Judaism is the only major religious group that doesnt force its views on other people

[Marvel]

You're not an Israelite. Stop living in a fantasy.

Where do your descendants come from?

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Where do your descendants come from?

I don't have any descendants yet

na but for real, I thought you were a "so called African," like, from Africa Africa, not "African-American." Do I have you confused with someone else?

Either way you're not an Israelite.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I actually read up on that since im Christian my self and always under pressure to convert others..frm wat I learned (I mayb be wrong) Jews dnt mind converts bt they don't go out they way to convert others since they dnt think you have to be Jewish to go to heaven..just live a good life, dnt worship idols, and some other stuff...ironically they said the same wen Christianity began...its called the 7 noahide laws...they never saw Christianity as a separate religion till we claimed Jesus as God (the son)...bt yea they supposed to turn you down 3 times to make sure that you really wanna convert and nobody forcing u to do it...
My ex Jewish boss told me Sooo if im wrong it's his fault...

Hebrews were the first 'Christians'. Judaism and Christianity 'split' in the 2nd Century CE about 100 years after Jesus' death.

Read this.......

Hebrews were the ones who made Jesus 'divine' using the text of the OT to support the idea. Jewish rabbis got nervous about the amount of Christian converts decades after the Second Temple was destroyed and declared it 'heretical'. Prior to that, Hebrews worshiped 'Two YHWHs' for centuries and were still monotheists.

Binitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

​

Larry W. Hurtado of University of Edinburgh uses the word binitarian to describe the position of early Christian devotion to God, which ascribes to the Son (Jesus) an exaltedness that in Judaism would be reserved for God alone, while still affirming as in Judaism that God is one, and is alone to be worshiped. He writes:

…there are a fairly consistent linkage and subordination of Jesus to God 'the Father' in these circles, evident even in the Christian texts from the latter decades of the 1st century that are commonly regarded as a very 'high' Christology, such as the Gospel of John and Revelation. This is why I referred to this Jesus-devotion as a "binitarian" form of monotheism: there are two distinguishable figures (God and Jesus), but they are posited in a relation to each other that seems intended to avoid the ditheism of two gods" (Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, William B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, 2003, pp. 52–53).

Hurtado does not cite "binitarianism" as antithetical to Nicene Christianity, but rather as an indication that early Christians, before Nicea, were monotheistic (as evidenced by their singular reference to the Father as God), and yet also devoted to Jesus as pre-existent, co- eternal, the creator, embodying the power of God, by whom the Father is revealed, and in whose name alone the Father is worshiped. He writes, "The central place given to Jesus…and…their concern to avoid ditheism by reverencing Jesus rather consistently with reference to "the Father", combine to shape the proto-orthodox "binitarian" pattern of devotion. Jesus truly is reverenced as divine" (Ibid, p. 618).

Hurtado's view might be interpreted as urging that, at this stage of the development of the Church's understanding, it could be said that God is a person (the Father), and a single being; and that Jesus is distinct from the Father, was pre- existent with God, and also originating from God without becoming a being separate from him, so that he is God (the Son). This view of a binitarian pattern of devotion would posit a unity of God's being, and a singleness of the object of worship, which is sympathetic to its predecessor view in Judaism; and it also displays a plurality of simultaneous identities which is sympathetic to its successor in trinitarianism. It is a development of understanding of Christ, in other words, from which arose several understandings in the course of development, that eventually came into conflict with one another.

 

[Turk]

You're wrong op.

None of the Dharmic religions force their views on people, especially Jainism.

 

[AyahuascaSippin]

op obviously isnt aware of the mass conversion of khazars berbers and north african arabs around the time the hyksos ruled egypt before they were cast out.. any genetic line of abraham is long gone im afraid fukk what they say.. these caucasian workers who migrated to egypt and created a represented community were the havrews.. after the destruction of egypt judaism was created.. egyptian in origin but corrupted and seperated into religion and kaballah..

moses was really akhenaten.. the hyksos havrews ensured that the correct name was removed from everything egyptian.. then alexander and even napoleon continued the job

abraham offered his sister for a nation.. his nation had to circumcise themselves.. a sign of disagreement with gods design and distinguishable from the chosen people..

 

[AyahuascaSippin]

Actually Ill give you a relatively short answer.

First, theres no heaven and hell in Judaism as its not a fear based religion. There's not an implication that outsiders are doomed to "eternal hellfire". Judaism is more of an identity.

Secondly, I wish we lived in a world where more people thought like this, but its not the case. the in group out group mindset has dominated our culture since forever.

But the real problem is the people that go above and beyond. Its not enough that their culture thrives - they arent satisfied until their culture wins out and becomes the status quo.

