stone a woman. Why would they care what happened to some wandering mystic? Why should they punish the Jews for carrying out their laws? They didn't in case of the adultress? (she might have lived, but that was because the crowd gave up, not because the Romans exerted any authority.)

(Again, the execution method is wrong in the adultress case too. Also note that in order to prosecute a capital crime there was a precondition. Two witnesses would have to have caught the woman _in the act_ and said "stop, you are doing a capital crime, if you persist, you will be killed" and she would have had to say "I hear you, I am not stopping". The death penalty in Jewish religious law was essentially inoperative. But lets assume somehow these two cases, Jesus and the adultress, both somehow secured a valid death sentence. The methods would have to match too, and they don't, in either case. )

Put simply, the New Testament case for "the Jews killed Jesus" is pretty weak. If the Jews were such total slackers and hypocrites about their own laws (and remember, even if the Priesthood is corrupt, the NT says the Jewish people as a whole clamored for Jesus' death. If the common they were willing to get killed over etrogs, why would they break tradition on execution methods? Why did the Jews die in the tens and of thousands between 70CE and 135CE ? To defend a system no one believed in or valued? I believe these are too inconsistent a set of claims. Particularly when there was a tradition in Jewish mysticism of the time. It was report by students of a mystic master that they could talk to their master after he died for "advanced teaching".

Yes they can.

Can Judaism and Christianity coexist? Not very well as the odds of building a Jewish Temple on the grounds of the 700 Club/Regent University (Pat Robertson) is zero; the odds of building a Jewish Temple at the Vatican of Rome, Italy is zero; the odds of building a Jewish Temple on the grounds of Liberty University (Jerry Falwell) are zero. Now, if one moves to Israel, is it possible to build Christian Churches there and welcome travellers from the 700 Club/Regent University and the Vatican and Liberty University? Yes. The Jews of Israel are far more tolerant of the Christians than the Christians are tolerant of the Jews.

Thats phoniest analogy Ive ever heard.
Im not saying you cant find evidence of christians being intolerant, but this is hardly such evidence.
You could build all of the synagogus you want in Lynchburg Virginia, or in Rome, to encircle both the Vatican and Jerry Falwell University ( in fact both towns already have quite a few temples). But you cant put a crusafix up behind the main lecturne of most synagogues.
Niether faith rents its square footage out to other faiths, but niether has any problem with other faiths setting up shop next door. Aparently you think that the entire nation of Israel is one enormous synagogue. Im sorry but it isnt. Like any other nation people live and work there and own homes and businesses! Its even possible to go outdoors in Israel! They have more than one building in the country!
Lol!

Only the Orthodox folk take chosen seriously. Chosen does not fly with most American Jews.

ruveyn

Statistics shows that 50% of American Jews marry other Jews. So, at least 50% of them think they are "chosen".

If most Jews didn't think they were chosen it would have been very illogical, seeing that even a lot of American Christians believe that *Jews* are.

If you want to build a synagoge inside some secular university, or even inside of JEWISH elderly home, neither would be welcome, so that is a bad analogy.

Israel allowing churches built on their territory is analogous to Christian nations allowing sinagoges on their territories. In both cases the answer is "yes", so in this specific respect the two fatihs are not different.

But if you want to look just a bit further you will see that Israel is a lot LESS tolerant of other faiths than Christian nations are. In Israel they won't recognize a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew. Now, every Christian nation is okay with marriage between a Christian and a non-Christian.

Speaking of Orthodox rabbis, even though most Jews don't believe their sentiment, somehow they don't ostracize them as "racists" for saying non-Jews have no souls; at the same time, Christians DO ostracize other Christian extremists for making similar statements regarding blacks, for example.

I understand why most people say Christians are "haters" and not the Jews -- we have two millenia history of Christian persecution of the Jews and not the otehr way around. But that is simply the question of numbers: Christians were a lot stronger than the Jewish minority, so OF COURSE only the former had means of persecutting the latter. But things changed when Jews have their state of Israel. The Christians living in Israel are regularly subject to beating, spitting, etc. Yes, Jewish police agree to do something about it, but they NEVER actually follow up with it. Somehow punishing people for crime directed against Christians always gets postponned.