People should be concerned with contributing to their communities, rather then imposing their way of life on others

lets not skate around its origins.. if you want to talk about how righteous they are we have to talk about the archeological evidence for their infiltration and manipulation of what was one time common knowledge.. the fact that most jews adopted this and the dilution by interbreeding and conversion of north africans and arabs.. .making their claim to israel false.. also akhenaten creating the first sun based monotheistic religion but it became attributed to moses somehow? And turned into judaisim which gave birth to the religions you compare it to and ultimately condem? The dots are all connected.. it just depends on if you wanna go back to the start or pick a team halfway through and start cheering

 

[ThaRealness]

Brehs... just ignore this thread. Its essentially a bait thread. I dont know why I made it. Too many anti semites on here to have a real discussion.

 

[AyahuascaSippin]

Brehs... just ignore this thread. Its essentially a bait thread. I dont know why I made it. Too many anti semites on here to have a real discussion.

oh wow what ruffled your feathers? do you want to bless us with your knowledge or do you just wanna fish on a forum? please point us to the anti-semites.. Israel the us and europe have killed more semites than any coli brehs so im not sure what you're gettin at..

Check out 8:45-15:30

 

[ThaRealness]

oh wow what ruffled your feathers? do you want to bless us with your knowledge or do you just wanna fish on a forum? please point us to the anti-semites.. Israel the us and europe have killed more semites than any coli brehs so im not sure what you're gettin at..

Check out 8:45-15:30

I made this thread before all the Israel shyt went down. Since then, Ive just decided not to engage people like you in discussion.

And I just sifted through all the faux-historical bullshyt you posted. I can spot an anti-semite a mile a way. Even just going off of key words. Like "manipulation. Infiltration. Interbreeding." etc.

Youre essentially projecting modern day anti-semitic caricatures onto an antiquated era. like the 'lying jew' stereotype. Its hard for me to suss out where exactly youre going with this argument, as you used extremely vague terms. But I can only assume it has to do with ancient mathematics and philosophy, or some shyt. Anyways... I refuse to go down this rabbit hole. Not today. Im sure the premise of your argument is rooted in historical evidence, however distorted and obscured. The fact remains, I dont really give a shyt. What is your end game here? Are you trying to prove that Jews were an "unrighteous" group of people throughout history? That they were always liars? Like I said before, I dont engage with anti-semitists.

I already admitted that making this thread was a mistake on my part. So now, I bid you good day.

 

[AyahuascaSippin]

I made this thread before all the Israel shyt went down. Since then, Ive just decided not to engage people like you in discussion.

And I just sifted through all the faux-historical bullshyt you posted. I can spot an anti-semite a mile a way. Even just going off of key words. Like "manipulation. Infiltration. Interbreeding." etc.

Youre essentially projecting modern day anti-semitic caricatures onto an antiquated era. like the 'lying jew' stereotype. Its hard for me to suss out where exactly youre going with this argument, as you used extremely vague terms. But I can only assume it has to do with ancient mathematics and philosophy, or some shyt. Anyways... I refuse to go down this rabbit hole. Not today. Im sure the premise of your argument is rooted in historical evidence, however distorted and obscured. The fact remains, I dont really give a shyt. What is your end game here? Are you trying to prove that Jews were an "unrighteous" group of people throughout history? That they were always liars? Like I said before, I dont engage with anti-semitists.

I already admitted that making this thread was a mistake on my part. So now, I bid you good day.

first the 'israel shyt' has been going down for 60+ years.. secondly i disputed the authenticity of the religion, not the people you fukking idiot.. theres nothing faux about it.. theres plenty of evidence, open a book sometime? Religion has a huge baring on the current war so many are interested.. you arent but you made this thread.. fukk your lifes purpose lol

I dunno why i have to explain this to you but adopting a culture overthrowing it destroying the evidence and collecting its artifacts is worse than infiltration tbh but infiltration would describe the entry into the culture.. stop trying to win points off of buzzwords.. it makes you look like o'reily.. theres no genuine purpose to the creation of the religion other than to sway the people.. and not with choice either but out of constant fear mongering..

So if i doubt the authenticity of the worlds 3 major religions due to the current situation coupled with an archeological backstory that contradicts it, does that make me antisemetic? Do you get paid to shill this hard on a hip hop forum?

 

[IVS]

The connection goes way deeper than just Abrahmic religions. There's a millenia-old rivalry between Zoroastrianism and early Indian Devic religions/Hinduism. I read somewhere that it's possible that Ahura Mazda and the mythology surrounding Zoroastrianism are literal inversions of Hinduist ideas of spirits/demons (and it makes sense when you look at the etymology of the words; daevas/devas, ahuras/asuras). When you factor in the parallels between the Hindu pantheon and the Hellenic/Norse pantheons, you begin to get a picture of how tightly interwoven all of these belief systems are. shyt is fascinating to me that we could share so much in common with each other without even realizing it.

Very excellent post. When you go further into the history and stories you'll find that there are parallels between Manu and Noah, and also between Zoroaster, Abraham and Moses.

What is truly striking is the Mosaic covenant involves maintaining a perpetual fire burning upon the altar and maintained by priests. The "Brahmins" (Aryans who invaded India) maintain a sacred fire perpetually burning upon the altar, as do the Zoroastrians. The sacred light\fire is Ahura (אור in "Hebrew").

It is also striking that the Brahmins and Zoroastrians have reverence for the bull as you will in front of every Zoroastrian agyari the image of a bull with a human head, and the bull sometimes has wings; In Hindu Brahminism the cow was sacred as well. It's striking that the Moses narrative involves the Israelites worshipping calves and bulls. Amongst the Irani, followers of Ahura Mazda-ism, but not of Zoroaster specifically, you also find reverence for the cow.

So we can see the Vedic Brahmin Aryan roots of the these religious are rather clear. Furthermore, the racism encountered in the scriptures is congruent. The aryan brahmin introduced the caste into Hindustan, and reduced the blacks there to Sudras and Dalits. But they do not practice circumcision, as that is the Abrahamic covenant and is associated with initiation into the Mystery Schools of "Egypt."

According to Diodorus of Sicily circumcision was the mark of the Greek philosopher (wise man), thus the learned men of Greece were initiates into the mysteries or crafts.

 

[IVS]

Also it also striking that Ahura Mazda, which means light wisdom is represented by the Sun or a winged disk. I find this to be connected with Tien-Ri (falsely writtien as Tengri) which translates to light of day, or sun in the sky. Tien-ri is from Sanskrit or Chinese\Mongolian and it spread via the Mongols and Turks. The staple of Tien-ri worship was a sacred fire and their ritual consisted of sacrificing a lamb to the sacred fire atop a mount and partaking in feast.

 

[LucaBrasi]

I wonder if Jews were inspired by Zoroastrians somehow, cuz neither of them go after converts, two really old monotheistic faiths, Jews migrated from parts of Mesopotamia into the Fertile Crescent if I'm not mistaken. I dunno, maybe my dates are off but it's an interesting parallel.

I'm pretty sure Zoroastrians came first, n Judaism is just an offshoot of ancient Caanan Polytheistic religions.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

fwiw on the 2 YHWH's..."Lesser YHWH" is/was considered to be Enoch/Metatron not Jesus

Taoism for the win btw.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

fwiw on the 2 YHWH's..."Lesser YHWH" is/was considered to be Enoch/Metatron not Jesus

No. The 'other' (not lesser) was variably known as Wisdom, the Angel of the Lord, the Spirit, and a few other names.

Metatron is an invention of Middle Age thought via the Talmud and Yahoel literature from the 5th Century CE (400 years after Jesus). Enoch didn't actually 'die' but was never worshiped.

The ONLY other being worshiped as 'divine' was Jesus.

Certainly, earliest Christian reverence for Jesus seems to have drawn upon pre-Christian Jewish tradition, especially ancient Jewish ideas about God having what we term a "principal agent." That is, typically in earliest Christian sources, Jesus is linked with God and is given a unique status in relation to God—for instance, as God's "Son" or "Messiah" (Christ) or "Word" or "Servant." In ancient Jewish sources, this sort of "principal agent" role is played sometimes by a great angel (such as Michael), sometimes by a great human figure of the past (such as Moses or Enoch),and sometimes by one of God's own attributes (such as divine Wisdom or God's Word, pictured in personified forms).

The fact is that we simply have no evidence that any figure, whether human or angelic, ever featured in the corporate and public devotional practice of Jewish circles in any way really comparable to the programmatic role of Jesus in early Christian circles. For instance, the praise of Judean kings reflected in some of the Psalms and the reverence later shown for Jewish martyrs do not provide genuine analogies or precedents, and cannot, thus, furnish an adequate historical explanation.

....devout Jews of Second-Temple time were often quite ready to portray this or that figure in astonishingly exalted terms (whether divine attributes such as divine Wisdom or the divine Word, or principal angels such as Michael or Yahoel, or revered ancestors such as Enoch or Moses).

Indeed, a number of the specific claims about Jesus in the New Testament have precedents and analogies in some of the claims made for these figures in sources that derive from or reflect Second-Temple Jewish circles. But what we do not find in the Second-Temple Jewish tradition is the further, momentous step of treating any such figure as a recipient of cultic devotion that in any way parallels the devotion given to Jesus in earliest Christianity.

~pgs. 21 - 22 & 24 (2005)